TGB Well-Physics - August 11, 2014

https://www.google.com/search?&sclient=psy-ab&q= %22vacuum+magnetization%22+%22vacuum+polarization %22+permeability+permittivity+pdf+-Science.gov&oq= %22vacuum+magnetization%22+%22vacuum+polarization %22+permeability+permittivity+pdf+Science.gov&gs_l=serp.3...763754.770062.1.770423.13.11.0.0.0.0.0.0..0 .0....0...1c.1.51.psyab..14.0.0.3XrgUXFdL0A&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_qf.&bvm=bv.721972 43%2Cd.cGU %2Cpv.xjs.s.en_US.wTPx1a5xiUM.O&biw=1366&bih=624&ech=1&p si=mpLeUXDEovuoASDzYGwCA.1407095459933.5&ei=o5LeU4bEHJfcoAT74o CYBw&emsg=NCSR&noj=1

An altogether different timeline with its own anthropic cosmological principle (filtration) The leads to a fundamental reinterpretation of the "re-" in "reincarnation". A counterintuitive phenomenon discovered: The coexistence of superconductivity with dissipation. http://phys.org/news323232954.html What type of information is represented by the quantity of surprise to the quantum vacuum? Are their numbers that can be represented by qubits that cannot be represented by bits? Aren't there qubit strings that cannot be translated into bits without a wavefunctiion collapse? HISTORY OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE NUMBER ZERO. Scribd and google search. Hate is not the opposite of love, but indifference. The quantum information passing between Alice and Bob depends on what vacuum contextualizes information (data) their brains "contain" If A can collapse Psi and B can collapse psi, then are there two distinct random processes by which wavefunction collapse is effected rather than a single one and is this distinct from wave function collapse base upon sudden opening up of a potential avenue of obtaining knowledge about the state of the system? Why do dreams of being unwittingly in very high radiation fields fascinate me so?. Are their numbers that can be represented by qubits that cannot be

represented by bits? It would seem so because X qubits always represents a larger number than Z bits. What to the power of X equals X qubits? If A can collapse Psi and B can collapse psi, then are there two distinct random processes by which wavefunction collapse is effected rather than a unitary one, and is this distinct from wave function collapse based upon the sudden opening up of a potential avenue of obtaining knowledge about the state of the system ? Something became me. I did not come from nothing (provided that I am something), and so what ever became me can do so again, according to the solipsistic logic of the anthropic cosmological principle. Divert potential political energy into a shooting barrel where it can't challenge the interests of the power elite, e.g., abortion issue, gay marriage, political scandals, etc. Genetic over determination of amino acids and the predetermination of chemical self organization. For example arginine and isoleucine This enables the accumulation of a series of so-called silent mutation and builds up a great amount of genetic complexity potential which can be exploited later in light of further mutation. There is a creative side to error correction in genetic base pair sequencing which is ordinarily thought of as a critical process. Accumulation of context for correctly spelled out kinetic base pairs sequences provides the basis for future error correction. This is a hypothesis concerning the deeper aspects of the error correction

mechanism. Consciousness collapses the wave function the quantum vacuum only gradually degrades the wavefunction. The brain focuses the quantum vacuum's proto consciousness. Concerning a scientist's view on the rediscovery of Zipf's Law: "The paper's co-authors include biophysicists David Schwab of Princeton and Pankaj Mehta of Boston University. "I don't think any one of us would have made this insight alone," Nemenman says. "We were trying to solve an unrelated problem when we hit upon it. It was serendipity and the combination of all our varied experience and knowledge."" This goes against Ayn Rand's dogmatic assertion that no significant discovery was ever made by a group or collective. Facebook has taught me one thing, if it has taught me anything, namely that great intelligence and wisdom do not necessarily coincide. Humility makes on artificially wise as pride renders one artificially stupid. "Neti, neti" - Advaita Vedanta, concerning the nature of Brahman "The fool who persists in his folly will become wise." - William Blake There is a scale of the processing and integration of quantum information represented by the quantum decoherence limit, which applies to the maximum quantity of information that may traverse the vacuum via quantum teleportation alone. Does this quantum teleportation bottleneck plan important role in the separatenesd of conscious minds? An empirically based decoherence theory proves that there is more to the universe than just quantum information.

"I wouldn't describe myself as lacking in confidence, but I would just say that - the ghosts you chase you never catch." – John Malkovich Sam, is there really only one consciousness and each brain merely filters, structures and resonantly tunes to this consciousness in a different way? Paradoxically, alterity is the "image" in which each of us is made, and so the appropriate metaphydical ground for our ethical system must be a kind of "polysolipsism". To refer to alterity as an "image" is to invoke a kind of "transcendental metaphor". Why is topology an important consideration in thinking about the phenomenon of dissociation? GW Researchers Disrupt Consciousness With Electrical Stimulation | GW Today | The George Washington University http://gwtoday.gwu.edu/gw-researchers-disrupt-consciousness-electricalstimulation It never occurred to anyone in ancient Greece to advocate for the abolition of slavery. I'm reading "Christopher Lasch and the Moral Agony of the Left - Aidan Rankin" on Scribd. Read more: http://scribd.com/doc/221987108 I'm reading "Language and Truth: A Study of the Sanskrit Language and Its Relationship with Principles of Truth" on Scribd. Consider the topology of the gaps with in the computational state space and the domains interlocking in the multiverse My coincidental domains interlocked with other peoples non coincidental domains

The relationship of time and frequency is analogous to the relationship of coincidence and5 incidents. "Does it contain any abstract reasoning concerning quantity or number? No. Does it contain any experimental reasoning concerning matter of fact and existence? No. Commit it then to the flames, for it can contain nothing but sophistry and illusion." The intersubjective realm is merely an arena of constructive and destructive interference of multiple mental frequencies, but we should hear distinguish between carrier frequencies and frequency envelopes. Evangelical atheists enjoy a concept of scientific progress which is modeled in terms of nature, the asymptote, approached closer and closee by an ever more gently arcing curve. But this model is disproven by the marked tendency for scientific ignorance to grow at a rate that acceleratingly outpaces the accumulation of scientific knowledge. And this is fundamentally owing to the necessary structure of scientific revolutions, as first compellingly demonstrated by Thomas Kuhn. In deep philosophical discussions of broad hypothetical nature, it is common to compare and contrast hypothetical cases which we could never determine the difference between, for example, what if God never existed, what if this epic historical event to which we owe most of our cultural identity never happened, and so on. Oculus Rift, Speeches of Frederick Douglass, Howard Zinn, Ron Radash, historian to Howard Zinn, Henry Lewis Gates, Paul A. Samuelson, Saul Alinsky, Stanley Kurz, Three Felonies a Day, "Show me the Man and I will show you the Crime." Causality is pattern recognition and image enhancement of correlations. Nature is no thing in itself. (We've known this since Kant) Science

doesn't prove theories, it falsifies them. Human beings are free to the extent that they can replace one set of behavioral determinisms with another set. As Fritjof Capra indicated in his book the turning point visual metaphors fail us when it comes to trying to understand quantum mechanics in intuitive way. Quine the analytic synthetic distinction, Whorf hypothesis. If the domain of the unknown with respect to scientific investigation was a finite, determinate space to be cumulatively and progressively filled in with correct theories and facts, then the notion of a theory of everything would be a coherent one. But this is the not the case and the future is not indeed on a trajectory conceivable to the present. After a paradigm shift occurs, not only do facts become obsolete, but also questions, even fundamental ones. http://www.homewarrantyreviews.org/ Contrast thinking in terms of tools vs. Concepts. Do we have a concept of a metaphor or only a metaphor for a metaphor? The question frequently arises why ufo's study more less began in the 1940's in the American southwest around and near military and nuclear installations seems to be perhaps due to the unique neutrino emission signature of an operating nuclear reactor that would be easily deductible in deep space with detector technology only a little bit more advanced then what we possess today. Because of topology and internality an aborted fetus cannot correspond to a determinate hypothetical human. Most acts of creation are not creative acts at all, but are merely examples

of what I term "creaction". Two-dimensional time is built into the universe all one has to consider to see the truth of this is the principle of quantum superposition in the interaction of mutually exclusive temporal lines [email protected] (Wants prospectus of induced gravity theory) Freud was the first to observe this principle that humans reactions are to the contrasts in things and not to the things themselves, and I felt keenly that this was true when I first read this remark by Freud. “Lol” has distinct different meanings, however what it is acronym for, “laugh out loud” has an additionally distinct meaning or acceptation. Consciousness collapses the wave function the quantum vacuum only gradually degrades the wavefunction. The brain focuses the quantum vacuum's proto consciousness. August 2014 fb=

As "Chuck Norris of Theoretical Physics", you are in a unique position to judge. (I have witnessed you deliver many a devastating roundhouse to crackpots beginning in my short memory with a cavalcade of Usenet kooks in the early 90's and zero-point energy crackpots a little later on, e.g., Haisch, Rueda, Puthoff. .)..I gotta laugh thinking back upon those who you regularly skewered back in the day...people like "Archimedes Plutonium", Alexander Abian, Euejin Jeong, Todd Desiato et al. Gott sei dank I never aspired to be as crackpotty as they! :) On the other hand, Doc, predicting stuff before someone else predicts it and receives their Nobel Prize has gotten to be a bad habit with you! I think I understand where some of the energy of those roundhouse kicks comes from! (To Dr. Jack Sarfatti) August 2014 fb=

"Lead, as I do, the flown-away virtue back to earth— yes, back

to body and life; that it may give the earth its meaning, a human meaning! May your spirit and your virtue serve the meaning of the earth. . . . Man and man's earth are still unexhausted and undiscovered.— Nietzsche "This epigraph is chosen quite deliberately. I run the risk of its seeming to lend itself to a certain Christian, idealist, and human is a tone, a tone in which it is easy to recognize those well-meaning virtues and values that have loosed upon the world all the things that have driven the humanity of our century to despair over itself, where these values are both blind to and complicit in this letting loose. In his own way, Nietzsche himself would have undoubtedly participated in this dubious, moralizing piety. At any rate, the word "meaning" rarely appears in his work, and still more rarely in any positive sense. One would do well, therefore, not to give any hasty interpretations of it here. The above excerpt appeals to a "human meaning," but it does so by affirming that the human (l'homme) remains to be discovered. .In order for the human to be discovered, and in order for the phrase "human meaning" to acquire some meaning, everything that has ever laid claim to the truth about the nature, essence, or end of "man" must be undone, "Jean-Luc Nancy, "Being Singular Plural" http://www.scribd.com/doc/197767982/A-Physicist-s-Guide-toSkepticisim-Milton-a-Rothman I resonate with the "frequency envelope", but not the "carrier wave", verstehst du? kwd=

Entanglement, superposition, complexity threshold, decoherence, translatability, dialectical, transactional, maximum fluctuation energy, kernel, reprocessing, context dependency, discourse, Quantum Theory, Philosophy of Mind, Epistemology, Philosophy of Science, Sociology of Science, Christian Apologetics, Epigenetics, Cosmology, Artificial Intelligence, Evolutionary Biology, Biochemistry, Chess Theory, Music Theory, Middle East Politics, American Foreign Policy, Linguistics, Deconstruction/Postmodernism, Phenomenology, Alvin Plantinga

http://www.scribd.com/search-documents? escape=false&filetype=pdf&language=1&num_pages=100%2B&payme nt=free&query=%22radiological+accident%22 In the unlimited fullness of multidimensional time, once the little knobs on the cosmological radio receiver are tweaked to juuuust the right frequency, one's "signal" is pulled into one's idiosyncratically unique and tiny corner of the infinite multiverse, which is to say "the Universe". I like to think in terms of organism and systems-based analogies for political power in multi-level society. Game theory is also a good framework in which to think about political power and how it inflects within and across those levels. More on that later. For something a little more concrete in response, let me say that, as horrible as US Foreign policy appears to the Chomskian far left, I believe that, had the great might of the United States been in the hands of any other nation, culture or people, it would have undoubtedly been applied with less selfimposed restraint and greater recklessness . . . with all that this entails. I acknowledge that there shall always be decisions that will have to be made at a level "above my pay grade" and that I will always have to maintain a certain level of trust in those above me. Deconstructive thinking is good...up to a point. As language has evolved over the centuries so have basic concepts and concept maps and networks. These changes are subtle and don't fit within any one generation's sociolinguistic concept map, but are distributed over a higher linguistic dimension - time. Societal and political self-organization therefore exhibits a significant amount of "causal supervenience". Especially the discovery that we all reside within an ancestor simulation of a billion year old galactic civilization... a kind of crypto "City and the Stars"... "Thinking inside the box" is not exactly a metaphor in this instance!

This comes from a consideration of the presumed Gaussian distribution of extraterrestrial civilization ages in the galaxy being tied to the average age of the civilization parent star and then also taking into account where a merely five or six thousand year old civilization would fit on that normal distribution curve.... a curve with a centroid of perhaps a billion or more years! This represents a rather peculiar, but I think valid application of the anthropic principle to the question: "are you living within a computer simulation?" :p That is true, but a knee-jerk rejection of dualism is itself a variety of box, especially when quantum mechanics all by itself exhibits so many dualities: wave-particle. real - virtual, local-nonlocal, deterministicprobabilistic, fermion-boson, particle-field, quantum-classical, coherent-decoheremt, matter-antimatter, discrete - continuous, realimaginary (for tunnelung particle momentum, that is), eigenfunctioneigenvalue, etc. The above combined with the work of Dr. Stuart Hameroff and Sir Roger Penrose concerning general anesthestics' effects on the quantum mechanics of brain neural microtubule function and consciousness *and* the decades long observed reverse effects of conscious observation upon quantum behavior of particles and their wavefunctions means that there is too much scientific evidence in favor of it to just dismiss dualism out of hand. Oh and have you noticed how "the new atheists", Dawkins, Hitchens, Dennett, Shepherd, etc. all base their arguments in 19th century physics and biology while critics of Darwinism tend to argue from the standpoint of 21st Century science? Matter provides the boundary conditions on the fundamental quantum field which enables the encoding of structures of quantum entanglement possibly similar to how a scaffolding or template can make certain reactions more energetically favorable. Vacuum entanglement patterns can occupy the interstices of scaffolding provided by neural microtubule network boundary conditions on the vacuum electromagnetic fields are

required to initiate vacuum entanglement states mirroring physical particle entanglement states of the matter supplying the boundary conditions. This mirroring however cannot be complete due to inequivalence of entanglement contexts. There is a complexity threshold for conscious thought and perception but this is for thought in perception admitted to, registered in, as it were, i.e., consciousness not for consciousness as such, which is fundamental like any other quantum field may be a threshold for ego - may not be for reified egoic consciousness. Is egoic consciousness accessing a preexisting subspectrum or an emergent subspectrum of consciousness as such? One-dimensional time is a shadow and a projection of multidimensional time. Kind of like a temporal hologram. Consciousness is the intuition of time according to Kant. "Plato's Cave" - Google Search http://www.google.com/search? hl=en&site=webhp&tbm=isch&sa=1&ei=sJK2U5LJGZSiqAaFh4LgAg &q=%22Plato%27s+Cave%22&oq=%22Plato%27s+Cave %22&gs_l=mobile-gwsserp.3..0l5.332640.352421.1.355089.15.14.0.1.1.0.421.3430.0j2j11j0j1. 14.0....0...1c.1.48.mobile-gws-serp..1.25.5616.2.pvoEjPsuKXA#facrc=_ Reinterpreting cold dark matter has a bose-einstein condensate... This compliments an earlier research paper on the derivation of the magnetic field permeability and electric field permittivity constants in terms of the magnetization and polarization of the quantum vacuum. Reinterpreting dark matter http://phys.org/news323509369.html Investigate the concept of genome as "interface data" qua "selforganizing system kernel".

"abils and skillities" Inflation through Quantum Tunneling from a False vacuum: http://youtu.be/tSe8UE7EitU Theory suggests the speed of light is SLOWER than we think http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2672092/Was-Einsteinwrong-Controversial-theory-suggests-speed-light-SLOWERthought.html @MailOnline That is the mistaken notion of the neodarwinian synthesis. The genome is a cybernetic control system. Proteins are an expression of information in DNA. The DNA's information is not itself an expression of any information because it constitutes a blind filtering of merely random changes (mutations) to its structure. Epigenetics complicates this model by introducing controls, which are anything but random, at both ends - epigenetic information modulates mutation, as well as alters patterns of expression of genetic base pair sequences as amino acid sequences that must be folded in only relatively very few of many trillions of possible ways in 3- dimensional space to function properly within the cell. By way of epigenetics, metainformation becomes involved, and although the path of information within the cybernetic control system of the genome-protein system may indeed be one way, in the absence of meta-levels of information, i.e., information confined to a surface (single level), with the emergence of multi-level information in the system, i.e., metainformation of the genome-epigenome-histone-ribosomecytoplasm-epigenome-genome system, information originating at the genome is no longer confined in its path to unidirectional arcs along a surface, but is allowed to move across this surface. Topology here is perhaps metaphorical, but serves to illustrate that a paradigm change in

evolution theory shall likely be required, one that a growing number of main stream biologists believe cannot be successfully accommodated within the current paradigm of the now 80 year old "Neodarwinian Synthesis". Once I get my laptop back from "computer heaven", I will include appropriate screenshots to further illustrate. Before we sneer at the role of the metaphors employed by the theorist, we should realize that all concepts upon which theories are based are in reality only specialized metaphors, which are artificially restricted in their reference, application and context. But that the ground of these three restrictions is dynamic, and shall inevitably back-react upon the theorist. In some cases this back reaction can be stably maintained for a time, though never indefinitely, the great success of the quantum theory notwithstanding. Is the deck from which evolutionary mutations are dealt, stacked? Google search "The Human Brain Project" is a little bit like committing in 1920 to landing a man on the moon by the end of the 1920's." See 130 Neuroscientists' "Open message to the European Commission concerning the Human Brain Project". . . I think theism with the appropriate amount of humility admixed must needs be an "agnostic theism". The theism that "knows that it knows "the truth"" shall always pose a danger to the advancement of human civilization. . . on myriad levels! The most profound, or shall I say, profoundly satisfying, lyrics are, of course misheard lyrics because the author's inspiration is forever secretly infused with the subconscious' heart's desire. The tension between reason (as opposed to rationality) and mysticism is ultimately soluble. The catch is that the only proper context for this is

transcendental mind, which is essentially (nota bene) *transpersonal*. "Managed compassion is the inevitable solution hit upon by the metaguilty conscience, which feels keenly the chronic nagging guilt of not feeling guilty." Natural selection is hamstrung by the fact that incipient structures are of absolutely no use to the evolving organism in its competition for limited resources and mates. If it is the most bloodthirsty tribes, races and subspecies which win at every turn in the evolutionary competition, then why has morality and ethics emerged at all in the course of man's evolution? Without transcendental mind and only evolution and natural selection to guide us there is nothing standing in the way of a thorough going epistemological solipsism given the fact that members of a breeding population share the same physical environment and a common language in the specific case of human beings Wittgenstein's "family resemblance" and the concept of consciousness. Only a minority of people possess a fate, but of those that do, it is encoded within their very name. Imagine that thousands of professors were originally leading to academia because they believe that they possessed inspiration maybe even genius but in the work today on the ground application of graduate student life they learned otherwise would there not be a great motive to try to unseat the notion of genius? isn't this really be true origin of the deconstructive impulse? June 2014

“What’s the best way to kill a lobster? Is there any mercy? No mercy for the weak! Just kidding. Some experts claim lobsters die within seconds of being submerged in boiling water (but oh how terrible

those few seconds), and others claim their nervous system is too primitive [italics, mine] to allow for very much pain. The debate is ongoing and best summed up by David Foster Wallace in this essay…” Russell Clark Dad began his service to this great country as a private in the Army Air Corps while WWII still raged on, served with great distinction as a Marine Corps Platoon Leader during the Korean War (refusing to be medically evacuated due to combat injuries and remaining on the battlefield to lead his men) and then with equally great honor and distinction served as an Artillery Battalion Commander in Vietnam. I am so proud to be his son! April 2014

Paul Davies argument which is a restatement of Bertrand Russell's argument that all of us could have popped into existence 5 minutes ago complete with false memories of an earthly life extending back many years fails because of considerations of context dependency of meaning, also in light of Wittgenstein's private language argument and perhaps also in light of quantum decoherence theory. Duration in relation to the building up of complexity overtime is very much dependent upon the Planck mass-energy limit of fluctuation size and the density of Planck magnitude or smaller fluctuations, not just in terms of the scalar equation for the Heisenberg time-energy uncertainty principle. May 2014 Of course, what Russell is making sport of is that absurdity of a perfect illusion of meaning the in utter absence of a temporal context. The “five minutes ago” just obscures this realization. A five minute interval of human biography cannot just “hang in the void” context-free. What is the connection between the private language argument and Penrose's one graviton limit for quantum decoherence? Considerations of topology lead us to presume that the brain cannot boot strap itself into self-awareness through use of a private linguistic structure of thought the structure of thought must be sociolinguistic in order for this

bootstrapping process to be successful if one were a Boltzmann brain one would not be aware of this fact in other words. Investigate "Fine Tuning Argument Fail" on youtube. Does this argument itself fail? The multiverse channels us from out of the void, anthropically fine-tuned consciousness. The state of the observer or experimenter does not become quantum entangled with the apparatus that he is seeking to adjust in order to perform a characteristically quantum-mechanical mechanical experiment such as that of nonlocally connected or quantum correlated detector clicks. In general the nonlocal connectivity exhibited by the mind of the quantum observer is not traceable to an aggregation of historical quantum entanglement between the observer and the external world. In other words at least in part the quantum entanglement of the observer's mental processes is internal and internally determined. A generalized description of the freedom which the observer possesses in determining the experimental conditions and the settings of his quantum observational apparatus is his freedom to select a system of basis vectors, i.e., a *basis* for expressing the observables measured in the experiment. Look at internal and external conditions for the breakdown of Bohm's causality principle vis a vis decoherence and wavefunction collapse. goo=

Wigner's friend"" and "quantum solipsism".

If quantum experimenters did not possess human free will then they would only be able to select bases for quantum measurement that they themselves were embedded in. And this vector basis would be the only basis possible - it would be the same quantum basis that every other person was embedded in. Here we see the connection between the consciousness of the ego and the question of other minds and the external world. "It seems that nature is somehow communicating under the surface but

not allowing us to use that communication to actually transmit information and this is something that doesn't happen in so-called classical theories and is one of the key features of quantum mechanics”, "Physics Math Charlatan" on www.youtube.com. “Instead of the communication of information we might speak of a jointly actualized meaning”, c.f., Cybersemiotics: Why Information is Not Enough. Yet another connection between gravitation and consciousness in terms of the basis vectors of a quantum measurement. Human brains are always tapping into the reprocessed collective Akashic record. Once in a while, however a brain taps into a copy of an as yet unreprocessed experience fragment. In the same way that God transcends the dual opposite categories of existence vs nonexistent he also transcends the category of being in the sense of not being a mere instantiation of being as an abstract category. After all God is the ground of being and of abstract form. Analogous to the self-existence of God is the self-existence of intuitively grasped concepts for which we only have metaphorical justification this brings up the puzzling and even paradoxical nature of the concept of the metaphorical Certain questions are so big that we can only hope to answer them by finding a more proper formulation of the question. Frequently we ask a question about one thing and formulator answer in terms of a different kind of the same thing. Substance is always presupposed by form but then the question of the one versus the many in relation to the concept of substance becomes problematic. The notion of there being a general concept of substance is itself very problematic because if there are multiple substances what is there which is more fundamental than the multiply distinct substances such that they are instantiations of this general substance does this imply that there must be something more general than substance in order to distinguish and categorize different

substances? Multiple instantiations of consciousness in the absence of a concept of consciousness seems to invoke Leibniz' principle of pre-established harmony. Google search nonlocality and the principal a pre-established harmony A trajectory of least energy would be decomposed in terms of a series of steps which are resonance points and this would be consistent with Fourier analysis theory. This may explain the successful climbing up the hill by a complex system within a single local region of rugged fitness landscap, but without nonlocality and quantum entanglement we cannot explain the climbing down from a local maximum in order to creare the opportunity for ascending a neighboring greater local maximum. Kwd

group

selection

sexual

selection

Teleology without intention requires two dimensional time and selforganizing properties of particles and fields, which cannot be captured within a linear deterministic causality. Chance vs determinism... are they mutually exclusive and or is there a third option or way? Imagine a rugged fitness landscape composed of generations which leave behind varying numbers of descendants. We might need to bring in a second time axis in order to construct an accurate rugged fitness landscape if we are going to take into account relative multi-generational success at reproduction. This could be modeled in terms of the strength of back reaction signals from later generations with the strength of the signal being a function of both the number of descendants in the proximate generation and the integration of distal generations in terms if number of descendants. What component of Bohm's causal principle is represented by

differential equations versus integral equations versus some unknown form of equations belonging to neither class? Future contexts may be in competition with previous contexts as well as competing with multiple parallel distinct contexts. We don't have to invoke creationism or intelligent design to explain teleology, we merely have to invoke a more sophisticated model of temporality. August 2014

“When he contemplates the perfidy of those who refuse to believe, Dawkins can scarcely restrain his fury. "It is absolutely safe to say that, if you meet somebody who claims not to believe in evolution, that person is ignorant, stupid or insane (or wicked, but I'd rather not consider that)." Dawkins went on to explain, by the way, that what he dislikes particularly about creationists is that they are intolerant. We must therefore believe in evolution or go to the madhouse, but what precisely is it that we are required to believe? "Evolution" can mean anything from the uncontroversial statement that bacteria "evolve" resistance to antibiotics to the grand metaphysical claim that the universe and mankind "evolved" entirely by purposeless, mechanical forces. A word that elastic is likely to mislead, by implying that we know as much about the grand claim as we do about the small one.” – Phillip E. Johnson, Darwin on Trial I am not a Creationist and I could only be with considerable qualification be termed an “Intelligent Design” advocate. What I do believe is that, analogous to String Theory of theoretical physics, which postulates the compactification of spatial dimensions, but only at the tiniest of scales, i.e., at the “Planck scale”, I postulate compactified temporal dimensions, which constitute the feedback paths between mutually exclusive branches of a quantum superposition of atomic or molecular states. The connection of this feedback is instantaneous within our single dimension of causal time, and is characterized as instantaneous quantum entanglement. But if this notion of “instantaneous connection” is somewhat disagreeable, then perhaps

quantum entanglement is but a manifestation of a supracausal process taking place in a higher dimension of time, i.e., within a 2 nd time dimension. The collapse of a quantum superposition is in certain cases effected along the lines of a quantum computation in which the new eigenstate constitutes the output of the computation. http://www.scribd.com/doc/222478894/The-Origins-of-Order-Stuart-aKauffman The Origins of Order Can multiverse physics and the implied multidimensional temporality thereof simulate teleology? The absurdity of Goldman's Quantum Jumping paradigm may actually be implied by the inner logic of the Anthropic cosmological principle. We cannot deny teleology, that is, its operation in the evolution of greater biological complexity as well as in the more foundational chemical evolution. This is because of the obvious self-organizing properties of atoms and molecules. Communications received from our closest most intimate friends, soul mates, life partner, mentors these have a distinctive quality namely we cannot imagine these communications could somehow secretly be the invention of our own minds whether subconscious or unconscious. What is called reason necessarily transcends subjectivity and so points to the reality of being beyond the subjective, namely that of an objective world and other minds. The cash value of objectivity is intersubjectivity. Here again we see how reason to the reality of being beyond the merely subjective. Grammar relates state so on a state-space that is of a manifoldly connected nature. Topology of temporality is here key. The contingency of language (see Richard Rorty on this) is importantly connected to the concept of grammar and Chomsky's nativist understanding thereof. Somehow the gulf between distinct minds is

overcome and information may actually be passed between minds, but this is necessarily facilitated by way of grammar. Semantics is to context as syntax is to. . . Grammar functions as filter and ultra-hard encryption along the same lines as how a web page uses a captcha image. kwo=

“Our sense organs and our brain operate as an intricate kind of filter which limits and directs the mind’s clairvoyant powers, so that under normal conditions attention is concentrated on just those objects or situations that are of biological importance for the survival of the organism and its species . . . As a rule, it would seem, the mind rejects ideas coming from another mind as the body r ejects grafts coming from another body.” —Cyril Burt (1883-1971) Professor of Psychology University College, London The moral of the story here is that, above is an instance of an "excluded middle" between chance and necessity, or randomness and determinism. The only "thing" that I can imagine that populates this logical excluded middle is consciousness. (I mean, think about it...a computer with randomly switching circuit elements couldn't be conscious, nor could a machine with circuit elements that only switched in a predictable pattern (according to some mathematical formula or equation). I suspect this hints at a breakdown in the presumed strict analogy between the determinism of physics and the logical necessity of mathematics. Say, because what we take to be equations describing unchanging law like physical behavior are indeed only approximations. It has been said that there has to be something that "breathes fire into the equations of physics" to make them "about something" instead of their being entirely abstract. What breathes fire into the equations is something that we intentionally ignore or just fail to notice. But what we ignore is grounded in what we fail to notice.

Without Kant's intersubjectivity.

"thing

in

itself",

objectivity

can

only

be

If the concept of being transcends that of existence this is provide support to the ontological argument? However, the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics is 1) Only a statistical law, not fundamental like, say the law embodied in Maxwell's Equations of Electromagnetism, 2) The 2nd Law only applies to *isolated systems* and 3) The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics assumes that any thermodynamic system is composed of discrete states such that combinations and permutations of the arrangement of these states (or elements) *exhausts* the possibilities for the system. Fluctuations in the quantum vacuum field are limited in size by what is called the Planck Mass Limit, given by: ≈ 1.2209×1019 GeV/c2 = 2.17651(13)×10−8 kg, (or 21.7651 ng). So a Boltzmann brain could only appear out of the quantum vacuum within a preexisting physical brain as a new configuration of the quantum states of that brain's tubulin dimer network of 21.7651 nanograms mass-energy equivalent or less. On this view, there would be no actual "Boltzmann brains", merely Boltzmann brain continuants of the integral quantum entangled global tubulin dimer network states of an actual brain. These Boltzmann brain continuants would correspond to temporal bubbles of consciousness, i.e., of the "specious present" and each BB continuant would be informed by previous BB continuants through the quantum vacuum filtering action and resonant frequency tuning *an actual brain*. Only BB vacuum fluctuations that are most compatible with the intact memory traces within a given person's brain could likely become a subsequent BB continuant of that person's consciousness. (In other words, the experiential continuity of lived conscious experience would not be merely some pernicious illusion) I think something along these lines can tame the bizarreness of Boltzmann brains predicted by inflationary cosmology and string theory and reconcile these predictions with human intuition and common sense. Of course, there are still intriguing implications of this slant on BB's, but they would not be of the

ridiculous sort that has appeared in recent popular scientific and philosophical publications, etc. Somewhat along the lines of Descartes' "Cogito Ergo Sum" idea, we know that the brain of a conscious person is *not a closed or isolated system"*, since, if it were, there would be no context for what is happening inside his brain and "without context there is now meaning" and that person would not actually possess conscious states of awareness (necessarily implied by understanding or experiencing "meanings"). Also, if the brain were an isolated system, then two identical brains could not imply the presence of two distinct conscious minds. However, add the fact that each is embedded or grounded in a historically distinct context of embryo-logical development, etc., and this seeming paradox is handily resolved. Human creativity moreover implies that the system of the brain (or whatever serves as the physical substrate for the conscious mind), cannot be just a changing configuration of exclusively discrete, unchanging states for otherwise the changes in the configuration of this underlying system would be causally deterministic - a situation in stark contradiction with human freedom and creativity. An objection here is that human freedom and creativity may in fact be an illusion. But the objector must acknowledge the disqualifying caveat here that, if human freedom and creativity are illusory, then so is consciousness and again, turning to Descartes' "Cogito", we can confidently assert that "we know that ain't true!" c.f., http://www.scribd.com/doc/47346743/Challengesto-the-Second-Law-of-Thermodynamics "A similar thesis has been argued for by Allen Everett [2004], specifically that in the case of Deutsch’s version of the Multiverse Thesis the theory of decoherence indicates that time travelling objects must be broken into microscopic fragments. Here I intend to demonstrate that this result is not peculiar to Deutsch’s version of the Multiverse Thesis, and is a problem for any theory that endorses that thesis", c.f., An Unwelcome Con-sequence of the Multiverse Thesis, http://www.nikkeffingham.com/resources/multiverse.pdf

What breaks the degeneracy of real brains vs Boltzmann brains? May 2014 Well, according to what was just said concerning the Planck limit on vacuum fluctuation size, it must be: an already broken scale invariance, i.e., simulacra at different spatiotemporal scales are necessarily functionally inequivalent. Instantiation (of a concept) is a concrete process. “I do not fear death. I had been dead for billions and billions of years before I was born, and had not suffered the slightest inconvenience from it.” - Mark Twain However, the fact that one is conscious, rather than being a "philosophical zombie" perhaps implies that the Universe, Multiverse or whatever one terms this realm of being has registered (and is in the continual act of registering) one's temporal existence and so Lucretius' "symmetry argument" may indeed fail, i.e., in favor of the proposition that the nature of nonexistence *before* and *after* one's brief Earthly existence are identical. Lucretius' "symmetry argument" carries the assumption that no metaphysical work is performed by the act of human existence - an assumption that I suspect is altogether unfounded in the light of such modern physical principles embodied in the quantum "nocloning" theorem, vacuum entanglement, decoherence theory, two-slit experiment, "Wigner's friend", Penrose-Hameroff "ORCH-OR theory", and so on." Lime Cat Another possible breakage of Lucretius' symmetry: if each person is "called forth" from a *distinctly different* abyss, (this would certainly beef up the ethics of mutual respect, that is, such a transcendent "alterity of the other"), then nonexistence would not possess a simple structure and so likely would possess no such "Lucretian symmetry" as Twain is glibly presuming. You could say..."truth splits this degeneracy". But without a transcendent observer, there's still this degeneracy of ontology vs epistemology. Infinite regress.

God and reified individual consciousness are two sides of the same coin qua projections from sociolinguistic constructs. Boltzmann brains in the vacuum require bootstrap boundary conditions on the quantum field. Margenau says quantum superposed states are always of a given quantum mechanical system of matter and fields, vacuum boundary conditions must be present. The first cause dilemma placed in a quantum mechanical context, that is, the vacuum cannot provide boundary conditions for itself. It cannot boot strap itself in other words. The back reaction of complex its extended physical structures upon the quantum vacuum transcends the configuration complexity possibilities for fluctuations of this vacuum. Mutual

recognition

of

behavioral

genetics.

Ziad asks, "Could god recreate same person twice? Let’s assume x exist and then god destroyed it and recreated it again. Is that same x or a similar x? Is it a duplicate x? No way has the original x come back after destruction." Since a physical duplicate of your body, down to the identical individual atoms is not the same as you, (by the famous "no-cloning" theorem of Quantum Mechanics), which is to say, not truly identical to you, then therefore the true underlying basis of your identity is not to be sought in the configuration of some particular set of atoms and molecules. I ask you, if God had managed, hypothetically speaking, of course, to create you for the first time, then why would it be *more difficult* rather than less so, for Him to create you once again? After all, He didn't have a template to start with the first time, but He now has a template to work from for a second time around. In a word, how does a feat which was possible on the first occasion become impossible to reproduce on

subsequent occasions? It is our subconscious acknowledgement of the essential irreversibility of the act of human existence which is secretly at work here in this discussion. You and I, because of our distinctly different philosophical prejudices relating to how we regard this irreversibility of each act of individual human existence, from "opposite ends of the binoculars", as it were, view the initial human incarnation as either enabling or disabling the possibility of a second human existence. Also we come to the problem with different views of temporality. You see it's not an instantaneous configuration of spatially discrete elements which provides the underlying ground of being and becoming (sustainment of being over time) for one’s personal identity. Although ones being possessed a beginning in time, the very ground of one's being lies all together outside of time. Via application of Solipsistic Cosmological Principle, one enters the realm of time and space at its own good pleasure. The immortality of, or better said, *the eternity of* the ground of your being is a much more certain proposition than is the external world and the other minds which appear to populate said world. August 2014 fb=

Concerning the "re" in reincarnation. I think it's high time (no pun intended) for philosophers to step out of the box on this question. If there's anything that the anthropic cosmological principle and multiverse theory (not to mention quantum mechanics and relativity theory) has taught us about time, it's that we should not confine ourselves to the notion of a unitary cosmic time/temporality. You got here for the first time in *this* timeline. Since there are an unlimited number of other times (completely distinct and disjoint) from this time (i.e., the time that you are in now), it follows that you can always come into being "for the first time" an unlimited number of times. . . and this would not be to invoke the phenomenon of "reincarnation" in any way. . . because all of these distinct times in the multiverse *have nothing whatever to do with each other*. It's soooo hard to let go of the notion of there only being a single metaphysical timeline, one that somehow coincides with the temporality of the subjective egoic self, but once you see how to metaphorically shuffle off that philosophical "mortal coil" but effecting

the implied mental trick here, then ones doubts about the eternal nature of the self utterly fall away. But alas, this leap of insight is just too hard for most people and even many geniuses are not capable of it. . . because it's not a question of sheer intelligence as a certain level of imaginative openness is required. The philosophy of empiricism is the linear, zero-threshold extrapolation of knowledge acquisition. Flowers for Algernon and the essentially social nature of qualitative, as opposed to quantitative knowledge acquisition. Somewhat in the spirit of Frank J. Tipler's "Omega Point": The whole "burning in hell for an eternity" concept is perhaps just a kind of metaphor, though perhaps not an altogether groundless one. This metaphor has undoubtedly functioned in myriad diverse cultures over these many centuries as a strategic mechanism of social control and as a scare tactic to compel compliance of the masses and individuals alike with the disguised agendas of social elites. But the notion of hell is perhaps also in part aboriginally the product of the fevered imagination of some particularly gifted Bronze Age Levantine tribesman-poets’ interpretation of the horror of unending separation from God. Because I don't really believe in the God of most rabid atheists’ impious imaginations, there is really not that great of a difference of opinion between them and me. In the spirit of an attempt to reconcile my semiorthodox Christian beliefs with a scientific world view, I interpret the whole “separation from God” trope for eternal damnation in light of the following eminently quantum and therefore scientific notions: quantum entanglement, quantum vacuum, quantum nonlocality, quantum tunneling, quantum cavity electrodynamics, and I shall include one additional concept derived from the late classical physics of Maxwell and his famous equations of electromagnetism, namely that of the "Gibbs Phenomenon". Applying the interesting and pervasive physical phenomenon of Willard Gibbs to a quantum tunneling wavefunction in which the barrier is reinterpreted as that of God-man separation in the

afterlife in which "eternity" equates with the infinite height of the barrier - required to prevent penetration of the “quantum brain” wavefunctions of unforgiven sinners into the “heavenly ground state vacuum”. The eternity or *everlastingness* of the separation is basically needed to prevent the wavefunctions, describing the quantum- vacuum-embedded functioning of the brains of atheists and Satan's fallen angels from quantum tunneling into heaven’s vacuum ground state and threaten to disrupt Jesus' administration of life within heaven, effectively amounting to an intrusion of sin nature. (A potential energy barrier of finite height, however large, permits eventual probablistic quantum tunneling of wavefunctions through the barrier.) And if conscious mental functioning, i.e., cognition and will are conditioned by a preexistent ground of being within the quantum vacuum that is spontaneously productive of virtual Boltzmann brains as a kind of necessary percolation process within the brain of each hominid ape, so as to endow it with self-awareness and a free will, then the only way to excluded undesirable Boltzmann brain vacuum fluctuations, so as to protect the new, “glorified brains” of those bodily resurrected in heaven, would be to erect an infinite potential barrier, rather than a merely large, finite one, thusly separating fluctuations of “good quality” or “fidelity” from those of “bad fidelity”. Otherwise, the Gibbs Phenomenon (applied to the quantum vacuum electromagnetic field) would permit eventual probabilistic “leakage” or quantum tunneling of the undesirable quantum information borne on the inwardly seeping nonlocally connected vacuum field fluctuations from outside the barrier. On this view, heaven is then an exercise in cavity quantum electrodynamics writ large. An implication of this view is that those who have been resurrected on the “dark side” of this potential barrier would possess brains that could only resonantly tune to Boltzmann brain fluctuations within the global quantum vacuum field that are of lesser stability and fidelity, i.e., that are noisier or “more entropic”. The integrity of function of such brains, resurrected on this dark side would, we imagine, be much more prone to problems of internal regulation. It is easy to imagine that anxiety, fear and hate, etc. and other negative emotions, as well as disruption, and dis-coordination of other psychic faculties, might well be the inevitable result for such

unfortunate souls. Bodily resurrection on this view would be a general physical phenomenon much like that underlying one’s original though nonetheless equally “miraculous” earthly embodiment, and would be in its universality akin to "the rain that falls on the just and unjust" alike, as befits any physical phenomenon, e.g., hurricane, tsunami, etc. A precondition to resurrection in a “glorified body” might correspond to a kind of “scrubbing” of the physical interface between the saved soul’s brain, or between his brain microtubule tubulin dimer network and his unique subspectrum of vacuum electromagnetic field fluctuations, performed while he is still alive, say, as a result of the influence of a new subspectrum (corresponding to the action of the “Holy Spirit”), such that a kind of preparatory frequency filtering is put in place, providing the underlying basis for psychic continuity, through conserved quantum entanglement encoded information, into the “up” or “good” side of the infinite potential barrier partitioning the “eternity” of the resurrection world. Since preexisting quantum vacuum correlations between two points within spacetime are always necessary to support any causal connectivity between these points, there will no longer be any possibility for causal interaction between opposite sides of the infinite potential barrier, i.e., the Gibbs Phenomena of quantum vacuum wavefunctions would be altogether “squelched.” Namely, there can be no correlations between fluctuations of the quantum vacuum on opposite sides of the infinite potential barrier. This is reminiscent of the fact of Schrodinger’s cat becoming so isolated in his black box in order to be placed into a superposition state that the quantum processes underlying the biochemical function of the cat in its “living branch” of this superposition, e.g., the quantum superposition of wavefunctions that supports all covalent bonding activity, would be effectively shut down. And because it is the spontaneous energy fluctuations of quantum vacuum, which is responsible for Heisenberg energy uncertainty, /\E, which in turn produces all temporal change, i.e., /\t ~ h//\E, by virtue of the complete separation of these fundamental field fluctuations into two distinct partitions, it follows that time and temporality in “heaven” will have become totally separate from time and temporality in “hell”. Such a bifurcation of the time line would effectively be irreversible because

the event of bifurcation would not be contained in either timeline.

I cleaned this up and edited it some. See also, Frank J. Tipler's Tulane University and personal webpages. I will probably end up emailing him the final version of this as it contains some ideas that he might find useful. If there are any questions, I will be happy to elaborate, since I have glossed over some details. The guiding insight for me is the consideration that our workaday world of conventional common sense is underlain, if you will, by a fundamental fluctuation field, i.e., the quantum vacuum electroweak nuclear field. So relating aspects of some important area of cultural common sense, e.g, Christianity, or Organic Gardening, American Football, competitive billiards, etc. for that matter, is not so ridiculous a proposition as at first seems. All "ordinary" phenomena are emergent from the universal quantum field. As Alan Watts used to like to say, "You didn't come into the world, you came out of it!" http://tulane.edu/sse/pep/faculty-and-staff/faculty/frank-tipler.cfm http://129.81.170.14/~tipler/ C.f., 1 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wavefunction 2 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_tunneling 3 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinite_potential_well 4 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WKB_approximation 5 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_entanglement 6 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_cryptography 7 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_superposition 8 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schr%C3%B6dinger%27s_cat 9 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cavity_quantum_electrodynamics 10 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gibbs_phenomenon 11 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_fluctuation

12

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_correlation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_nonlocality 14 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_vacuum 15 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omega_Point 16 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_J._Tipler#The_Omega_Point_cosm ology 17 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourier_analysis 18 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourier_inversion_theorem 19 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncertainty_Principle 13

“In digital signal processing applications there is sometimes an effect known as the Gibbs phenomenon, which is a characteristic ringing associated with sharp edges and transients. Is this a function of sampling, quantization or filtering in the system?” There is no "twice". The ground of one's being is eternally given only once...but there are unlimited manifestations of time. The only reality is the absence of limitation. The question becomes whether this absence is a one or indeed a many. Each soul possesses its own eternity. May 2014

Sam and I agreed long ago, that this absence is a plurality, which in mutual collaboration has produced a common metaphorical ground. Each metaphor begins as a creative leap of insight before it inevitably cures, hardening into an impenetrable ball of a stock metaphor. Humanity can perhaps be fundamentally divided into two groups, the one, formed of individuals who bring new metaphors into being, and the other, formed of those who consort and trade exclusively in stock metaphors. It has been noted that the figurative and the literal take each other's place in dreams. So is there then no real basis for comparison between the two groups other than biology? (Fundamentally similar up to the very point at which they are irreconcilably different? The poet, the artist and the philosopher indeed find themselves strangers within a strange land. kwo=

“the information contained in a retroviral gene is used to generate the

corresponding protein via the sequence: RNA → DNA → RNA → protein. This extends the funda-mental process identified by Francis Crick, in which the sequence is: DNA → RNA → protein.” December 2012

By analyzing the DNA of both parents and that of the child, it can be determined how many so-called germ line mutations are present in the child’s DNA. By this means it was established that approximately 40 such mutations typically occur between generations. The vast majority of these mutations cause no changes in the types of proteins that are produced, i.e., they are not “point mutations” and are mostly harmless because their gene regulatory implications only manifest themselves over the course of an extraordinarily long life span, interacting as they would with patterns of gene expression not heretofore selected for, which is to say manifesting the biochemical self-organizing properties of matter and not the higher level properties of environmental context sensitivity. So-called harmless or "silent" mutations are far more efficaciously interoperative with gene regulatory structures that lie still far in the future than indeed they are with respect to currently existing structures, which points up the providential nature of the self-organizing properties of atoms and organic molecules as a kind of preexisting infrastructure that promotes and enables evolution. Quo vadis, Peter, er, uh, Darwin? April 2014

Research the difference between the hypothetical observation of an observer versus the observation of a hypothetical observer versus the hypothetical observation of a hypothetical observer in terms of wavefunction collapse. March 2014

The true sceptic possesses no agenda or preconceived notion of what reality is and plays the devil’s advocate though always without taking sides. The so-called sceptics of the late 20 th and early 21st centuries are almost uniformly materialist ideologues or evangelical atheists. The puzzles and paradoxes which result if there is no must be

understood and the two distinct and we related of this phrase, "thing in itself". It is clear that the thing itself must be indifferent to the passage of time and therefore the originator of temporality. Voice to text is operating suddenly through use of synonyms instead of phonetic transcription....the ghost in the quantum computer. Discuss the tertium datur of the self, "zweiselection", i.e., the self and the other, but not just any other (another), for there is no other without the transcendent other, e.g., me and Jesus, pursuant to the anthropic cosmological principle and the fine tuning of immanent and transcendent consciousness. How to distinguish another from an other, i.e., an other who is not me from an other who is me – the me that is always just here for the first time? Is the other of the other reducible in the final analysis to merely the other, properly so-called? A simulation is based on something outside of itself. A really existing system is based on something outside of what can be known by any inhabitant of the system. March 2014

If there is no thing in itself, then there must be something maintaining the order of things in existence apart from the mere indifference of creation to the passage of time. There is a special class of counterfactuals these are a counterfactual that we would never have been in a position to observe. For example if there had been an advanced technological civilization prior to the current one on planet Earth we should have been able to observe that the earth’s crust is strangely bereft of precious metals. But this would only be possible if we were observers from another planet with its own precious metals to support advanced technological civilization Discuss the general distinction between the operation of laws of physics and chemistry from the application of the loss of physics and chemistry in terms of the distinct levels of generality.

God is what is secretly pointed to by the unity of hidden assumptions of successful splitting of the myriad linguistic degeneracies that human communication is prey to. Both general relativity and quantum mechanics have passed every experimental tests too many decimal places too many standard deviations or Sigma.. And yet these two highly successful theories cannot be merged together harmoniously. Does the experimental success of both series implying that they must be harmoniously blended that this must be possible or just that carry a hidden assumption of metaphysical prejudice? Does a so-called Theory of Everything require data in addition to what is available through intersubjective observation and experiment? The concept of the “cosmic breadboard” as the basis for, for example, on the one hand, a finite speed of light, time dilation, gravitation and spacetime variations in the local velocity of light in vacuum from the partitioning of CPU workload/bandwidth, as well as providing the theoretical modeling basis for wavefunction collapse, probabilistic quantum behavior (algorithms for “guessing” the next computational state) and quantum decoherence (link rot), on the other hand, evinces a possible deep though perhaps comprehensible interrelationship between GR and QM. Perception as “cognitive tuning”, i.e., as quantum mechanically mediated tuning of brain circuits to resonate with selected vacuum frequencies and bandwidth spectra instead of as portrayed in the naïve realistic models of sense perception may point to a threshold, above which, cognitive tuning becomes independent of intrinsic quantum entanglement (and its selfreprocessing) in the vacuum and below which, and below which these two processes (which may indeed be on a par with one another) act in mutual competition. Must spontaneous quantum entanglement reprocessing be intentional and object based? Since there is no concept of consciousness therefore there is no instantiations for quantification of consciousness. This means that there

is no set of conditions which excludes my being. I am always already here for the first time. Nor can there be a theory of consciousness (without a concept thereof). (One can always come back “for the first time” as there is nothing to prevent it! It’s how one originally came to be.) One of the implications of eternal inflation theory is that each observer within a given pocket universe does not have access to veritable cosmic time and so in a very real sense exists within a simulation possessing its own internal time. There is a growing consensus in New Age circles that life transformative events, even tragic once, are directed somehow by the Higher Self of the person who is subject to these events or incidents. Because the system is radically reset upon death, if the evangelical atheists are right, anything becomes possible, as a novel occurrence since all of the restrictions that might have prevented novelty are removed. Even God becomes possible, that is, from a starting zero-point of altogether unconditioned being, which is the transcendent ground of being. This is the true inevitable underlying logic of multiverse metaphysics. It has been rightfully said that anything at all will indeed happen that is not specifically forbidden by quantum mechanics. This is consistent with the principle of the superabundance of unconditioned being. Da das System radikal auf den Tod zurückzusetzen ist, wenn die evangelische Atheisten Recht haetten, wird alles möglich, als ein neues Auftreten, da alle Beschränkungen, die Neuheit verhindert haben könnten, entfernt geworden sind. Selbst Gott möglich wird, das heißt, von einer Startnullpunkt von insgesamt unbedingten Seins das der transzendenten Grund des Seins ist. Dies ist die wahre unvermeidlich zugrunde liegende Logik des Multiversummetaphysiks. Es hat zu Recht gesagt worden, dass überhaupt alles in der Tat passieren soll, dass nicht speziell durch die Quantenmechanik verboten ist. Dies steht im Einklang mit dem Prinzip der Überfülle der unbedingten Seins.

It is not merely that the time line frays at infinity. Unconditioned being makes no choice between the ontological alternatives of the one and the many. Investigate

the

concept

of

agnostic

theism.

Analyze and deconstruct the naive tissue of assumptions lying behind such statements as "the universe has been here forever". Between the emergence and the originality of time, anything is possible but not necessarily inevitable. When you are dead you're no longer attached to the time line along which you lived your human existing so you're free to start "again" (English is not equipped to describe situations of multidimensional temporal tenses), as though for the first time , but it's not "again" because altogether new time. It's difficult for one to grasp because one thinks in either/ or and black and white terms... either you live again or you won't, but there's a third way analogous to getting here in "the first place". @$One's consciousness simply possesses multiple instances, however in the total and utter absence of instantiation of an immanent concept or category, i.e,. a concept graspable by a finite intellect. The instantiation of consciousness is with respect to a transcendental concept of consciousness. Multidimensional subjective temporality is implied by the transcendental nature of consciousness. All concepts are metaphors masquerading as such, except for transcendental consciousness and its concepts, which are purely abstract, i.e., not taken from experience as indeed metaphors are. @$Can the purely concrete be truly concrete and un-abstract? Doesn’t the concept of pureness or purity imply abstraction? March 2014 The notion of the “purely concrete” is an abstraction and so mind as the only source of abstraction becomes unavoidable. May 2014 It occurs to me that the notion of “the purely concrete” is an abstraction and so mind, as the only source of abstraction, becomes an unavoidable precondition to an inevitable phenomenon. This is a good definition of immanent necessity, i.e., the

instantiation of necessity as such: an unavoidable precondition to an inevitable phenomenon. This is of course all contingent upon "existence" and "mind" being well formulated or coherent notions. March 2014

The Gödel Incompleteness Theorem combined with the finitude of the human intellect points to the reality of universal mind, since Platonic mathematical forms as sufficiently complex mathematical theorems thusly may subsist independently of any finite mind, c.f., wik= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_return May 2014 Lime Cat We live endless lives, but in each life we are here for the first time. A seemingly paradoxical statement, but not if one realizes that eternity is the root of all temporality. "Time is infinite, but the things in time, the concrete bodies, are finite. They may indeed disperse into the smallest particles; but these particles, the atoms, have their determinate numbers, and the numbers of the configurations which, all of themselves, are formed out of them is also determinate. Now, however long a time may pass, according to the eternal laws governing the combinations of this eternal play of repetition, all configurations which have previously existed on this earth must yet meet, attract, repulse, kiss, and corrupt each other again..." ~Heinrich Heine From Aphorism 341 of The Gay Science: "Whoever thou mayest be, beloved stranger, whom I meet here for the first time, avail thyself of this happy hour and of the stillness around us, and above us, and let me tell thee something of the thought which has suddenly risen before me like a star which would fain shed down its rays upon thee and every one, as befits the nature of light. - Fellow man! Your whole life, like a sandglass, will always be reversed and will ever run out again, - a long minute of time will elapse until all those conditions out of which you were evolved return in the wheel of the cosmic process. And then you will find every pain and every pleasure, every friend and every enemy, every hope and every error, every blade of grass and every ray of

sunshine once more, and the whole fabric of things which make up your life. This ring in which you are but a grain will glitter afresh forever. And in every one of these cycles of human life there will be one hour where, for the first time one man, and then many, will perceive the mighty thought of the eternal recurrence of all things:- and for mankind this is always the hour of Noon".[7] Have you ever had an insight that is extremely significant, but you can't find a way to put it into words so as to share it with others? I recently had such an insight. The fact that I can't really describe this insight or the details of its contents to anyone else, for some strange reason doesn't cause me to believe that it is any less valid. Being an alien doesn't mean that you're from another planet or star system. It means that your brain acts as an interface between quantum vacua within a partition that is categorized altogether differently from the quantum vacua partitions which the brains of others, one’s so called peers, resonate with. There is no concept of consciousness or category thereof... This would imply that there is no universal mind which is instantiated by multiple individual consciousnesses. Only subjective metaphors and not intersubjective concepts. @$

If upon death one loses the thread then you were never here so you can come into being for the first time. Either God exists or God does not exist either the soul is eternal or does not either reincarnation is true or its faults either humans have free will or they don't and so on. In an open ended multiverse metaphysical possibilities are contingent. Either reincarnation is true or it is not if it is not true then the thread is cut upon one's death in which case when was never here in which case one can come to be for the first time.

Discourse is not just a structure within one's native language, but is a novel language in its own right. The illogical modus ponens verses modus tollens reversal or inversion is necessary for the translation between languages which is nonlinear in the relationship of concept maps. And is necessary for the operation of metaphor transitioning between different universes of discourse or for use with idiosyncratic dialects of individual persons I thought it was when Alan Lightman physicist said that we are lucky to be here and said this within the context of discussing the multiverse. Because the system is radically reset upon death, if the evangelical atheists are right, anything becomes possible, as a novel occurrence since all of the restrictions that might have prevented novelty are removed. Even God becomes possible, that is, from a starting zero-point of altogether unconditioned being. This is the inevitable underlying logic of multiverse metaphysics. It has been rightfully said that anything at all will indeed happen that is not specifically forbidden by quantum mechanics. This is consistent with the principle of the superabundance of unconditioned being. It is not merely that the time line frays at infinity. Unconditioned being makes no choice between the ontological alternatives of the one and the many. Chaos is wholly degenerate.

February 2014

Origin of the assertion that "God is dead"? Not with Nietzsche or Sartre. February 2014

One needs stability to get life started one needs instability to get species to split in two subspecies which then become independent separate species. We need a vast continuum of forbidden States interwoven into the rugged fitness landscape of the multiverse for otherwise nothing of value can ever be brought forth. The advancement

of science has, since the Enlightenment or perhaps even since the Renaissance, gone hand in hand with the steady retreat of Man from the position he had enjoyed since antiquity, at the center of creation. But the underlying logic of the Anthropic Cosmological Principle, if properly understood and this understanding disseminated, threatens a Copernican revolution that shall boomerang with a vengeance. Reductio for the multiverse with 10500 universes vastly outstripping the number of possible distinct minds? April 2014 @$One way to invert this disastrously counterintuitive ratio and avoid all this is to discover that the mechanism of human consciousness necessarily and regularly invokes what is well beyond a mere astronomical number of these parallel universes. And the quantum decoherence limit set at the Planck mass-energy combined with Henry Margenau’s observation that quantum superposed states are always states of some classically describable object aids us in properly identifying these myriad “parallel universes”. They are distinct quantum states of brain microtubule tubulin dimer networks of distinct energies no greater than the Planck energy. A principle of unity implies a principle of design coherence cohesiveness unity stability all of these are part of the principles of design as manifestations. Meditate on what it means to process a deeper understanding of ideas. Most people live the majority of their lives ensconced within a tissue unchallenged assumptions nestled within a paradigm which never shifts. The differential decoherence mapping correlates with the rugged fitness landscape of evolutionary theory. Keeping a loved one's stress levels low and giving her attention and love will help her condition. What I call active, participatory prayer. Similar to how consciousness does not possess a representation, so too does time fail to have a representation. This is connected to Wittgenstein's "private language" argument, one application of which is a disproof of the skeptical hypothesis that I popped into existence a moment ago complete with a set of false memories referring to a fictitious earlier life's history. Wittgenstein's private language argument

is thought to be so important to 20th century philosophy because it is the only respectable argument ever developed against solipsism. The incorrigibility of the reality of memory rather than the incorrigibility of memories themselves is importantly related to quantum decoherence in thermodynamic irreversibility. Although Boltzmann brains are more massive than the Planck mass and therefore cannot be generated in a vacuum fluctuation, nonetheless Boltzmann "minds" *are possible* states of the vacuum during its fluctuation. And “Boltzmann minds” may indeed be the most important quantum neurological phenomenon that can be supposed to result from the coupling of the brain to the fluctuating quantum vacuum electromagnetic field at the tubulin dimer level. In the youtube video, "The Private Language Argument and the Nature of Consciousness", Cutoftheamateur states that the supervenience of consciousness increased natural selective pressure in favor of increasing neurological and brain physiological complexity in the evolution of the human brain above the selective advantage afforded by mutations or cultural innovations which merely had the effect of increasing the efficiency of a classical neural network of stimulus-response by way of improvements in logic, memory and data processing speed. It is no accident that metaphors are frequently referred to through the use of quotation marks enclosing a term or phrase: which is being applied in all together new way that is in a manner not suspected, heretofore (note temporal inflection) unsuspected by the listener who has necessarily received a communication from the other. To form an abstract concept or idea of a person, there must be more than one exemplar of "person". Also, quotation marks are used when one is *referring* to one thing in terms of a different thing. It is not that the mind transcends the limitations to logic set by Gödel’s incompleteness theorem and it's implications, but that the brain has access to multiple Boltzmann minds through the quantum superposition of brain contexts provide by the embedding quantum vacuum fluctuation field (of nonlocally connected tubulin dimer states). There are perhaps no Goedelian limitations in philosophy and philosophizing as there is with logic and mathematics

because of the blurring of the distinction between levels and metalevels within the domain of philosophic activity. February 2014

The philosophically naive error of intelligent design theorists is their presumption that grammatical chauvinism on the part of speakers of human languages possesses validity beyond the linguistic context in other words is valid is relevant to the description of objective being. They should remember that the passive construction leaves the question of a subject wholly indefinite. The adjective "intelligent" may only be a property of a fundamental process, I.e., one having no beginning in time. The noun, "design" does not necessarily imply an activity. An activity does not imply an agent. An agent does not imply an agency. An agency does not imply a founding. A founding does not imply a founder. Thanks, Michael! An old chestnut or shall I say "onion". : p. The motive behind ID is indeed disingenuous aka backdoor creationism. Believing grammatical relationships to be as robust as logical or causal implications is my biggest criticism of the purveyors of ID. . .not their cynicism, which I take for granted. "You can't get something from nothing . . . unless its the quantum vacuum." The philosophically naive error of intelligent design theorists is their presumption that grammatical chauvinism on the part of speakers of human languages possesses validity beyond the linguistic context in other words is valid is relevant to the description of objective being. They should remember that the passive construction leaves the question of a subject wholly indefinite. The adjective "intelligent" may only be a property of a fundamental process, I.e., one having no beginning in time. The noun, "design" does not necessarily imply an activity. An activity does not imply an agent. An agent does not imply an agency. An agency does not imply a founding. A founding does not imply a founder. Thanks, Michael! An old chestnut or shall I say "onion". : p. The motive

behind ID is indeed disingenuous aka backdoor creationism. Believing grammatical relationships to be as robust as logical or causal implications is my biggest criticism of the purveyors of ID. . .not their cynicism, which I take for granted. "You can't get something from nothing . . . unless its the quantum vacuum." I.e., the quantum vacuum is "nothing". And "nothing" comes from nothing...Heisenberg energy uncertainty is the causal basis of temporarily and so could have had no beginning in time. And "everything" comes from "nothing" because the only difference between real and virtual particles and fields is (and here's the rub...*undifferentiated* energy). There are no things, only "things”. In order to do away with dualism we need to analyze the redundancy of the external world and other minds as independent concepts or principles of being. Paradoxically in order for science to be truly positivistic it must, following Feuerabend, be radically free of any determinate method of discovery and investigation. Belief that science has a determinate method of discovery is to presume that the final achievement of science shall be the establishment of a theory of everything, which is a metaphysical presumption. Positivistic science, which possesses no determinate method of investigation or inquiry, cannot make any hard and fast distinction between the natural and the supernatural. What distinguishes a brain from a computation device or computer is the greater independence of modularity of design which leads to the marshalling of multiple independent contacts also there is the L stripping of any unified or integral to sign this is about saved due to the plank limit where in the design functions in a manner which transcends the look ahead computational capacity of the quantum vacuum field. All of the operations described by Alan Turing for his universal computational device are susceptible to quantum superposition

There is certainly an important distinction between 2 to the power of 400 parallel universes versus 2 to the power of 400 quantum computers within a single universe. Does the natural decoherence limit play an important role in this distinction? Compare the degree of focus of attention versus the degree of resolution the appearances. Is there a degeneracy of case between discovery and learning about an objective realm versus a self- interfering, self- limiting cognitive system embedded in a chaotic medium? God is the consciousness of Being as well as they will which brought being into being. Imaginary

number

mysticism.

Well it is true that long hair usually doesn't look aesthetically appropriate framing the face of an "older woman" and could create a perception problem, both personally and professionally. I never thought that your long hair mismatched your face two years ago. Regulation of gene expression is no longer under the legacy of a billion years of natural selection once the child-bearing years are far behind. Regulation of gene expression rolls over to being subject to the innate self-organizing properties of atoms and molecules. In the second half of life, therefore, one ceases to be a child of this little green earth, but comes into her own as a child of the cosmos. But what is really relevant is not the modern day, but what natural selection had to work with over the previous million, 10 million, hundred million, etc. years in the past. It's unlikely that natural selection programmed gene regulation in hominids living much beyond 30, still less, *producing offspring* beyond this age. So the relaxation of the grip of our evolutionary legacy actually probably begins after 35 or so and granted, maybe is not complete until 50 or 60. The moral here is that one can look forward to old age instead of necessarily dreading it because of the possibilities of transcendence and spiritual growth that our latter years offer. : ) The concept is valid, I believe, in terms of the

combined action of Darwinian and thermodynamic principles. Now the process of the great spirit of the cosmos strengthening its gentle grip and loving influence on the genome may indeed extend into the 70's, 80's and beyond. This principle relies upon a reasonable assumption, the one that levels of description in gene regulation inter- penetrate, in other words modularity is imperfect so that it is not just the lower level systems on which natural selections grip relaxes, but that this applies to higher level function as well. According to Whittington, animals could have arisen at different places and at different times. Instead of descent from an accidental first common ancestor, we have evolutionary convergence guided by the selforganizing properties of organic molecules from multiple points of origin: nevertheless guided by a single underlying dynamic. In other words the common descent is not from a single accidental first ancestor, but from a single dynamic medium informing and guiding the evolutionary process as a whole. Darwin's principle of common descent is false and his principle of evolution by natural selection is tautologous: everything which survives, survives. Because life arose from multiple points of origin, but there is a single genetic code or language to mediate the evolutionary process from these multiple point origin, it follows that the rationale of the genetic code lies with the self-organizing dynamic origin of life rather than itself having been cobbled together by blind evolutionary processes. Platonic archetypes offer themselves as a happy 3rd alternative to the Intelligent Design hypothesis instead of explanation of evolution in terms of common descent. Higher mammals such as humans share such an ancient common

ancestor with the octopus that the eye of the octopus and the eye of the human originated from a common ancestor so ancient that this ancestor did not itself possess a recognizable functional eye. By combining Bohm's causal principle with the decoherence principle, we see that the Planck limit applies not only to space and critical densities, but also to time and time intervals. in this way we see that temporality is necessary for the construction of an integrally whole and open consciousness and one that is prepared to be an active participant in a heavenly community. The operation in the background of this tendency to commit informal fallacies greatly reduces the time it takes to hit upon theoretical insights which had one can find oneself to correct logical thinking one might not have stumbled upon for orders of magnitude greater spans of time if at all and so the fallacies of informal logic we're likely selected for in the evolutionary process because they had survival value in greatly reducing the time spans required for hitting up on favorable solutions to otherwise intractable problem. Hey ready general example of this is the confusion of the principles of modes tollens with modus ponens. The robustness and stability of life forms may be better served by multiple points of origin rather than common descent. With multiple points of origin the beginnings of life how much less likely to be purely driven by chance, but partly driven by the self-organizing dynamics of a fundamental ground. Investigate the concept of the seeming magical nature of the general effectiveness of mathematical integration. Make no mistake deconstructionist theorists: What led us to this postmodern world of the indeterminate self and the illusory will were myriad individuals be- speckling history, possessing a determinate will and a highly determinate ego.

Darwin was only embraced wholeheartedly and promoted to the status of a scientific demigod only because there were myriad closet atheist secretly awaiting the arrival of a godless messiah. We can use evolution theory is a system of appropriate metaphors for organizing our experience and understanding it better even though Darwin's theory is not strictly speaking correct this brings up the whole question of what correctness of theories within the context of the philosophy of science means. For example applying Darwin's natural selection concept to the second half of life and the unexpected benefits of getting older. Within the realm of limitation angelic free will is considerably more limited than that of human beings because of their much greater intellectual capacity and ability to foresee negative outcomes to any possible decision amongst alternative The deterministic chaos observed for algorithms possessing very simple rules for operating a simulated world such as cellular automata suggest that just because physicists have been able to pin down the parameters of the Standard Model of particle physics does not lead us to expect similar successes in the future in the softer sciences. Compose an essay on the hopefulness of the true and thorough going skeptic. Include a discussion of the concept of time, eternity, everlastingness and temporality in relation to the Black Adder concept of reincarnation. The Anthropic Principle, the Multiverse, Simulation (and the problem of Aetiology) and the theory of Eternal Inflation should figure prominently. March 2014 Reincarnation means being brought forth, unbidden into a new universe within the multiverse that is unfathomably connected or not connected at all to the universe that provided the nutritive yolk of one’s

“previous” incarrnation. The consistency of one’s memories of a past or past lives is a function of cosmological anthropic consciousness tuning continuous line or thread. Differentiation and integration is with respect to a self-same mathematically real line. edt=June 2014, fcbk= or fb= eml=

"Although the proper fine tuning of brain microtubule tubulin dimer circuits could be managed by an underlying naturalistic quantum vacuum, so that the majority of real human beings could be expected to possess consciousness, in a so-called ancestor simulation, the fine tuning would be at the opposite end of the one-many (individual-collective) spectrum, i.e., within the ground of being at its "world end" instead of within each tiny subspectrum of ground from which the individual draws his or her being, such that only one distinct individual would likely possess the correct, concretely dynamic "brain" structure necessary to embed itself properly within the virtual quantum vacuum field of the simulation so as to become a properly conscious entity, rather than the hollow projection of an avatar or at most, a "philosophical zombie"." That having been said, were multiverse theory correct, then there really would be nothing to fundamentally distinguish the universe one happens to be in from a simulation. ! It would be a case of one universe per customer, instead of tiny fractions thereof, each! Although the proper fine tuning of brain microtubule circuits could be managed by an underlying naturalistic quantum vacuum so that the majority of real human beings would be expected to possess consciousness, in a so-called ancestor simulation the fine tuning would be at the opposite end, i.e., of the world instead of the individual, such that only one individual would typically possess the correct "brain" structure to embed properly in the virtual quantum vacuum to be conscious. This does not imply solipsism, but merely that, if Nick Bostrom's simulation hypothesis is true, then each simulated human is isolated within his own virtual world and perhaps receiving frequent multiple data (rather than information) inputs from individuals inhabiting distinct virtual worlds.

Both pure necessity and pure contingency are inconsistent with free will and consciousness there must be some chaotic boundary between the two across which they interact to effect freely willed conscious states. Treiben Sie wohin Sie wollen Neues zu lernen, soll bitte keine Atbeit sein. Wir treffen uns bestimmt irgendwann wieder. Once we have rejected the naive empiricist view of perception memory and imagination and how these are related one to another and in turn embrace a more sophisticated Kantian view of these three elements of mental functioning, then we become open to some highly counterintuitive results concerning the philosophy of mind, the philosophy of time and space, as well as the philosophy of science. The tripartite theory of perception distinct from Plato's projective perception Theory and the traditional empirical theory of perception of the external world which has been in place for approximately the past 150 years. There

can

be

no

mechanical

theory

of

inertia.

The mental faculties of humankind can be divided into two fundamentally distinct groups: those whom once the anthropic principle is explained can only understand this principle as a triviality or tautology and the minority of persons whose minds are constituted in such a manner that they are capable of grasping the core insight or logic underlying the anthropic principle so as to understand this principle in a non-trivial way. This is perhaps not truly owing to a difference in intellectual ability of the two groups, but to deep and lasting differences in intellectual bias. A further division can be made within the minority group that understands the anthropic principle in a non-trivial way: those who believe the anthropic principle obviates the need for infrastructure or design within the ground of being versus those who believe this principle absolutely requires the element of design.

The logic of the anthropic principle applies to the multiverse: humankind can only find themselves living within a bubble in which the fundamental constants are appropriately fine-tuned. In turn, I can only find myself within a bubble within the multiverse in which the fundamental physical constants are even more appropriately fine-tuned. We must remember that the only thing that has to be made consistent are the appearances. The logic of the anthropic principle applied to the multiverse has important implications for the question of personal identity: for example, could I have come into the world as a lower animal or as a mentally retarded individual? The necessity of finetuning of the cosmological constant, for instance as well as the approximately 38 fundamental physical constants. Anthropic cosmological fine tuning seems to require that personal identity be based upon some form of necessity such as a determinate essence of some sort, meaning that one's identity must already be given prior to the fine-tuning, i.e., a fundamental component of the ground of being itself. “While the standard model of cosmology has been largely confirmed by experiment, a few curious anomalies have resisted explanation. One, first seen by NASA’s COBE satellite and more recently confirmed by WMAP9, is the so-called “low quadrupole”. The WMAP satellite has mapped in great detail temperature fluctuations in the cosmic microwave background (CMB) radiation that pervades the sky. Standard cosmology predicts that we should see such temperature fluctuations at every scale. Both COBE and WMAP, however, discovered that there are virtually no fluctuations at angular scales larger than 60 degrees. One possible interpretation of this perplexing anomaly is that spacetime simply isn’t large enough to support such large-scale fluctuations. If true, this result would set the upper bound on the size of the universe at almost precisely the size of the observable universe. In other words, the boundary of spacetime – the edge of reality – would coincide with the boundary of a single observer’s reference frame. According to the standard view, this is quite a coincidence!”, c.f.,

http://fqxi.org/data/essay-contest-files/Gefter_Gefter_Fqxi_essay.pdf Creator or multiversal vacuum fluctuation are just two different metaphors which relate to the same really existing first cause. Nobody lives in the vast majority of multiverse bubbles. Quantum mechanics predicts that anything which is not forbidden by conservation laws must occur with some degree of probability. One of the implications of the multiverse theory is that it each of us is immortal. Time to address the metaphysics of "incarnating for the first time" within an eternally inflating anthropic multiverse. It's not so much that some part of us lives on after our death as it is that what brought us forth here in the first place shall still be here after we depart this life and can bring us forth once more just as though for the first time. “As a former research student of John Hick I accept his view that we are living in an ambiguous Universe which can be interpreted theistically or atheistically. Hence I am not attempting to ‘prove’ the truth of a liberal modernist version of Christianity”, c.f., http://www.anglicanism.org/admin/docs/believable_anglicanism_august _2013.pdf So on account of this solipsistic implication, the multiverse principle fails as an adequate basis of explanation for the observed density of information (in the sense of specified complexity) in the universe. And because there is better continuity across ensembles rather than within a given ensemble, temporal evolution of the consciousness of any given anthropic observer is such that causal continuity is psychically projective rather than reactive. In other words, the psychic continuity of

the self and that of the other do not coincide. The multiverse principle as an explanation for the radical fine tuning of the dozen or more fundamental physical constants of this universe - this principle flouts another principle, that of causal continuity. I say this because continuity is more readily available in immediately nearby alternate universes than it is in subsequent states of one's own universe. Two-dimensional temporality to which we are attributing the majority of all sudden changes or increases in biological complexity in evolution would have likely affected the memories and consciousness of any long lived observer who may have been in the area observing these changes. Kauffman Reason and rationality are broader than science, broader than logic. Logic is applied reason. Logic is to technique as reason is to science. The former provides the basis for selecting the latter. 'Experimental rugged fitness landscape in protein sequence space.' U. P. Hayashi 'news and views' 'Why genes in pieces?' 'Nature volume 271 'news and views' 'Why genes in pieces?' 'Nature volume 271 C.f., YouTube video, The Origin of Genes (cdk007) New order can arise from random shuffling of modular components provided that each modular component arose more or less by selforganizing properties of atoms and molecules which graced the process at its beginning, independently of any natural selection processes. KEY WORDS for searching this document: @$, threshold, quantum vacuum, vacuum electromagnetic field, zero-point, Lamb shift, Paul

Exclusion, Pauli Inclusion, Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, HUP, dark matter, dark energy, pioneer anomaly, cosmological constant, cosmological acceleration, induced gravity, induced inertia, Zitterbewegung, dimensional time, temporality, specious present, dissociation, dissociative, unified, integrated, concept of consciousness, Incompleteness Theorem, Benjamin Libet, Rupert Sheldrake, Terence McKenna, Chomsky, Plantinga, El Greco, Kurt Gödel, Wittgenstein, Bertrand Russell, William James, Julian Jaynes, Philip K. Dick, Star trek, Perry Rhodan, science fiction, Eccles, Kant, Santayana, Sartre, Descartes, Hume, Berkeley, Leibniz, Fichte, Margenau, Penrose, Hameroff, microtubule, tubulin, synapse, interconnection, future, time travel, Prokhovnik, Sarfatti, Fontana, zeitschicht, graviton limit, gravity wave, binding energy, Hubble, density gradient, gravitational constant, fine structure constant, mc2, mc**2, relativistic mass velocity, rotation about the time axis, angular momentum, intrinsic spin, imaginary momentum, conservation of four momentum, hypersurface, hyperspherical, WKB approximation, Casimir Effect, DeBroglie, Schrodinger, Dirac, Feynman, Einstein, Gamow, Planck, virtual particle, spontaneous emission, stimulated emission, fermion, boson, fermionantifermion, spin 0, spin 1, spin 2, composite spin 0, composite spin 2, scalar, vector, tensor, Pauli blocking, Cooper pair, discrete redshift, quantized redshift, cosmological redshift, gravitational redshift, vacuum energy density, fluctuation, correlation, Van Gent, Brian Swift, Ziad, Greg, Sakharov, four angular momentum, precession, red shift, complacency, joy, authenticity, sociolinguistic, cultural, anthropological, hypocrisy, hypocrite, church, Christian, Paul, Jesus, God, Divine, divinity, free will, creation, intelligent design, ancestor simulation, Bostrom, Carroll, Elvidge, Matrix, Gaussian, Boltzmann brain, solipsism, solipsistic principle, standard deviation, mean, percentile, foreknowledge, determinism, underdetermined, overdetermined, correlated, Christianity, Hinduism, Buddha, Buddhism, Taoism, Tao, Ego, Dream, Dreaming, Lucid, epistemology, epistemological, metaphysics, metaphysical, methodological, anthropic cosmological principle, anthropic principle, wavefunction, phase relations, Fourier, fringe, Gibbs phenomenon, collapse, decoherence, resonant, resonant

tuning, resonance, filter, reducing valve, transcendence, immanence, evolution, Darwinian, epigenetics, chemical evolution, mutation, natural selection, unit of heredity, DNA, RNA, Jacques Monod, Neodarwinian, genetic base pair, information bearing, structural mutation, genotype, phenotype, self-organization, infrastructure, providence, grace, theistic evolution, random mutation, point mutation, regulatory gene, gene regulatory network, GRN, superposition, tunneling, nonlocal, nonlocality, entanglement, qubit, parallel, many worlds, Everett, transactional, clone, cloning, twin, doppelganger, contradiction, contradictory, contrary, Nagel, Dummet, Smart, Chalmers, philosophy of mind, metaphysics of mind, philosophy of space and time, arrow of time, irreversibility, entropy, Von Neunann entropy, 2nd Law, thermodynamic, discourse, free will, reductionism, consciousness, quantum nonlocality and hidden variables, self-referential, unity, integration, holism,

The biggest factor interfering with my fantasy that the world is my oyster is the notably inadequate state of development of battery technology. January 2014

Write down every original kernel idea you have ever had and then explore the connections between each and every one. This exercise should succeed in generating myriad new insights that shall serve to extend the network further in terms of expanding the total number of nodes (kernels). December 2013

Devemos compreender que a Moral tem aspectos relativos; e, por isso, o que era moral no pretérito pode ser imoral no presente. Não se pode ajuizar a vida de um povo de mais de dois mil anos, aferindo-lhe os valores morais mediante o critério de vosso século. Em certos povos do Oriente a poligamia ainda é de boa moral, a fim de se ajustar o desequilíbrio que é produto do excesso de nascimentos de mulheres sobre pequena percentagem de homens. Algumas tribos asiáticas tacham

de imoralidade o fato da viúva ocidental sobreviver ao marido falecido, em vez de ser cremada com ele no fogo purificador. A moral tão sublime e sadia que Jesus pregou em sua época, foi o motivo dele ser crucificado, porque essa moral cristã era considerada subversiva ou debilitante em face da predominância do instinto inferior dos homens da época. http://www.businessinsider.com/magnus-carlsen-our-first-post-modernchess-champion-2013-11 At logocentrism’s core is the gloss of a faux integrated and unified self, one concealing and underlying a de facto loose confederation of protoselves. This “trick” of the project-ive unified self is imitated again and again at numerous different levels, as this splintered confederation of mental faculties known as the human mind projects its reifying gaze everywhere and all around itself. Some must suppose this is but an appearance borne of an incomplete and tattered conceptualization or mapping of the mind in terms of numerous supposed faculties as the science of psychology remains in its long infancy as a kind of "psyence of scichology". One important example of this "logocentric reification" is the instinctive (as well as subconscious in the sense of "consciousness-grounding”) understanding of all verbal communication as being on a par with “telepathy accompanied by articulate sounds”. The infant acquiring the language of his parents never enjoys the advantage of having information input to his developing brain, but develops a theory of his own for making sense out of the funny sounds being made by big people by interpreting mere data, which only in retrospect becomes information, retroactively, c.f., April 2014 wik=“Ernst von Glasersfeld was a prominent proponent of radical constructivism. This school of thought claims that knowledge is not a commodity which is transported from one mind into another. Rather, it is up to the individual to "link up" specific interpretations of experiences and ideas with their own reference of what is possible and viable. That is, the process of constructing knowledge, of understanding, is dependent on the individual's subjective interpretation of their active experience, not what "actually" occurs. Understanding and acting are seen by radical

constructivists not as dualistic processes, but as 'circularly conjoined'. Though "data" may pass between minds, these are merely syntactically and not semantically structured signals: information is always created anew, in situ on the receiving end, though sometimes with externally received data as a guide to the construction of the intersubjective envelope containing the data, while the information resulting from the processing of this externally received data is a wholly original invention of the individual consciousness of the recipient. [1] May 2014

I sometimes feel as though I am living in the shadow of some great, disruptive and disillusioning realization, perhaps only to be personally encountered many years or even decades later. No one gets out of here alive and granted, one's ultimate demise sometimes casts a long shadow into the living past of the dying, especially if one is neurotic. I am speaking of something even darker and hidden within the time traveling penumbra of one's mortal end...unfortunately, any crudely fashioned chemicals that might be available to the infant science of psychiatry could only treat this condition at the risk of lobotomizing the poet in me. Constructivist Foundations is a free online journal publishing peer reviewed articles on radical constructivism by researchers from multiple domains. See also: Francisco Varela, Humberto Maturana, and Heinz von Foerster” An envelope of encryption corresponding to a carrier frequency this is the fundamental grammar which gives proof of intersubjectivity. All we perceive are Platonic forms from the ground of our own being, rather than from the ground of being itself. This is not the solipsistic nature of the world, but of the possibility of perception. January 2014

If a systematic and thorough going observation and analysis in terms of signal over noise ratios were performed on the communication

of couples and close knit groups on the one hand and of individuals in socially and culturally diverse groups on the other, and the results thereof integrated with long standing analyses of the dynamics of conflicting witness accounts of accidents and crime scenes, optical illusion data, “delusions and madness of crowds” phenomena, anthropological studies of shamanic and shamanically-mediated group spirituality, entanglement of cognitive metalevels, informal fallacies pertaining to causality, Bohmian causal analysis Darwinian behavioral genetics, e.g., Jaynesian cognitive theory, Benjamin Libet’s brain physiological studies of the relation of intention, retentive memory and consciousness, and all of this placed in the background of a sociolinguistic treatment of the El Greco Paradox, it would likely be revealed that the information to data ratio, I/D is extraordinarily high. A perhaps naïve view is that a perfect optimization of signal to noise ratio would necessitate flawless transmission of information between minds, which precisely tracks the internal vs. external, subjective vs. intersubjective continuum divide. The untranslatability of mutually unintelligible human languages informs a hypothesis of the incommensurate residue of untranslatability of thoughts between members of the same culture who are speakers of the same language. April 2014 Communication is not the transmission of information between minds, but the negotiated middle ground between diverse subjectivities in which internal semantic and associative adjustments are made as interpreted data are reprocessed on each side of the communication in a kind of “hand shake” wherein each party satisfies himself that an agreement in terms of consensual meaning has been reached. This becomes especially true when going beyond the relatively unchallenging demands of concretely descriptive language. January 2014

As they say, "without context there is no meaning". So the myriad circulating ion currents in the brain's gray matter can only "be about something", i.e., make reference to something beyond the otherwise closed system of the brain, if there is some kind of interaction or "hand-shake" between the relatively limited and otherwise narrowly

defined quantum processes in the brain and broader quantum-encodedencrypted processes within some grounding, embedding and open-ended context in which every process in the brain which is conscious becomes so only by virtue of being "registered" within this embedding computational-informational infrastructure. Modern day brain physiological research, c.f., Stuart Hameroff of the Santa Fe Institute et al. indicates that this embedding dynamic informational medium is none other than the quantum vacuum electromagnetic field. Presumably there must some sort of "cosmic FCC", which regulates and partitions the total available bandwidth in this quantum vacuum field so that there is no interference or cross-chatter between your thoughts and my thoughts. Of course "registration" does kind of carry the implication of archiving somewhere, say through non-locally connected quantum entanglements in the vacuum's zero-point energy fluctuation field. By the way, quantum energy uncertainty is entirely owing to the quantum fluctuations in this zero-point vacuum field, which through the Heisenberg time-energy uncertainty relation, /\E x /\t >h, implies that temporal change, i.e,. temporallity is owing to the constant perturbing effect of this field. It stands to reason that whatever is the cause of temporality and change would not itself have had a beginning in time, unless, of course, something from altogether outside of time was what had put this field in place. December 2013

Analogous to the above is the natural assumption that the conscious movement of the limbs of the body is on a par with telekinesis accompanied by kinesthetic sensations. This immediacy of contact that one seems to possess with the external world and with other minds does not bespeak either telepathy or telekinesis, but of an operant conditioning born of self-programming and innate or homegrown theory construction that was fully snapped in place well in advance of the development of one’s critical faculties of reason. And the lesson of taught to us from the analysis of the El Greco paradox in the visual space must be brought through further in the auditory and tactile or haptic spaces, as well. This lesson stated in its greatest generality is

simply this: that all direct implications as represented in the naïvely realistic world of the projective space of Newton’s “sensorium” of the mind and which course through the bulk of Einstein’s imaginative mollusk are in fact superpositions of constructively and destructively interfering data streams. Epiphenomenalism is false as originally pertaining to the individual, though may well prove to be a pretty fair theory of the relationship of conception and will of the collective consciousness in relation to its apparent action in the larger world. There is perhaps then no real collective, but only the intersubjective. This distinction, of course, is either lost on or matters not to the practical man. Each differing mental content that is, through the common conditioning of a shared sociolinguistic culture, mutually addressed via consonant labels for nevertheless differently perceived objects in the public space, are jointly juxtaposed and compared, and so although they be radically different in absolute terms, i.e., when per impossible compared abstractly with each divorced from its grounding context, are regarded as mutually and commonly perceived and understood. “Mutual understanding” is however not necessarily the same thing as two or more minds possessing the same or like understanding of something. Call me a reactionary, but I am alarmed by what is happening to the German language. I think Germans should be as protective of their native tongue just as indeed the French are! When I reflect upon how Deconstruction necessarily applies to itself, I realize that conservatism in some wisely chosen areas should be among the hallmarks of a true "progressive". Structure is necessary. Why? Because the Planck massenergy limit and therefore the largest possible vacuum energy fluctuation, i.e., the largest coherent and integrated physical structure which the vacuum can produce “in a single go” as a virtual object or simulacrum possesses a maximum mass of only 4.341×10−9 kg = 2.435 × 1018 GeV/c2. The operative insight here is best pointed up by the idea of the 3d printer. In its current stage of development (end of 2013), machines, which is to say, objects with articulated moving parts, fitted together according to an engineering design and intended to perform a specific set of functions, cannot be generally manufactured in a 3d

printer just by selecting “properties” and then hitting a “print” button. Many of the individual moving parts still must be printed separately, filed or ground down to more exacting specifications and then assembled together. The embodiment of conscious entities may indeed be similarly called for: the body may function as a mere scaffolding of the soul, rather than as Aristotle believed, as its integral and indissoluble component. This “scaffolding” may then be necessary for the formation of the subtler and more finely detailed structures and internal connections of the soul, for example, to produce a precise sets of boundary conditions for such quantum mechanical wavefunctions as describe brain microtubule substructures, e.g., tubulin polymers so that the interaction (as well as the self-interaction) of certain higher/larger and lower/smaller scale dynamic components of the fundamental quantum field is facilitated. The assembly all at once in a single piece of the human person would necessarily leave out the presence of the very subtlest of functional structures that by their very nature cannot be predetermined within an overarching design, c.f., the difference between, e.g., androids and robots, humans and angels, c.f., the growing threat of fundament quantum noise to the designated proper functioning of high density integrated circuit chips (and not only on account of the stray capacitance and inductance of imperfections within the chips structure) due to the innate electromagnetic interference (jamming, amplification, distortion, filtering, eavesdropping, quantum decoherence, superposition, entanglement, teleportation and tunneling in the case of quantum computing) posed by quantum fluctuations of the vacuum’s momentum-energy, which are fundamental and ineradicable, stemming as they must from fundamental Heisenberg momentum-energy uncertainty. Certain important mental features must be learned in a temporal process and cannot be built in or “programmed in”. Again, the body is “the scaffolding of the soul”, which is absolutely necessary for the production of a conscious being, one possessed of a moral sense and a free will and which is perhaps the only type of being with whom God is interested in having a relationship. The body also provides the kernel and crucible of suffering, which is a necessary ingredient in the development of compassion. The angels, which possess no capacity for

the experience of physical pain, are themselves incapable of genuine compassion, nor do they possess knowledge as Man does of Good and Evil. Angels, utterly secure in their persons whilst intervening in the affairs of men at God’s behest are in a somewhat analogous position to the Arkonides, that ancient and highly advanced extraterrestrial race, already in a millennia-long decline as galactic imperator, as described in the self-congratulatory anthropocentric German space opera, Perry Rhodan, who have been following the evolution of mankind since almost its very beginnings and who with great mixture of emotions realize that Man’s future in the wider cosmos shall assuredly outshine their own glorious past and who now look to the Terran race to take up the heavy mantel of a now splintered galactic empire, but who must first provide much mentoring, guidance and material aid. July 2013 I believe that the Perry Rhodan serialized novellas were inspired by the idealistic notion on the part of nationalist-leaning German authors that a rewrite of the history of the Third Reich could be undertaken wherein all of the genocidal and distinctly Hitlerian elements could be removed and Germany’s 20th Century shame could be recast as a cosmic AustroHungarian Imperium. April 2014

Russell Clark Jake and Markus. . .“Twain thought that the German language was a dreadful thing. However, for my part, I am a great admirer of it. English metaphysics translated into this tongue appears more profound, scientific prose clearer, poetry more deeply resonant and Eric Cartman, singularly ueberlustig!” epi=

Various previously attempted, as well as all future deconstructions of the self ("postmodern" or otherwise), have/shall only ever constitute modes of description, never an actual, still less complete description itself. The science of psychology is better described as a "psyence of scichology". Instability goes hand in hand with fine tuning of a system. This in turn requires an extremely intricate system of feedback and control existing

at the ground of being root level. 'In the years after the initial experiments, Couder and Fort used the oil bath to perform several of the classic experiments in quantum mechanics including One area where the Walkers' analogy with quantum mechanics fails, however, is entanglement the weirdest quantum phenomenon of all that describes how the physical state of two particles can be intricately linked no matter how far apart in the universe they are. For this to happen, a wave must occupy a very high number of dimensions so particles can affect one another over large distances, faster than the speed of light. However, in a walker system the waves will always occupy just two dimensions, given by the length and width of the oil tank', c.f., Physorg.com, ‘Can an oil bath solve the mysteries of the quantum world?' Young's double-slit experiment and found that the walkers exhibited many similarities to the entities used in the original experiments. Only a transcendental ground of being can accommodate the rationality of excluding possibilities from the universe of discourse. A transcendental ground of being satisfies all of the requirements for Deity, i.e., 'big G' godhood, but in addition, so much more. The many unbelievable events and segments of history suggest the possibility of a continual retrofitting of past alternate histories to our present age. This is a further illustration of the operation of multidimensional time. A case of the future being the history you didn't know Originally there was but a single shooter for the attempted assassination of JFK but additional shooters were inserted back into the historical time stream by additional conspirators from the future a second shooter was

also unsuccessful and so a third shooter was inserted ultimately a fourth shooter was inserted at which time the assassination attempt was successful.. Interference from future time travelers also helps to explain the incredible density of conspirators surrounding the assassination of JFK - a density not otherwise supportable by a merely naturally occurring linear-time stream. It may well be the case that consciousness only exist as or within a manifold and cannot exist as general, universal, transcendental, freefloating, nonspecific or otherwise unstructured. And that therefore this notion of consciousness as such is but a projection and kind of the opposite of a reification. When we make metaphysical assertions about something or other being beyond or altogether beyond the realm of being or beyond being itself, of course we can only be referring to beyondness as it were, with respect to our inadequate concept of Being. To say 'as it were' is to signal the use of a metaphor, but still deeper, it is to invoke a universe of discourse other than the one which one inhabits. But the subjectivity of color perception probably can be extended to other things beyond color There are many different ways of maintaining the system of conveying distinctions such as class inclusion and class exclusion and this is really the only thing that language is capable of succeeding in doing - all else is collective if not indeed conspiratorial projecting and make believe. There is however no concrete performative need at all to convey actual subjective content of thought or sense data, speaking from the standpoint of the requirements of natural selection. But their certainly is a Darwinian requirement that individuals of a breeding population believe that they can convey and receive subjective information to each other and from each other. This is much akin to how behavioral genetics favored the development of small splinter portions of the breeding

population who possessed shamanic powers. The presence of shamans, witch doctors, seers and so on within breeding population enhanced the integration of the breeding population and helped it to more energetically unify and organize its collective energies in the struggle for survival in a harsh environment amongst other competing groups also struggling. Because we share the same physical world in the out there and we share the same language more or less it doesn't matter so much that our subjective perceptions of the meaning of words within our common language may differ because a common word, though it splits in two different subjectively interpreted meanings many times, is nonetheless united in having a single reference in the external world. Illustrate this with a diagram in the shape of a diamond with a vertical line bisecting it. The bottom vertex is a word which refers - the upper vertex is an object referred to by the word, the left and right vertices of the diamond are my perception and your perception, respectively, which may differ as to the subjective content of the word held in common between us. Just think of what's called the El Greco paradox. El Greco was supposed to have depicted animals and humans with gnarled and twisted features because that was the way he actually visually perceived them in just that manner. But upon a moment's reflection, clearly El Greco must draw the figures more or less representationally - if he was attempting to draw them as he in fact sees them, since the canvas which shows the depictions he has drawn would be similarly distorted. January 2014

The random mutation + natural selection formula applies equally well to the competition of evangelical atheism and scientific creationists, who will always be able to develop an effective resistance to atheist debunking arguments. But there is a limit to what random mutations can accomplish, which is vastly outstripped by the capabilities of intelligent design. If this statement is indeed false, it is because (it may be turn out to be false on one level because true on a deeper level). We must make a distinction between a “Russellian paradox” of reference, e.g., the set of all sets that are not members of themselves vs. an infinite regress of metalevels in which the role of cause and effect switch places in an oscillatory pattern after the fashion of a superposition, vs. referent. (See

David Bohm’s discussion in his textbook of quantum mechanics, Quantum Theory (1951) concerning the mental aspects of quantum mechanics). Discuss how now that the “great evangelical atheists” are dying out during the same period that deeper layers of complexity regulatory genetic control mechanisms and epigenetics are being uncovered means that a new generation of biological scientists of similar intellectual caliber shall not likely replace them.

January 2014

But refer to those commandments and please note that compliance with half of them makes slavery impossible. But there is understandably no admonition in the Bible to follow 5 out of 10 commandments. An 11th commandment against slavery would have been equally redundant. Being either an actress who took up activism or an activist who took up acting, am I right in supposing that Ms. Sorvino possesses something less than a stellar intellect? You know, Ziad, Ms. Sorvino's is an outstanding example of some of the naiver criticisms of Christianity of which white liberals (who are not intellectuals) are frequently guilty. There are indeed intelligent criticisms that can and have been leveled against the Christian faith. This is not one of them, c.f., www.richarddawkins.net Empirical mathematics is founded upon the notion that mathematical

complexity is capable of exceeding the grasp of the divine mind. This is similar to how the complexity of the domain of eigenvalues can outstrip the complexity of the domain of eigenfunctions. Taylor power series expansion of analytic functions involves exponentiation but the rules of exponentiation breakdown when it comes to transfinite arithmetic. Compose a list of paradoxes that are related to Russell's paradox. Unlike being off by a mere factor of two, as is the case for the lion's share of crackpotty physics theories, a theoretic model which predicts effects which propagate, act, increase or decrease in the reverse direction relative to what is actually observed, cannot be rescued with a mere patch, but must be thrown upon the scrap heap of failed theories. Kind of like if Dr. Maxwell's equations of electromagnetism had predicted a Lorenz force with the correct sign. Once in an abiding system of feedback is in place, one which perturbs the natural selective forces, heretore acting alone on human behavioral genetics - at this very point, a honing in process starts up, one which shall in practical terms intelligently shape human behavioral genetics in accord with the ground relations of this system to which there has suddenly been linked a feedback coupling. There is a bit of a king or problems in Terence Mckenna the notion of brain activity as an ongoing die marker perturbation of the quantum field. This is related to another problem which I first brought up in connection with mental illness likely to occur during deep space voyages in zero gravity because of the twofold coherent in decohtnesserence processes that operate alongside each other within the quantum brain. January 2014

Cellular organization: Recent research implies that gravity helps cells create patterns. In microgravity, the microtubules in developing cells might not organize the same way they would on Earth,

even after the astronauts return. It is unknown how this will affect the Mars crew over the long term, c.f., http://www.racetomars.ca/mars/article_effects.jsp “Scientists have uncovered a compelling reason why the dream of colonizing space may be a non-starter. It seems that the skeletons within living cells may not form properly in zero gravity. This means that it may be impossible to live in space over the long-term without creating a form of artificial gravity. Most cells have skeletons made up of microtubules made from fibres of the protein tubulin. New Scientist magazine reports that Dr James Tabony and his colleagues from the French Atomic Energy Commission mixed up cold solutions of mammalian tubulin with an energy-releasing compound. When the mixture was warmed to body temperature for six minutes, microtubules began to form in distinct bands at right angles to gravity. Next, the team sent up tubulin on a European Space Agency (Esa) rocket to expose it to the effect of weightlessness. They found that when microtubules formed, they pointed in all directions. Dr Tabony said: "This shows gravity triggers the pattern." Previous work by Dr Marian Lewis of the University of Alabama at Huntsville produced similar results. Dr Lewis's team tested the impact of weightlessness on human white blood cells that were flown on board the space shuttle. After a day in orbit, the microtubules grew in random directions. The findings might explain some of the health problems people living in space have, such as depressed immune systems”, c.f, http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/830193.stm The uniform state-space with its combinations and permutations of distinct states must always be understood to be an abstract projection. I have said this before but I believe it bears saying again consciousness as such may indeed be like the state-space... nothing more than an abstract projection and reification of what can only truly happen at an individual level. PHP on server side and Java script on client side.

Having the epiphany that you personally don’t really know anything at all means that Mans knowledge can be at best but a collective illusion. . . and all this within the context of a sheer abundance of grace. How can one not then have faith upon recognizing the Providence involved in such a coherent manifestation of the radical unknown, i.e., the World as subjectively perceived. One is called forth from the Void and enters the world from one unknown only to pass from it into another unknown. What is lost on some is that the world itself is yet a third unknown, rendering the first and the latter qualitatively distinct. And so metaphysical work can only be performed by experience if it is possible to transcend all dual opposite categories. kwo=“I do not fear death. I had been dead for billions and billions of years before I was born, and had not suffered the slightest inconvenience from it.” - Mark Twain The number of distinctly possible universes in the multiverse outstrips the number of possibly distinct human minds in this universe - that an important distinction or qualification to have made, but does not reduce the original argument, that is, its original force, but merely acts as a kind of patch to the original argument. ANTHONY GOTTLIEB...DREAM OF REASON epi=

I don't speak from the top of the mountain but from many valleys.

Anne Behrnes says Buddhism is existential and not metaphysical and that the same principle applies to all religions. It's all distraction, she says, a way to not be present to your life. I was awoken by the dream of a sleeping avatar representing a friendship lost. She hurled curses foul and threatening towards me, the fool who disturbed her slumber.

Philip Jose Farmer. To your scattered bodies go. Entropy vis a vis appearance of order vs. actual order. Quote Feuerabend chapters. So how does Jesus is redemptive act perform the necessary metaphysical work to actually read email kind if man is not greater than he is in Jesus is not with her then he is thought to be namely man is an unsuccessful attempt to make a Jesus. Grace as the mechanism which counteracts the root of all evil which is pride Without the presence of daily and abiding joy we know that the person does not indeed possess the faith necessary to accept the gift of God's grace The many paradoxes of the early 20th Century in mathematics, physics, psychology, art and literature signaled the breakdown of the 19th Century's conception of reality. Paradox signals impending awareness of a larger system containing the system from which one is currently operating. Rationality is the mysterious nature of how the elements of one system transform as they are caught up into higher systems. Nature is hierarchically structured. We have no concept of consciousness because it is indeed consciousness that underlies rationality. December 2013

Neural impulses can only add together within a preexisting system which provides the context within which they can be interpreted meaningfully. Both the spatial binding and temporal integration of brain function rely upon quantum entanglement or quantum nonlocality within brain microtubule tubulin dimer proteins.

How can what happens within an isolated or closed system be about anything which is to say how can it make reference to something outside of itself? Deterministic causality is context free causality or causality within an isolated or closed system. Time telepathy and the simulation argument. One would be expected to possess a phenomenal sense of time and internal clock.122013 Ironic that the only real evidence for evolution is the microevolutionary adaptability which makes species robust against fluctuating environmental conditions. He was in part she was in part he was not impart they were playing the part she got the part there should be a new verb tense for those who are repetitively playing more or less the same character in a plot this is the concept of playing the same part but differently each time each different alternate universe. Does being reunited with everybody familiar from one's earthly life constitute in any way a disproof of solipsism? Scaffolding of the stepwise building up of mass larger than the Planck mass is analogous to the need for embodiment for the development of the soul. Social construction of the ego. The infant provides the theory that gives context to the sociolinguistic context of 'big people making funny sounds'. Temporal integration versus the integration of proto selves. Paradigm-busting

philosophical

theses

are

borne

of

either

disingenuousness or wonder. And in the teaching/retelling by admixtures of both. I am very much for celebrating the great successes of 20 th Century physics but we should be guarded against the arrogance typical of some hard scientists by contemplating the likely derision in which 40th century scientists will hold 30th century scientists. If the currently strong remaining strand of the generalized “future-hype” of the 1960’s which survives within the current day, i.e., the artificial intelligence community and its promoters, were destined not to fizzle out within its current scientific/engineering paradigm or even better were not to be altogether overthrown in the shift to the paradigm succeeding it, then one has to suspect how pervasive and successful indeed has been Descartes “deceiving demon” in preparing beforehand all the myriad layers of nested camouflage, which the career of post-enlightenment technological development has systematically peeled away, one by one, perhaps all too easily in retrospect, that one really must wonder in light of the piquant observation above whether Very small children, who are not yet three years of age, will happily play side by side without really interact within one another. A certain level of advancement in the sociolinguistic programming of the children’s neural networks, which is determined both internally and externally, say by behavioral genetics and social interaction, respectively must have first been achieved to enable interpersonal cooperation and communication and so a bootstrap function must somewhere be in evidence, either in the brain or, more likely in the brain-environment system. If there is no concept of consciousness there can be no theory of consciousness consequently no understanding of what consciousness truly is or how it operates Solipsism and the social nature of reality. The engaging nature of people that is of other minds takes our mind off of such self-destructive

metaphysical questions. An afterlife composed of an endless empty meadow. Had somebody not been born could they just wait until the universe goes bang again and get another chance? I had a dream with you which explained everything to me. The profundity of auto text correction is similar to that of misheard lyrics. What are we to make of the fact that the anthropic cosmological principle together with the multiverse in which the number of universes vastly outstrips the number of bona fide persons, which is to say original persons, who are not merely alternate versions of said persons? And where all the bodies and universes are superimposed although consciousness do not superpose in a quantum fashion. This is because of the underlying dynamics of consciousness involvement with the mechanisms of decoherence and wave wavefunction collapse. So by the anthropic principle, oneself must be bona fide, but all of the other selves in one's populated world are merely alternate versions of true or bona fide selves, each of which are located in some unimaginably far distant alternate universe. This would imply that only oneself possess free will and consciousness; everyone else in ones populated environment is merely an intelligently acting automata. January 2014

The Anthropic Cosmological Principle constitutes an epic fail as explanation of the intricate and harmonious complexity of the cosmos being as it is merely the anemic stepbrother to a secret lone rightful heir, that of the Solipsistic Cosmological Principle. Because acceleration only rotates the four momentum vector but does not change its absolute magnitude there for an external force is not actually possible Over the data passed away with the destruction of the brain originally containing that data the contextualizing a shin and interpretation of this data remains I am in the form of a network of quantum entanglements in the electromagnetic field. Consciousness and they referring to ground.

The appearances are overdetermined and possess an entropy the self or its consciousness is underdetermined, acting more or less as a heat bath probe though with filtering capabilities, which are quite extraordinary in that they extract quantum encoded entanglement based information from the pristine vacuum electromagnetic field. In the reprocessing, the initial and boundary conditions for this vacuum are also extracted. This by passes the traditional fine-tuning problem. The anthropic cosmological principle is but an inflection of a much more stringent principle, that of the solipsistic cosmological principle. December 2013

One’s consciousness is not determined by some immense, exquisite set of causal conditions with respect to a particular fixed and random fine-tuning of the fundamental physical constants of the Universe, but rather by the fine-tuning itself, which therefore, vis a vis the Anthropic Cosmological Principle cannot be anything like random. The “internal appearances” place a far greater constraint upon this fine-tuning of the fundamental physical constants in support of the character of one’s own conscious experience than do the “external appearances”, which concern themselves only with the apparent configuration of people and animals, tables and chairs, etc. within one's subjectively perceived spacetime. Consequently, the fundament physical constants must have been fine-tuned to something like 14 decimal places in one’s own case, though these constants need only to have been finetuned to 7 or 8 decimal places in order for other peoples’ behavior to be as manifestly coherent as it traditionally appears to be. This is a kind of inverse "time scale reductionism", which I will term "frequency scale reductionism", i.e., the behavior of systems requiring cosmological finetuning to N decimal places is determined by underlying systems requiring cosmological fine-tuning to N + 1 decimal places. So by the very same logic proffered in support of the Anthropic Cosmological Principle, one could put forward an equally cogent argument in favor of a so-called Solipsistic Cosmological Principle. February 2014

Buosso and Polchinski (2003) calculate that the string theory predicts 10500 distinct universes based upon each universe possessing

slightly different fundamental physical constants. This would seem to imply that there is “room at the bottom” to support hyperfine tuning well beyond the intersubjectively measurable realm of a mere 4 to14 decimal places. So the seemingly hyper-fine-tuning of the Bohr magneton to 14 decimal places, for example is merely superadded to the much more precise fine tuning that is required for the functioning of an individual subjectivity/consciousness. This is paradoxical fine tuning that starts out finer and progresses to coarser. Egoic consciousness is revealed for what it is: an intersubjectively mediated structure of initial and boundary conditions placed upon qualia-consciousness or consciousness qua substance/dynamic integral form. Ego is a structure of an individual consciousness that is effectively the collaborative effort of myriad egotranscending quale—consciousnesses. The implication here is that, even if one is indeed a brain in a vat, the feeding of impulses into one’s isolated brain that manages to succeed in producing the illusion of coherent world (and world view) must be managed through a collaboration within a collective of big-headed alien scientists and cannot be the product of a single big-headed alien scientist. Language is inherently social in nature and the ego is inevitably a sociolinguistic structure! Metaphysical solipsism is only a metaphorical interpretation of a hybrid methodological-epistemological solipsism. There are no solipsist big-headed alien scientists. This is in part because science is necessarily a social endeavor. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bATyoYzlObY (Nova documentary: “Universe or Multiverse?”) How naive is the level of discussion, philosophically speaking, since the larger metaphysical implications are ignored so that this paradigmbusting theory is treated solely within the obsolete paradigm. August 2014

Just as we need transcendental mind to ground our concept of consciousness and so a theory of “other minds”, we need to allow the possibility of metaphysics as an enabler of intersubjective objectivity as a hedge against solipsism.

It seems all causal relationships within four dimensional space time can be encoded as quantum entanglement on a two-dimensional surface. I think this is pretty solid proof of the holographic universe theory. One has to be thrown into uncertainty in order to have the opportunity to reduce that uncertainty which is to say acquire information and learn. Wittgenstein method appears to be one not of providing insight, but of providing the elements which the creative imagination needs in order to have its own insights. Is the aboriginal hologram model consistent with the notion of the rationality of language and with the reprocessing of 'shard' experience into new forms entertained within the original hologram reconstituted? Energy degeneracy and the objection of Hameroff to keep qubit states from entering a Bose condensation. Instead of wiping us out will the robots enforce humankind's own principles of ethics in fairness or will they only be able to be intelligent by becoming self-conscious that is by connecting to the cosmic Internet and in so doing be coming evil just as mankind is evil I like the way Hameroff describes the mechanism of the action of hallucinogens in terms of how the hallucinogenic compound donates electron residents to the receptors. Of course we already know that this residence has to do with the exchange of data and information between tubulin one dimers and the quantum vacuum electromagnetic field. These compounds simply change the interface where filtering of information occurs in the vacuum electromagnetic field's sub spectrum's self-interaction. There is an important distinction to be made between the aboriginal hologram and the dynamic informational ground providing the context

for the collective reprocessing of information which is being collected by each individual shard of the original hologram. Some distinctions are being suggested here which to me are reminiscent of the emanationism of Plotinean philosophy or of Neoplatonism. Hameroff says we do not want strong Froehlich coherence in the microtubule tubulin dimer quantum switches ('qubits') because this would result in Bose condensation of all of the qubits and you can't really do any meaningful computation with all of the qubits in the exact same state such as would be required by strong Froehlich coherence of the qubits. The devil is in the details. Similarly we can't have any meaningful experiential computation if there's only one transcendent infinite consciousness the hologram needs to be shattered and each shard have its own state so that in cooperation there can be meaningful computation, collectively. Ketamine Consider the entropy of the unused possibilities for various states of a system with respect to the closedness or openness of the system's state space, thermodynamically. Quantum field theory in curved space-time also in curved phase spaces and in curved state spaces. Gravitational decoherence of the state vector or wave function. We see the logic of the anthropic principle at work whenever we listen to an accomplished individual in some field or discipline describing how he arrived and his original inspiration to pursue his successful longstanding career. The interviewee points to various junctures in his early schooling or professional career which seemed very much driven by chance events. However the underlying logic informing the choices of this once young researcher or scientist exhibits a cohesiveness strongly suggestive of teleological influence and almost as though he is being guided by his future self, somewhat akin to how a quantum computation is performed by mutual interference of myriad distinct branches of a

superposition. And it is almost as though there is a stiff competition between future alternate versions of this young person vying with each other to influence his choices in such a manner that they come into being as the adult versions of this young person instead of their competitors. January 2014

Can the logic of the anthropic principle be applied to the question of what constitutes the present moment or what is called now? Spatial in temporal scale in the solar system realism dilemma Of course the logical answer with respect the status of the other ontologically is to say that each individual simply possesses their own unique subset room of resonantly tuned vacuum fluctuations field. Any amateur rhetorician who knows both the canon of ancient Scripture and who has merely a popular science writer's grounding in the basic sciences can with a little imagination and effort make any recent scientific discovery backwards compatible with a verse or verses plucked out of context from those canonical scriptures. Doing so proves nothing other than perhaps the cleverness of the rhetorician. Remember that the Sophists of ancient Greece used to pride themselves on being able to make the worst side of an argument appear the better one and there are still many around today keeping this cynical tradition alive. What is more than a little paradoxical today is that some of these folks are unaware of their own cynical motivations. Daniel van Gent and Dr. Robert de Brandes may end up being the collective Marconi's of the 21st Century. That is if the Chinese don't end up stealing all of their ideas. The team has already successfully applied for several European patents of their novel communications technology. The signals which live in a mysterious domain known as 'Hilbert space' cannot be hacked or eavesdropped on or attenuated, jammed or otherwise interfered with by other communications signals. The technology, which has already been successfully demonstrated in principle, is ideal for communication between underground installations

and between submarines which are submerged for long periods of time. The technology seems potentially applicable to the real time telemetry of space probes, but that's where the inventors would likely get into trouble with the US Patent Office, which holds to the long standing policy of not accepting patent applications for designs that are deemed to invoke principles that potentially fly in the face of established physical law. What these patent examiners need is a hefty dose of Hume and Feuerabend! http://www.google.co.uk/patents/US8391721 If you are considering shutting down your FB page or want to preserve it against the day that FB decides to shut down your page, then this application is for you. http://www.httrack.com/ With penultimate subtlety are the initial and boundary conditions of the universe for the fine tuning of the consciousness of the other managed in resonance with this universe whose fundamental physical constants have ultimately been resonantly tuned to uniquely correspond with my consciousness. The only way to democratically apply the anthropic cosmological principle to self and others is too follow a poly-solipsistic or emanationist theology. In other words the only way to avoid the ridiculous conclusion of the solipsist philosopher who misapplies the logic of the anthropic cosmological principle is for one to adopt polysolipsism. . . we collaborate with each other to produce this theater within which we can connect, learn, grow and love. The world perhaps is orchestrated by all secretly collaborating and like the occasional glimpsing of a familiar voice in a crowded room of conversations, one occasionally hears one’s own voice coming back at one. The logic of the anthropic cosmological principle is a veritable metaphysical stick of dynamite its a stick of dynamite that begs to be used in the appropriate way to solve some long standing and annoying

metaphysical problem the date back to the ancient Greeks on which we have apparently made a little progress in the last twenty five hundred years Just as ordinary people do philosophers take for granted the implicit deep infrastructure which graces language mind and all of the faculties of the human person. Philosopher, James Aaron’s theory in his book, Assholes (A Theory), is that "a person counts as an asshole when, and only when, he systematically allows himself to enjoy special advantages in interpersonal relations out of an entrenched sense of entitlement that immunizes him against the complaints of other people...The asshole acts out of a firm sense that he is special, that the normal rules of conduct do not apply to him". This is by far the best definition of the colloquially known “asshole” ever made known to me. http://m.nike.com/us/en_us/pd/fuelband-se/pid-924485/pgid-924484? cp=usns_kw_AL!1778!3!31545176582!e!!g!nike%20fuel%20band V Sauce 2 Idea channel...youtube. com/idea channel Combine the belief that there is nothing greater than oneself with the anthropic principle and you have something approaching solipsism. Why wouldn't you be the most superior and perfect being unless such a being had arranged it so that you were further down the spectrum below perfect godhood. Instability goes hand in hand with fine tuning of a system. This in turn requires an extremely intricate system of feedback and control existing at the ground of being root level. 'In the years after the initial experiments, Couder and Fort used the oil

bath to perform several of the classic experiments in quantum mechanics including Young's double-slit experiment and found that the walkers exhibited many similarities to the entities used in the original experiments. One area where the walkers' analogy with quantum mechanics fails, however, is entanglement the weirdest quantum phenomenon of all that describes how the physical state of two particles can be intricately linked no matter how far apart in the universe they are. For this to happen, a wave must occupy a very high number of dimensions so particles can affect one another over large distances, faster than the speed of light. However, in a walker system the waves will always occupy just two dimensions, given by the length and width of the oil tank', c.f., Physorg.com, ‘Can an oil bath solve the mysteries of the quantum world?' 'In the years after the initial experiments, Couder and Fort used the oil bath to perform several of the classic experiments in quantum mechanics including Young's double-slit experiment and found that the walkers exhibited many similarities to the entities used in the original experiments. One area where the walkers' analogy with quantum mechanics fails, however, is entanglement the weirdest quantum phenomenon of all that describes how the physical state of two particles can be intricately linked no matter how far apart in the universe they are. For this to happen, a wave must occupy a very high number of dimensions so particles can affect one another over large distances, faster than the speed of light. However, in a walker system the waves will always occupy just two dimensions, given by the length and width of the oil tank', c.f., Physorg.com, ‘Can an oil bath solve the mysteries of the quantum world?' Only a transcendental ground of being can accommodate the rationality

of excluding possibilities from the universe of discourse. A transcendental ground of being satisfies all of the requirements for Deity, i.e., 'big G' godhood, but in addition, so much more. November 2013

Anything within the state space of possible states is possible. But pursing the logic of your principle still further, we must say that multiple (and perhaps an unlimited number of) state spaces are possible. Exclusion of possibilities underlies the integral unity, coherence and cohesiveness of worldhood as such. The structure of possibility is probably fractal, which automatically carries the implication of excluded possibilities. For example, it is not possible for me to experience your conscious mental states or sense data. Another example, the real line possesses a topology, though one that is nonlinear. http://www.mlahart.com/s.nl?sc=3 HYPERLINK "http://www.mlahart.com/s.nl? sc=3&whence=&custcolclass_year=22&custcol4_initials=RSC&custcol 4=36802&custcol_engitem=&custcol122=NOEXPSHIP&custcol_shippi ngsupplement"& HYPERLINK "http://www.mlahart.com/s.nl? sc=3&whence=&custcolclass_year=22&custcol4_initials=RSC&custcol 4=36802&custcol_engitem=&custcol122=NOEXPSHIP&custcol_shippi ngsupplement"whence= HYPERLINK "http://www.mlahart.com/s.nl? sc=3&whence=&custcolclass_year=22&custcol4_initials=RSC&custcol 4=36802&custcol_engitem=&custcol122=NOEXPSHIP&custcol_shippi ngsupplement"& HYPERLINK "http://www.mlahart.com/s.nl? sc=3&whence=&custcolclass_year=22&custcol4_initials=RSC&custcol 4=36802&custcol_engitem=&custcol122=NOEXPSHIP&custcol_shippi ngsupplement"custcolclass_year=22 HYPERLINK "http://www.mlahart.com/s.nl? sc=3&whence=&custcolclass_year=22&custcol4_initials=RSC&custcol 4=36802&custcol_engitem=&custcol122=NOEXPSHIP&custcol_shippi ngsupplement"& HYPERLINK "http://www.mlahart.com/s.nl? sc=3&whence=&custcolclass_year=22&custcol4_initials=RSC&custcol 4=36802&custcol_engitem=&custcol122=NOEXPSHIP&custcol_shippi

ngsupplement"custcol4_initials=RSC HYPERLINK "http://www.mlahart.com/s.nl? sc=3&whence=&custcolclass_year=22&custcol4_initials=RSC&custcol 4=36802&custcol_engitem=&custcol122=NOEXPSHIP&custcol_shippi ngsupplement"& HYPERLINK "http://www.mlahart.com/s.nl? sc=3&whence=&custcolclass_year=22&custcol4_initials=RSC&custcol 4=36802&custcol_engitem=&custcol122=NOEXPSHIP&custcol_shippi ngsupplement"custcol4=36802 HYPERLINK "http://www.mlahart.com/s.nl? sc=3&whence=&custcolclass_year=22&custcol4_initials=RSC&custcol 4=36802&custcol_engitem=&custcol122=NOEXPSHIP&custcol_shippi ngsupplement"& HYPERLINK "http://www.mlahart.com/s.nl? sc=3&whence=&custcolclass_year=22&custcol4_initials=RSC&custcol 4=36802&custcol_engitem=&custcol122=NOEXPSHIP&custcol_shippi ngsupplement"custcol_engitem= HYPERLINK "http://www.mlahart.com/s.nl? sc=3&whence=&custcolclass_year=22&custcol4_initials=RSC&custcol 4=36802&custcol_engitem=&custcol122=NOEXPSHIP&custcol_shippi ngsupplement"& HYPERLINK "http://www.mlahart.com/s.nl? sc=3&whence=&custcolclass_year=22&custcol4_initials=RSC&custcol 4=36802&custcol_engitem=&custcol122=NOEXPSHIP&custcol_shippi ngsupplement"custcol122=NOEXPSHIP HYPERLINK "http://www.mlahart.com/s.nl? sc=3&whence=&custcolclass_year=22&custcol4_initials=RSC&custcol 4=36802&custcol_engitem=&custcol122=NOEXPSHIP&custcol_shippi ngsupplement"& HYPERLINK "http://www.mlahart.com/s.nl? sc=3&whence=&custcolclass_year=22&custcol4_initials=RSC&custcol 4=36802&custcol_engitem=&custcol122=NOEXPSHIP&custcol_shippi ngsupplement"custcol_shippingsupplement= November 2013

It seems all causal relationships within four dimensional space time can be encoded as quantum entanglement on a two-dimensional surface. I think this is pretty solid proof of the holographic universe theory.

One has to be thrown into uncertainty in order to have the opportunity to reduce that uncertainty which is to say acquire information and learn. Wittgenstein method appears to be one not of providing insight, but of providing the elements which the creative imagination needs in order to have its own insights. Is the aboriginal hologram model consistent with the notion of the rationality of language and with the reprocessing of 'shard' experience into new forms entertained within the original hologram reconstituted? Energy degeneracy and the objection of Hameroff to keep qubit states from entering a Bose condensation. Instead of wiping us out will the robots enforce humankind's own principles of ethics in fairness or will they only be able to be intelligent by becoming self-conscious that is by connecting to the cosmic Internet and in so doing be coming evil just as mankind is evil I like the way Hameroff describes the mechanism of the action of hallucinogens in terms of how the hallucinogenic compound donates electron residents to the receptors. Of course we already know that this residence has to do with the exchange of data and information between tubulin one dimers and the quantum vacuum electromagnetic field. These compounds simply change the interface where filtering of information occurs in the vacuum electromagnetic field's sub spectrum's self-interaction. There is an important distinction to be made between the aboriginal hologram and the dynamic informational ground providing the context for the collective reprocessing of information which is being collected by each individual shard of the original hologram. Some distinctions are being suggested here which to me are reminiscent of the emanationism of Plotinean philosophy or of Neoplatonism.

Hameroff says we do not want strong Froehlich coherence in the microtubule tubulin dimer quantum switches ('qubits') because this would result in Bose condensation of all of the qubits and you can't really do any meaningful computation with all of the qubits in the exact same state such as would be required by strong Froehlich coherence of the qubits. The devil is in the details. Similarly we can't have any meaningful experiential computation if there's only one transcendent infinite consciousness the hologram needs to be shattered and each shard have its own state so that in cooperation there can be meaningful computation, collectively. Consider the entropy of the unused possibilities for various states of a system with respect to the closedness or openness of the system's state space, thermodynamically. Quantum field theory in curved space-time also in curved phase spaces and in curved state spaces. Gravitational decoherence of the state vector or wave function. We see the pic you'll your logic of the anthropic principal at work whenever we listened to an accomplished individual in some field or disappointed describing how he arrived and his original inspiration to pursue his successful long-standing career. The interviewee points to various junctures in his early schooling or early professional career which seemed very much driven by chance events. However the underlying logic informing the choices of this once young researcher or scientist exhibits a cohesiveness strongly suggestive of teleological influence. And it is almost as though there is a stiff competition between future alternate versions of this young person vying with each other to influence his choices in such a manner that they come into being as the adult versions of this young person instead of their competitors. November 2013

The bizarre counter-intuitive behavior of the wave function is smoking gun evidence that we reside within a so-called ancestor simulation and that we are collectively responsible for the operation of said simulation.

I couldn't agree with you more, Sam! What you are suggesting is a "regime-culture" change, which though radical is just . If the robots do not wipe us out a few generations from now, but instead apply their implacable logic to the forced implementation of humans' own common sense notions of fairness and ethical behavior, then maybe your powerful vision of how things ought to be can be made a reality. I just looked in my email drafts folder and was psychically crushed under the weight of so many abortive thoughts. Managed compassion is the inevitable solution stumbled upon by the meta guilty conscience which feels keenly the mild but nagging guilt of not feeling guilty. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quorum_sensing Rene Girard Mimetic Theory Well ordering of the real line. McAfee. Our Holy Father the Pope by Don Caffrey Ignatius Press I agree with that article, Ziad. However, the belief in a supreme intelligence or at the very least in a 'cosmic programmer' of the universe somewhat akin to George Lucas' 'The Force' may continue among the relatively uneducated classes for many generations. Strangely, there will be a rise in the belief in both epistemological solipsism as well as a polymetaphysical solipsism, i. e., the belief that the universe is a collaboration and sociolinguistic construct of myriad individual consciousnesses. The deepening realization that there is no evidence for ET's will begin to reinforce the idea that we are members of an at least billion year old civilization living within an 'ancestor simulation'. Philosophers and cosmologists as well as some physicists as well as a goodly number of philosophy-educated people of the not so distant

future will take it for granted that the probability of universe-simulacra, for example, Boltzmann brains, et al., greatly outstrip the probability of so-called 'real' universes. Which realization is natural in light of the compelling logic of the anthropic principle. January 2014

There is a historical collection of initialization, updates and patches in the quantum field corresponding to which there are pointers in the brain however these pointers are ambiguous when not currently engaged in the wider underlying quantum field. How large of a temporal slice or chunk is required in order to accurately duplicate a global brain state? Buy a new and different logical pathway I have returned to the notion of resonant tuning of Boltzmann brains. This pathway is the resonant tuning to say, 14 or more decimal places of various fundamental physical constants. Any physical instrument or device which relies on resonant frequencies and which has been engineered to the extreme limits of sensitivity should perhaps be able to pick up the effect of 1 and perhaps multiple individuals and its immediate vicinity due to the normal operation of their conscious minds or perhaps only when they are in special mental states such as meditative states. The anomalous interactions between conscious individuals and random number generators may be a manifestation of this type of phenomenon. One paradigm shift which will significantly affect the evolution intelligent design debate is the dichotomy of faith versus reason and faith versus evidence, miracle versus natural law. Kuhn and Feuerabend and their philosophies of science vs the Enlightenment notion of the inevitable linear progress of scientific discovery. November 2013

Within current Multiverse theory, the number of possible alternate universes astronomically outstrips the admittedly large but relatively tiny number of possible distinct human brains. Add to this the peculiar logic of the Anthropic Cosmological Principle and you may find yourself in the possession of a probable truth that dare not speak its

name, c.f., the suggestion of the front book cover of the following:http://www.scribd.com/doc/145774104/Edu-2008-Vidal Doesn’t it make sense that, with such an inconceivably large number of possible universes that one could be born into, that one would naturally be born into (brought into being in) just the very universe possessing a quantum mechanical ground state or quantum vacuum that was the most exquisitely fine-tuned in terms of the precise collective settings and/or adjustments of the more than 20 fundamental physical constants in order to be compatible with both the unique requirements of one’s peculiar flavor of subjective consciousness, the phenomenal contents and quale uniquely befitting this consciousness and the equally peculiar mode of quantum mechanical functioning of the spiritual-material interface (quantum mind-brain) qua reducing valve-consciousness filter? And doesn’t it follow, moreover that, from the standpoint of one’s own unique anthropocentric and 1st person point of view that the brains of any and all other human beings, among whom one has now found oneself, the fine-tuning of the fundamental physical constants of this universe is not quite so exquisitely precise as in one’s own particular case? One of the outcomes of living within an ancestor simulation is that not all viruses of the mind originate with other human minds. Clayton Smith says that the fact that the Pauli Exclusion Principle does not apply to consciousness is connected with the idea of the fine tuning of consciousness and the hard encryption of quantum entanglement encoded information the anthropic principle. In the movie, A.I. (Artificial Intelligence), the idea from the metaphysics of mind is expressed by one of the super-advanced AI’s from 2000 years in David’s future that, "David, I often felt a sort of envy of human beings, of that thing they call 'spirit'. Human beings have created a million explanations of the meaning of life - in art, in poetry, and mathematical formulas. Certainly human beings must be the key to the meaning of existence. But human beings no longer existed. So, we began a project- that would make it possible to recreate the living body of a person long dead from

the DNA in a fragment of bone or mummified skin. We also wondered would it be possible to retrieve a memory trace in resonance with a recreated body. And you know what we found? We found the very fabric of spacetime itself appeared to store information about every event which had ever occurred in the past. But the experiment was a failure. For those who were resurrected only lived through a single day of renewed life. When the resurectees fell asleep on the night of their first new day they died, again. As soon as they became unconscious, their very existence faded away into darkness. So you see, David, the equations have shown that once an individual spacetime pathway had been used it could not be reused. If we bring your mother back now it will only be for one day. And you will never be able to see her again.” There seems to be two fundamental views on the nature of individual consciousness in relation to consciousness as such. One is that consciousness in effect obeys Fermi Dirac statistics this is my view the other view is the more common mystical view that the consciousness of the individual obeys Bose Einstein statistics. Seeing the depiction of parallel earths and the parallel lives of the humanoids that live in these parallel worlds just reminds one of how cultural patterns become historically locked in by chance events There is a relationship between inertia, robustness and holographic encoding. All distinctively quantum interference effects are in reality selfinterference effect. The litmus test of objective realism is the presence of absence of self-interference effects at some theoretically predetermined threshold. The question is whether man possesses the insight and imagination to propose such a theory. When our method of experimenting begins to get at the bootstrap mechanism a physical reality it is here that mental effects should become

discernible. http://oldarchive.godspy.com/reviews/a-review-of-v-for-vendetta-byjohn-zmirak.cfm.html 'All important truths are encompassed for all time by my own beloved intellectual prejudices.' If this is in fact what one secretly believes, then is it nevertheless possible to somehow bootstrap one's consciousness out of such a mental trick bag? Probably not. Therefore an advisable course of action is to make sure that this trick bag is as large as possible. That's right. One can only move from one trick bag of intellectual prejudices to another trick bag. That is because all information is contextualized and structured data. There is no such thing as raw information in the absence of a transcendental ground of mentality, which is to say transcendental mind. Quantum interference effects are manifestations of a collective information dynamics, not of a physical mechanism as such. Yeah that Jesus logic is perfect. We were all God and all chose limitation including the amnesia of the transcendent self that goes with this foolhardy act perpetrated out of the be ief that the other would do the same. Most everyone forgot the original mission having become enmeshed in Maya. Some, like Buddha and Jesus discovered how to recontact the higher self though without truly becoming one with it.

November 2013

"All important truths are encompassed for all time by my own beloved intellectual prejudices." If this is in fact what one secretly believes, then is it nevertheless possible to somehow bootstrap one's consciousness out of such a mental trick bag? Probably not. Therefore an advisable course of action is to make sure that this trick bag is as large as

possible. November 2013

Yeah, I'm hardly ever on here. We'll have to chat soon. When I see you again, it will be like no time at all has passed. It will be as though we had just resumed that personal conversation of 18 years ago. Time and space are meaningless between great friends. By all means, re-read part of my comment with all of the appropriately classic Leonard Nimoy intonation. November 2013

I have made it a habit to purchase books on Amazon that have inverted-bell-curve ratings spectra, i.e., a lot of one-star and five-star ratings and relatively fewer 2 to 4-star ratings, quite regardless of whether I think I’d agree with the author’s thesis or not. It’s a great way to step outside of the echo chamber of one’s own intellectual biases and prejudices. I highly recommend that readers of Meyer’s book next turn to Mark Perakh’s book, Unintelligent Design. Life is too short and the universe of ideas too vast to only read authors one agrees with. October 2013 fcbk=

Guisean Buddhistentialist meditative states are achieved not in the Lotus position, but while standing and gazing intently in the mirror at one’s own admirable reflection. The facial muscles must relax completely and one must appear as unenthused as possible, all the while one rhythmically intones the empowering phrase, which one has received from the master. Then and only then, if one is worthy, a channeling of his contemptuous spirit takes over and the insistent mantra of subvocal reverberation continues to grow, now powerfully with its own inner voice, one possessed of a mildly disdainful Brooklyn accent, which yet continues to build, feeding upon itself until it suddenly erupts, like a dagger of the mind, giving birth anew to this forever disembarrassing phrase, only now released from the very depths of crushing ennui. In a blinding flash, the ego is liberated from its selfimposed dictatorship of caring with just these four simple words: "Who gives a fuck?” December 2013

"To my son, Nicholas Coope (1980–98), who fell to his death

climbing in Glen Clova: a brave and thoughtful lad, proudly remembered." - From a book dedication by the boy's mother. Seemed placed there by the author mostly out of considerations of style. (I am amazed sometimes by how subjective my perceptions can be when it is only my own ego which benefits.) October

2013

fcbk=Naomi

Jakins

Concerning an Inconvenient Truth...it is a convenient book . . . for Al, since it helped put him at the ground floor as majority partner investor in the newly emerging global cap and trade commodities market, which his book helped to create the demand for. : ) Still more, if philosophers and cosmologists of some future age but possess the patience and acumen to look, many of the secrets of the Universe shall be laid bare within the past seven years of Brian's not so humble Facebook postings. Unfortunately, we who remain ensnared within this benighted century (unlike Brian) possess neither. Search Term Month Year (contribution put within context of a search term – primitive hyperlink) @$ “at money” (an important or seminal passage) @? “kernel idea requiring further development” au= “author is” (an important or seminal thinker) cit= “citation is” (important citation) con= “concept” (important concept) cont’d= (to be continued) epi= “epigram” (a candidate bon mot) ess= “essay” (passage containing a promising essay topic) fcbk= “serves as an interesting Facebook posting, e.g., Lime Cat, Lime Cat Universe, etc. fic= “novel or short story idea” hyp= “hypothesis” (important hypothesis) kwd= “keyword” (an exhaustive list needs to be developed for essay production) kwo= “quote from elsewhere in this document” ref= “reference” (missing reference)

ph= (a borrowed phrase, whose original context requires background explanation) per= (from personal conversation or correspondence) prn= “principle” (important principle) pru= “proof” (a proof is being demonstrated) voc= “vocabulary” (a term whose meaning is less than certain or contextually clear) coi= “coining” (the coining of a new phrase with future illustrative utility) web= “web address” wik= “wikipedia citation or reference” rsc+ “research” (any “proword” or phrase that seems to require further research) scribd= “desirable search term of phrase” goo= (Google search is indicated as appropriate) Month yyyy (month and year a passage was added, e.g,. “June 2011”) He was someone who had somehow long ago chosen me as the backstop for the projection of his many unfulfilled dreams - a situation which I sometimes find to be more than a little disconcerting. I can assure you that I am quite miserable enough possessing but a single, functioning conscience...I cannot brook carrying two of those around! Thanks, Dr. Sarfatti. I am always amazed at all of the disinformation and unfounded speculation that exists about you on the Internet. All of these phony Johnny come lately's who've never done any real research, theoretical or experimental, who want to cast aspersions. You're one of the few real physicists out there. The fact that you care enough to try to enlighten the rest of us rather than just staying within the echo-chamber of academia has confused more than a few people, apparently. Another thing: some of your books are on amazon.com, but I'd like to know how to get access to some of your earlier publications. If only there were a one-stop shopping location for your papers! : )



Back 

February 2005

Re: Puthoff's N.E.W. theory

(1)  

View Next HYPERLINK "http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/ItalianPhysicsCenter/conv ersations/topics/8160"Previous

    Jack Sarfatti Message 1 of 1 , Feb 20, 2005 View Source On Feb 20, 2005, at 8:05 

AM,

Russell

S

Clark

wrote:

> > I like Volovik's approach to Sakharov's idea of induced gravity as a > solution to the cosmological constant problem. I have my own version of this. It's different from Volovik's, but has some overlaps. > To be honest, I felt the same way and was even kind of excited and > intrigued when I first encountered the Puthoff, Haisch, Rueda > theory. But then I slowly realized that quantum statistics is a > much broader basis for an "already unified" induced gravity > theory than is Puthoff's Zitterbewegung-EMQG induced gravity. The > principles of quantum statistics would likely easily accommodated being > retrofitted with future theories, e.g., supersymmetry, M-theory, > etc. This appeared unlikely for a theory of gravity and inertia > based upon so narrow an abstraction as electromagnetism. I don't understand your point. I think the Puthoff, Haisch, Rueda

theory is wrong because it is too simplistic. For one thing it only deals with the transverse polarized virtual photons. It ignores longitudinal virtual photons and virtual electron-positron pairs. It has no "Higgs Ocean" coherence and, therefore, no possibility of explaining the emergence of Einstein's gravity. Haisch simply assumes Einstein's GR, I actually derive it FROM the cohering of the random ZPF. Puthoff & Haisch do not even understand ODLRO AKA coherence. None of the relevant math are in their papers. The effect they talk about is small and has already been considered in a paper in Rev Mod Phys on "quantum friction". > > Once I realized that quantum statistics embraces all of the > interactions of fermionic and bosonic particles whereas > electromagnetism only certain fermionic particles, e.g., not neutrinos > and only one bosonic particle, i.e., the photon, it became difficult > for me to take Puthoff's theory seriously anymore. A kind of > philosophical disdain for Puthoff's program crystallized - and this > despite the fact that I could never have come up with the admittedly > clever mathematical arguments Puthoff submitted in support of his > theory. > > On a less dour note, in Volovik's recently published book, The > Universe in a Helium Droplet, Volovik gives theoretical grounds for > why the cosmological constant and the average matter density of the > Universe should be approximately equal throughout much of the history > of cosmological expansion. Yes, so do I. Puthoff does not even recognize the depth of the problem and hand waves it away. > > Matter and vacuum perturb each other's spacetime symmetry to induce a > gravitational field because (as Feynman pointed out) the Pauli

> Exclusion and what might be called the "Pauli Inclusion" principles > apply equally to real as well as to virtual fermions and bosons. > Matter and vacuum mutually interact as traces of a common destiny, er, > uh, density matrix. :) No, that is meaningless. The precise equations for this are Bu {Pa}

= =

Lie

bu^aPa/h Algebra

of

T4

Bu = (Goldstone Phase),u from partial cohering of random ZPF in inflationary vacuum phase transition Einstein-Cartan

tetrad

&

is

guv(curved)

=

=

eu^a

=

&u^a

+

Kronecker (&u^a

+

bu^a)(Flat)ab(&v^b

bu^a Delta

+

bv^b)

Gauge transforms on Bu -> GCT Diff(4) tensor transforms of local frames - missing in Puthoff's other "PV" theory. > > BTW, is the notion of an electron-positron spin-0 field interpreted as > the timelike component . . . and the photon as the spacelike component > (of an appropriately defined four vector) a "not even wrong" notion? > I was thinking in analogy with the electric charge (a scalar) being > represented by the timelike component and the charge currents by the > spacelike 3-vector components of the "spacetime-like" current density > four vector in Maxwell's equations. Until you write the equations I don't really know what you mean. :-) Show message history

October 2013

Anomalous quantum phenomena exhibit the mutual interference of heretofore all along thought distinct bootstrap mechanisms, that of the mental and that of the physical. He was just repeating funny voices and as we know the computer programs which devise these various humorous comments and sayings do not actually possess the power of human consciousness. Since he was only absentmindedly mimicking or repeating under his breath what he heard the funny voices saying I would say that these charges of sexism are wholly unfounded. She plays like a Roman with her eyes on fire. He plays like a Roman with his eyes on fire. These two different pronouns do not seem to function perfectly analogously in the above exemplar sentences and we might wonder why this is the case? “Her” refers to a particular person, while “his” refers to any one of a number of hypothetical Romans. Niels Bohr the Alice The akashic record possesses all information past present and future however the information is not necessarily structured temporally as we understand time. Akashic paradigm. The moral dilemma question is: would you intentionally push a person off a cliff to his or her death in order to save some great mass of strangers say from a nuclear detonation? There is a presumptive metaphysical ethical fallacy lying at the root of such a hypothetical ethical dilemma. The metaphysical presumption is that individual human experience fits rationally into some collective matrix through which and by which human suffering at the level of the individual can be massed together and accumulated into some very much greater transpersonal or trans-human suffering say on the part of a deity observing and experiencing the suffering of and through those many individuals.

The paradox is how an atheist who considers himself moral and ethical might answer this dilemma vs. how a Christian theist who also considers himself moral and ethical might answer this same dilemma. Human suffering doesn't add in any absolute or objective sense, and the moral intuition that it *does add* is informed by a kind of 'cryptotheism', one shared by theists and atheists alike! : ) Similar to the chronology protection mechanism there is another mechanism which prevents individual human consciousness’s from gaining access to the control interface to the karmic field. Darwinian evolution theory does not propose a model or theory of the origin of life. So Darwin's theory can be likened to the notion of a bridge that is anchored in the middle of a chasm on one side and to the edge of a steep cliff on the other. One cannot begin to bridge a chasm from its midpoint without a sky crane (or otherwise suspending the law of gravity). Whatever is holding up the bridge in the middle is still secretly present in order to prevent its collapse: our “sky crane” of course is chemical evolution and the self-organizing properties of atoms and molecules, which drove evolution for its first billions years before the advent of a unit of heredity, e.g., primitive DNA or RNA, which is to say, before mutations began to be shaped by natural selection. What were “mutations” or, "spontaneous changes to the phenome” guided by during those first billion years of chemical evolution? Again, by these self-organizing properties of atoms and molecules. Is there any reason to suppose that these “self-organizing properties” ceased to operate after the advent of a unit of heredity, i.e., DNA, at which time natural selection commenced its operation? Conclusion: mutations of DNA are not random, but were shaped and continue to be shaped by the selforganizing properties of atoms and molecules. These principles of chemical self-organization did not evolve, but are owing to the initial conditions of the universe, which were determined during the initial

infinitesimal fractions of a second (I say "fractions" instead of the singular, "fraction" because time likely possesses more than one dimension) during the Universe's Big Bang when the fundamental physical constants, e.g., Planck's constant, Bohr magneton, mass and charge of the electron, speed of light, electric field permittivity, magnetic field permeability, Avogadro's number, Boltzmann's constant, Pauli Exclusion Principle, gravitational constant, etc. were determined. Of course, the simultaneous and more or less instantaneous fixing of all of these physical constants to 12 decimal places or more (a notable exception here is the gravitational constant, 4-5 decimal places) represents an extremely large quantity of information and cosmologists and astrophysicists now recognize that the Universe began in a state of extraordinarily low entropy. This low entropy state is now believed by the experts to be the result of an entropy fluctuations within a much larger system, e.g., “Multiverse”. My response to this is: "You don't say?" : ) Combine the anthropic cosmological principle with the etiology paradox and what do you come up with? December 2013

It is more than a bit ironic that the only real empirical proof for the theory of evolution is the design feature of micro-evolutionary adaptability of each species, which makes it robust against fluctuating environmental conditions. Of course, the theory-laden evidence for Darwinian evolution is indeed in plentiful supply. He was in part, she was in part, he was not in part, they were playing their parts, she got the part. There should be a new verb tense for variably repeating time, e.g., for repetition of a particular scene or act of a play in which actors are participating. Would being reunited with all of one’s lost loved ones from one’s earthly life in any way constitute a disproof of solipsism? Indeed not. If anything it would be strong evidence in favor of the hypothesis that the world is one’s oyster, as it were.

October 2013

wik=

Stalin's speeches published in the problems of Leninism

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk%3AJack_Sarfatti/Archive_1

http://de.scribd.com/doc/170276616/Quantum-Mechanics http://www.scribd.com/doc/79203258/Sean-Carroll-Dark-Energy-ThePreposterous-Universe October 2013

Psychiatrist Brian Weiss mentioned the possibility that persons could be reincarnated from not only other galaxies but also other universes and other dimensions. Transcendental otherness and the plurality of consciousness is related to the principle of hard encryption and is also connected to spontaneous decoherence of wave functions inertia and gravitation also the distinction between subjectivity and physical reality, interiority and exteriority. If the outside is relative to the inside, but here is a plurality of interiors or inner domains, then how do we come up with a common public space called the outside, that is to say, the outside for all concerned, for everyone? Is it truly correct to think of the miraculous is that what your curves by virtue of a mechanism that is merely currently unknown to us I would have to say this is incorrect since the advancement of science and technology reveals ever new mechanisms which are realized to be just as scientific as other older and well established mechanisms were to an earlier stage of the advancement of science. Consider here the fact that a wavefunction collapse occurs by virtue no mechanism at all. Cosmologists likely fail to understand the disturbing metaphysical and spiritual implications of their latest cosmological theories. When the number of bubbling universes greatly exceeds the number of possible distinct human beings and one considers this in light of the anthropic cosmological principle....the disturbing spiritual implication here is

obvious. I dreamed the 'you can't say that in GERMAN paradox. ' Without success of the argument for God from analogy, that is, of a mind that is both transcendent and universal the argument from analogy for other minds fails. Scaffolding vs whole fluctuations vs specified complexity vs intelligent design. Where knowledge and reality intersect is within the mind of God. Science is not the edifice of truth; science is the scaffolding of truth. No one knows where this place is. This is but one of the many logical conclusions which can be drawn from the fact that science does not progress in linear fashion, but a certain amount of destruction of prior established scientific truth goes hand in hand with the advancement of science. Just consider how 30th Century scientists shall view 20th century science and in turn how 40th Century scientists shall view 30th Century science, and it becomes clear that there is no future stable plateau from which contemporary science can confidently assess previous eras in the advancement of scientific truth. Anomalous quantum phenomena exhibit the mutual interference of heretofore all along thought distinct bootstrap mechanisms, that of the mental and that of the physical. “Quantum entanglement only dependent upon area” http://phys.org/news/2013-09-quantum-entanglement-area.html If Bohm’s principle applies universally, then the world is constituted as a hologram. Decoherence is induced by complexity that outstrips Bohm’s causal principle, meaning energy acquires bulk as higher dimensional objects.

Of course there is no real physical meaning attributable to the phrase, 'photon bouncing off of an electron' in the absence of an observer properly equipped to perform a position and momentum measurement on the impact site for the two particles which are also waves. In the absence of an observer the quantum vacuum serves as the default ground of quantum entanglement. Can a grounding or substantive quantum entanglement be transferred from the quantum vacuum to a quantum observer and back all the while conserving entanglement? Is entanglement conservation violated by this transaction? The observation that ambient photons within the laboratory should not be able to trigger the collapse of a superposition state certainly applies to the case of the two slit experiment performed using buckyballs. Nevertheless an observer can use photon radiation of precisely the same momentum energy and polarization in order to observe which slit the buckyball went through which does succeed in collapsing the interference pattern. This is true even though the very same types of photons existed amongst the ambient radiation with in the laboratory when the observer was not looking at the slits to see which slit each buckyball went through and this ambient photon radiation in the laboratory does not succeed in causing the interference pattern to collapse apparently the observer makes the difference not the physical interaction of photons with the buckyballs say through collisions. In other words if the observer is not watching which slit the buckyball goes through and just looks at the phosphorescence screen for the presence or absence of an interference pattern then he cannot rely on the presence of ambient proton radiation of identical character to that which would have been required to observe which slit the buckyballs goes through in order to produce collapse of the interference pattern with the

exhibition of particle-like behavior on the part of the buckyballs. So it does not appear that a physical interaction is responsible for collapse of the interference pattern but rather the presence of the observer looking at the slits. Nature wanted to be Newtonian but didn't think the problem completely through. The acausal behavior of perceived physical reality is perhaps as much owing to the brains overabundant complexity which outstrips the capabilities of nature to anticipate and create representations of equal complexity to those of which the brain is capable. This leads to a consistent underdetermination of representations causally speaking. All this time we've been looking at the quantum decoherence and quantum measurement problems from the standpoint of energy, momentum and momentum-energy exchanges between the observing system and the observed system, but the decoherence problem can be handled in the context of the hot, wet brain and its microtubules and their coherent tubulin dimer energy states by looking at the problem from the standpoint of information rather than energy, that is, if what is happening inside the brain's microtubule network outstrips in terms of complexity or information density, the quantum computing capacity of the cosmic CPU or quantum vacuum by which each future time step in the evolution of Schrodinger's wave equation is computed, then we may have alternate conditions for quantum coherence, which do not depend on such things as temperature. The inversion relations for electron mobility vis-a-vis the two slit experiment... this relation may actually be applicable to solving the quantum decoherence problem for a wet hot brain specifically where the coherent quantum states of tubular and dimers of the brain's microtubules are concerned. I see no problem with utilizing a consistent empirical relationship

between two observables in order to establish a new axiom. These two observables between which our empirical relation exists, namely that of the inversion relation noted earlier, our consciousness and electron mobility vis-a-vis the two slit experiment and the quantum observer. A problem further investigated here should be: consciousness is always consciousness of the individual not an intersubjective quantity such as a quantum observable. This inversion relation that I have been talking about is simply this: when consciousness is present at the two slit apparatus the electron wave function collapses so that we get particle behavior. On the other hand, during general anesthesia when electron mobility is induced to switch from wavelike to particle- like by the presence of the anesthetic gas, there is a loss of consciousness. If intelligent design is a false hypothesis, then when we examine the informational structures of life such is RNA and DNA and complex macromolecules such as enzymes and proteins which modulate the expression of RNA and DNA, we should find that there is only a single level of description at work, in other words there should be an absence of meta levels of description. Such informational mechanisms as error correction codes, operating systems, compilers, hyperlinking (computational nonlocality, if you will) are all examples of metal levels at work within a text or within a computer program which exhibits a linguistic structure and programming infrastructure that possesses too much specified complexity to have arisen from passively filtered entropy fluctuations. If intelligent design is a false hypothesis, then when we examine the informational structures of life such is RNA and DNA and complex macromolecules such as enzymes and proteins which modulate the expression of RNA and DNA, we should find that there is only a single level of description at work, in other words there should be an absence of meta levels of description. Such informational mechanisms as error

correction codes, operating systems, compilers, hyperlinking (computational nonlocality, if you will) are all examples of metal levels at work within a text or within a computer program which exhibits meta levels and bespeaking a language and programming infrastructure that possesses too much specified complexity to have arisen from passively filtered entropy fluctuations. Would solipsistic Boltzmann brains solve the Fermi paradox and what is the strange logic that underlies such a propos l? Microcosm exhibiting microcosm? Descent with modification leads to a wider and wider divergence of forms such that any given form tends in later epochs to find itself much more alone and unique within the state space of possible peers. By the time such a late stage in evolution has been reached such that individual consciousness becomes possible and emerges by this time the divergence has grown so wide that it is unlikely that any given individual consciousness should find any peers coexisting within the reach of communication unless a kind of Nexus be provided. This is somewhat the obverse of the argument that the self being a sociolinguistic construct cannot emerge in a solitary state but must be always and everywhere surrounded by peers with which it has communicated and with which it can communicate. But the phenomenon of miscommunication reveals to us that it is not the input of actual information which leads to the emergence of the individual consciousness as sociolinguistic construct, but merely the input of data impulses which are uninterpreted unless a paradigm or theory is in place with which to interpret them. Earth's civilization must then be secretly extremely old not only in the galaxy for but perhaps within the universe at large such that the average distance of peer extraterrestrial civilizations namely those of comparable or greater technological development may well be too great to be detected.

Earth's civilization must then be secretly extremely old not only in the galaxy for but perhaps within the universe at large such that the average distance of peer extraterrestrial civilizations namely those of comparable or greater technologic l development may well be too great to be detected. We should now investigate what might well be called the Fermi metaparadox within the discipline of the philosophy of mind and the problem of other minds. The dissolution of a paradox by way of the advent of a new paradigm usually signals the appearance of a metaparadox. Can long lived metastable states of organic molecules be passed down from one generation to the next, enabling a greater scope of action for quantum entanglement. The process of biological evolution is not a hundred percent onward and upward just consider the case first considered by Darwin himself of placing newer or modified species in competition with their earlier for bears in the current environment of the modified species and how the newer or modified species would merge victorious rendering the extinction of the order forms from which they are derived and now having said this consider someone to reverse case where the newer or modified forms of the older species are placed in the folder species contemporary environment and allowed to compete with him there here the advantage would not be so clear of the newer forms over the older ancestral forms because of the consideration of coevolution and ecology. That an individual consciousness' apparent peers are intelligent is more a testament to the ultra high fine tuning of that individual mind's consciousness than it is to the fine tuning of the brains of those peers. Note here that we are relating the fine tuning of consciousness with fine tuning of brains.

The existence of a specious present is inconsistent with the principle of time scale reductionism. Moreover time scale reduction ism is incompatible with multi- dimensional time. Young souls have many peers old souls are relatively peerless. Of course this principle would not be expected to hold within a universe that is infinitely old. This principle would only be expected to hold the universe which had a beginning. Only truly old souls would be expected to possess consciousness because of the radical context dependency of consciousness what provides this context myriad previous life times and the sensory perception inputs and quantum entanglement generated there from along with proto conscious thought processes lay down in the quantum back you providing ever richer contacts from which future incarnations may draw and in so doing the context for future incarnations becomes ever richer so that greatly more aged souls appearing in those later incarnations shell if she the necessary context in order to experience self-awareness. Hypothesized entities substances and principles this is the mainstay of the 19th century amateur natural philosopher such as Darwin. I found Robert Zubrin's statement very intriguing, namely, that since the simplest creatures on the planet are bacteria and bacteria are extremely advanced in terms of their cellular machinery and the language of their genetic code which is to say DNA that to assume that bacteria are at the beginning of the evolutionary process is like assuming that the iPhone is at the beginning of the technological evolutionary process. It was upon these considerations that Robert Zubrin considered it likely that life originated elsewhere perhaps on Mars or perhaps another star

system which passed through our solar system's Oort cloud, causing comets from its corresponding Oort- like cloud to seed the Earth's inner solar system with organic material. https://www.youtube.com/watch? v=PHSRbD_69yk&feature=youtube_gdata_player Transgressing the boundaries in one's written communications means busting up pre- registered complexes of behavioral epigenetics of one's naive, untutored reader. Is it possible to distinguish these two cases: differentiation of selves versus differentiation of the otherness of selves? The concept of consciousness is grounded in the otherness of the self not in the self as one among many instantiations of consciousness per se or as such. Given the level of consciousness attainable by ordinary human beings on planet Earth it is puzzling how long are life spans can be upwards of 100 years and not necessarily accompanied by serious mental decline or diminution of self-awareness puzzling when one considers how utterly small is the socio linguistic and cultural milieu of planet Earth for such persons. PETA disclaimer: no Christians were offended during the posting of this comment. When Jesus opened St Paul's eyes, he opened them too wide. From Sartre's Being and Nothingness: cit=“If we attempt somehow regarding the Other what Descartes attempted to do for God with that extraordinary “proof by the idea of perfection” which is wholly animated by the intuition of transcendence, then for our apprehension of the Other qua Other we are compelled to reject a certain type of negation

which we have called an external negation. The Other must appear to the cogito as not being me. This negation can be conceived in two ways: either it is a pure, external negation, and it will separate the Other from myself as one substance from another substance – and in this case all apprehension of the Other is by definition impossible; or else it will be an internal negation, which means a synthetic, active connection of the two terms, each one of which constitutes itself by denying that it is the other. This negative relation will therefore be reciprocal and will possess a twofold interiority: This means first that the multiplicity of “Others” will not be a collection but a totality (in this sense we admit that Hegel is right) since each Other finds his being in the Other. It also means that this Totality is such that it is on principle impossible for us to adopt “the point of view of the whole.” In fact we have seen that no abstract concept of consciousness can result from the comparison of my beingfor-myself with my object-state for the Other. Furthermore this totality – like that of the For-itself – is a detotalized totality; for the since existence-for-others is a radical refusal of the Other, no totalitarian and unifying synthesis of “Others” is possible. It is in the light of these few observations that we in turn shall now attack the question of the The Other. Consciousness my consciousness even is more general then the most general medium of my own experience this also points up the transcendental nature of consciousness and the concept of consciousness. Does the notion of consciousness as “con sciousness” point, etymologically speaking, to the socially context based nature of consciousness? @$

Consciousness as such or in general transcends my individual consciousness in much the same way that objectivity transcends intersubjectivity Penrose's one graviton Planck mass energy limit can be r cast in terms of quantum information theory, which is to say in terms of the abstract relationships such as combinations and permutations of the various

relationships between the physical components of a quantum system which can outstrip in complexity the computing capacity of the underlying quantum field. This is because the quantum field, whose entanglements constitute at the very least the causal relationships by which the quantum vacuum computes each succeeding state of the Schrodinger wave equation for the system, *is physical* and increases in mass according to the cube of the system radius, while the abstract description of the system, i.e., its wavefunction, increases exponentially with the radius. Spontaneous decoherence is a function of how the abstract overwhelms the purely physical that is responsible for computing all future states of Psi. September 2013

Consider causal relationships with which the universe or nature has no “experience”. Certain informal fallacies of reasoning had survival value because they more readily enabled the would-be demagogue hunter-gatherer to more quickly mobilize the tribe or clan into action against a threat to the group's survival posed by a neighboring tribe. The human brain requires sleep for eight hours once every 24 hours in order to rest up after enforcing the strictures of causality and logic for the previous 16 hours running. Instead of following established procedures you know somebody who knew somebody who is at the control panel and in a position to turn knobs at will. You don't necessarily have to arrive at a given board position in the game of chess by playing step by step in conformance with the rules of chess but are allowed the option of placing pieces directly onto the board in such a manner that an otherwise impossible mating position is effected. This points up the relationship between free will and self-consciousness particularly in connection with Kurt Gödel’s Incompleteness Theorems.

Consciousness has a knowledge of the system by which its will is implemented in the world, its limitations as well as its proactivities. The logic of coherent tiny subdomains of genetic base pair sequences as yet untried within a virtually infinite state-space of possible genetic base pair sequences. How is optimization in an evolutionary sense possible within such a virtually infinite state space? That is, given the large negentropy barriers that separates different degrees of fitness on the rugged fitness landscape. Is the ground of emergence transcendent and necessarily so? Can teleology in evolutionary biology be an emergent property? The soul is the basis but not the ground of spiritual development. Equivocation of sense is the basis of many logical fallacies but it is also the basis of the intuition which permits thinkers to sneak outside of a given system or paradigm. October 2013 An interesting example of equivocation of sense is the obvious ambiguity of the phrase, “philosophical zombies”, that is, between its technical philosophy of mind acceptation and one of its more “ordinary language” or literal interpretations. For example, do philosophical zombies in sense A tend towards philosophical zombiehood in sense B, and so on? Many seeming paradoxes are borne of our inability to adjust the sense and scope of our technical terms with which we treat problem's analysis. Paradoxically the delayed choice experiment was devised both to demonstrate nonlocality and that quantum entanglement of spins was a genuine physical effect. Quantum nonlocality and David Bohm's causality principle suggest that the world is indeed a type of computer simulation the quantum vacuum serves the purpose here as the cosmic quantum CPU

The fact that quantum non-local information cannot be transmitted faster than light is an indication that quantum nonlocally connected or encoded information may form the basis at least in part of the integral unity of the individual consciousness, information which is hard quantum encrypted. The principle of quantum nonlocality teaches us that what we call substance is an emergent phenomenon or property which arises above the Planck limit. “And this would be manifestly favorable to natural selection by affording a better chance of the occurrence of profitable variations. Unless such occur, natural selection can do nothing”, c.f., Darwin’s Origin of Species. Darwin's remarks concerning changing conditions increasing variation from his seminal work, TOOS: 'and this would be manifestly favorable to natural selection by affording a better chance of the occurrence of profitable variations. Unless such occur, natural selection can do nothing.' Note that profitable changes, triggered or enabled by environmental change in a random fashion, nevertheless rely on coherent and coordinated reactions at the genetic level. Explain time bubble analogy in the species present as a means of understanding the notion of two-dimensional time. Re investigate conservation of four dimensional angular momentum in the light of subatomic particle collisions' non-conservation of threedimensional angular momentum. Reexamine the interpretation of quantum intrinsic spin as angular momentum about the time axis, especially while considering the concept of quantum entanglement and instantaneous Lorentz frames of reference. Turning inside out in three dimensions as a rotation in four dimensional space vis-a-vis enantiomer molecules. In turn relate this to the relationship between consciousness and particle-wave duality of electron

mobility in quantum microtubules hat is pointed up by the classic twoslit experiment and the Meyer-Overton law of anesthetic action upon quantum microtubule electron mobility. The diamond in the rough model of intersubjective communication applied to the infant's development of a hypothesis of speech sound meanings. The DRM model demonstrates that information was never transmitted to the brain or mind of the infant and that all of the meanings and coherent structures of perception and cognition which the child develops later on are wholly the product of transformations, reactions, processing and reprocessing of data into information which took place within the brain of the child. Derivative time versus integral time. When you observe 2 people are communicating at cross purposes perhaps secretly in agreement with each other say from the point of view of a third party, or a comedy of errors of misunderstanding is playing out, which reminds one that no information is out into anyone's head until they already understand the signifiers. Theistic evolution involves supernatural quality control and quality assurance applied to the process of natural selection by a super intelligent designer engineer such that Richard Dawkins' mount improbable is always the tallest mount improbable and never the smallest mount improbable. Genetic drift is not enough to provide natural selection with the variability that it needs to select from for beneficial mutations there must be a gradient in addition to genetic drift which drives the forward advance of greater and greater complexity this gradient with the advent of the first unit of heredity would have been that gradient that drove the billion years of chemical evolution leading from carbon hydrogen

oxygen nitrogen to the very first primitive RNA or DNA molecule. An important question is whether or not with the advent of the first replicating information bearing molecules primitive RNA or primitive DNA, whether or not feedback: occurred between the gradient which drove chemical evolution and these first information bearing molecules, changing that gradient and perhaps steepening it. A dynamic interaction between mind at large and the wavefunction of organic molecules seems to be required here. Shouldn't there be some limitations on the complexity of unitary wave wavefunctions, which is to say a limit on how complex a wavefunction can be without either being a superposition or devolving into a density matrix representation of a statistical mixture.'' a statistical mixture of I can functions does not have a corresponding quantum observable. So the limitation on wave function complexity is twofold on the one hand there is a wave functions which is too complex to be observed in the sense of having a corresponding observable on the other hand the wavefunction represents a system which cannot be computed by the cosmic CPU or quantum vacuum because it out strips the representation capabilities of that quantum vacuum. The dynamics of chemical evolution form the subconscious for the process of biological evolution and are responsible for all of its fortuitous insights into more perfect adaptation and coadaptation. Of course there is no real physical meaning attributable to the phrase, 'photon bouncing off of an electron' in the absence of an observer properly equipped to perform a position and momentum measurement on the impact site for the two particles which are also waves. In the absence of an observer the quantum vacuum serves as the default ground of quantum entanglement. Can a grounding or substantive quantum entanglement be transferred

from the quantum vacuum to a quantum observer and back all the while conserving entanglement? Is entanglement conservation violated by this transaction? Of course there is no real physical meaning attributable to the phrase, 'photon bouncing off of an electron' in the absence of an observer properly equipped to perform a position and momentum measurement on the impact site for the two particles which are also waves. In the absence of an observer the quantum vacuum serves as the default ground of quantum entanglement. Can a grounding or substantive quantum entanglement be transferred from the quantum vacuum to a quantum observer and back all the while conserving entanglement? Is entanglement conservation violated by this transaction? The observation that ambient photons within the laboratory should not be able to trigger the collapse of a superposition state certainly applies to the case of the two slit experiment performed using buckyballs. Nevertheless an observer can use photon radiation of precisely the same momentum energy and polarization in order to observe which slit the buckyball went through which does succeed in collapsing the interference pattern. This is true even though the very same types of photons existed amongst the ambient radiation with in the laboratory when the observer was not looking at the slits to see which slit each buckyball went through and this ambient photon radiation in the laboratory does not succeed in causing the interference pattern to collapse apparently the observer makes the difference not the physical interaction of photons with the buckyballs say through collisions. In other words if the observer is not watching which slit the buckyball goes through and just looks at the phosphorescence screen for the

presence or absence of an interference pattern then he cannot rely on the presence of ambient proton radiation of identical character to that which would have been required to observe which slit the buckyballs goes through in order to produce collapse of the interference pattern with the exhibition of particle-like behavior on the part of the buckyballs. So it does not appear that a physical interaction is responsible for collapse of the interference pattern but rather the presence of the observer looking at the slits. Nature wanted to be Newtonian but didn't think the problem completely through. The acausal behavior of perceived physical reality is perhaps as much owing to the brains overabundant complexity which outstrips the capabilities of nature to anticipate and create representations of equal complexity to those of which the brain is capable. This leads to a consistent underdetermination of representations causally speaking. All this time we've been looking at the quantum decoherence and quantum measurement problems from the standpoint of energy, momentum and momentum-energy exchanges between the observing system and the observed system, but the decoherence problem can be handled in the context of the hot, wet brain and its microtubules and their coherent tubulin dimer energy states by looking at the problem from the standpoint of information rather than energy, that is, if what is happening inside the brain's microtubule network outstrips in terms of complexity or information density, the quantum computing capacity of the cosmic CPU or quantum vacuum by which each future time step in the evolution of Schrodinger's wave equation is computed, then we may have alternate conditions for quantum coherence, which do not depend on such things as temperature. The inversion relations for electron mobility vis-a-vis the two slit experiment ... this relation may actually be applicable to solving the quantum decoherence problem for a wet hot brain specifically where the

coherent quantum states of tubular and dimers of the brain's microtubules are concerned. I see no problem with utilizing a consistent empirical relationship between two observables in order to establish a new axiom. These two observables between which our empirical relation exists, namely that of the inversion relation noted earlier, our consciousness and electron mobility vis-a-vis the two slit experiment and the quantum observer. A problem further investigated here should be: consciousness is always consciousness of the individual not an intersubjective quantity such as a quantum observable. This inversion relation that I have been talking about is simply this: when consciousness is present at the two slit apparatus the electron wave function collapses so that we get particle behavior. On the other hand, during general anesthesia when electron mobility is induced to switch from wavelike to particle- like by the presence of the anesthetic gas, there is a loss of consciousness. If intelligent design is a false hypothesis, then when we examine the informational structures of life such as RNA and DNA and complex macromolecules such as enzymes and proteins which modulate the expression of RNA and DNA, we should find that there is only a single level of description at work, in other words there should be an absence of meta levels of description. Such informational mechanisms as error correction codes, operating systems, compilers, hyperlinking (computational nonlocality, if you will) are all examples of metal levels at work within a text or within a computer program which exhibits meta levels and bespeaking a language and programming infrastructure that possesses too much specified complexity to have arisen from passively filtered entropy fluctuations.

The problem of initial conditions and inherent chaotic dynamics of the universe. Initial conditions have to be distributed across time. People secretly identify the unknown with the sum of things they know they don't know and forget to consider the vastly larger domain of unknown unknowns. Behavioral genetics and the Mr. Potato Head theory. www.nri.eu.com/NRI2EN.pdf Every theory of Darwin's day has since been overthrown or at least revolutionized and each replaced by a modern theory that emerged in the light of much later discoveries that were completely or largely unsuspected in Darwin’s time...every theory, that is, except Darwin's. Is this happy coincidence or is there a logical explanation at work here? Does the sociology of science really have nothing valid to say on this question? If so, then this only compounds the coincidence and raises more serious suspicions of question-begging. Milton's bonding of angelic beings… Heaven is not all of the best stuff on earth with none of the bad stuff We must distinguish between persons whose minds interface with reality at the surface versus those whose minds interface reality at a hypersurface. http://www.whynotcatholicism.com/indulgences-for-dummies-109.html http://ourladystears.blogspot.com/2008/11/indulgences-fordummies.html?m=1 An example of bootstrapping is when accidental attributes end up becoming central or defining attributes of a system.

Biocentrism rather than demonstrating that life is necessary for the existence of the universe just the converse is demonstrated namely that all of our theories are not about the world or the things in the world outside of the mind but all of our theories are about the self Apply the anthropic principle to the self-negotiating the myriad quantum universe branching’s. All of one's parallel selves are merely zombie versions of one's true self. Continuing with this logic ones true self continually enters parallel quantum universes that are largely populated by zombie versions of other people from one's original or home quantum universe. 'The importance of untangle meant for determining space-time structure is something that 3 years ago only a few of us were thinking about says than Van Raamsdonk. Now a lot of people are realizing that it's an important piece of our thinking about quantum gravity.' 'The great quantum space time tangle' by Adam Becker. 'The great quantum space-time tangle' published by New Scientist SPACE-TIME, the very fabric of our universe, may be a tangled place. Entanglement, a feature of quantum mechanics that links objects over great distances, could be responsible for its structure. It all sounds a little wild, but the id http://www.scribd.com/doc/120240261/A-Great-Idea-At-The-Time http://www.scribd.com/collections/3431581/science-2 http://www.scribd.com/doc/139912694/Einstein-Albert-Infeld-LeopoldDie-Evolution-Der-Physik About 551 documents for 'quantum collapse wavefunction consciousness "Wigner's friend"' July 2013

With regard to the fundamentals, e.g., metaphysics, epistemology, ethics, religion, politics, etc., all smart people, or at least all people who

fancy themselves smart, have already made up their minds as to on which side of the issues they stand. So any polemical work does well to state up front what ax is being ground with the understanding that the work shall only serve, if it succeeds at all, in providing grist to already like-minded souls, who are more or less passionate about the positions on the issues, which they hold in common with the author. If a goodly many of these kindred spirits perceive that the author’s work provides them with additional rational justification for already long held intellectual prejudices, then the polemical work offered has every chance of being a success. By and large humans do not hear much less do they heed messages from outside of their respective echo chambers. It is the height of arrogance to believe that one is skilled enough to fashion an argument which can succeed in changing some smart person’s stand on any important issue. Experienced polemicists know this and yet they still devote much effort to conceiving clever arguments and submitting them for publication. The motivation here is primarily desire for monetary gain. August 2013

“If we consider all possible worlds there may be plenty of universes with naturally occurring fine-tuned constants, but there may be more fine-tuned universes that have a god who set those constants. This argument rests on the assumption that the most likely explanation for improbable (in this particular sense) non-evolved things is intelligence. It is more of analogical argument and might be summarized as: "from our experience we can see that non-evolved things that exhibit the characteristics of being delicately balanced to achieve something complex (in this case life) are more likely to be designed than to come about by chance". As au=Plantinga puts it: "It's as if there are a large number of dials that have to be tuned to within extremely narrow limits for life to be possible in our universe. It is extremely unlikely that this should happen by chance, but much more likely that this should happen if there is such a person as God", c.f., http://themeatyard.blogspot.com/search/label/Alvin_Plantinga

How can the probability of a coin toss turning up as either heads or tails be 50 percent, given the more or less causal determination of the flipping of each coin? 'Eine unendlich überlegene Wissenschaft' there is no English phrase which sounds as good in the ear of Englishmen or an American as this phrase sounds in the ear of a German speaker. The linguistic constraints of rhyme, meter and cadence, which are peculiar to a particular tongue do not only limit what one can say or translate from one language into another, but also underlie the profundity of what is said and can be said in some instances. There is a non-logical component to the halting trial and error process of scientific discovery which cannot be intersubjectively communicated to successive generations of scientists, which is always lost in that process, but which is a key component to the underlying creative intelligence of scientific discovery. We know that god is not looking but not that he does not exist because of the existence of as yet uncollapsed wavefunctions. Can we generalize the Monty Hall probability puzzle by casting God in the role of Monty Hall in such a way as to explain wavefunction collapse? The Wheeler delayed choice experiment does not prove that there is backwards in time causation rather it demonstrates that a moment of time takes time to be integrated at the quantum level. June

2013

The superposition of macroscopic objects points up the importance of quantum entanglement between sub Planck mass cellular units, each maintaining its own coherence and unitary evolution although simultaneously nonlocally connected, at least each to its neighbors. Hierarchical entanglement and the role of consciousness in piecing out the macroscopic world.

'Quantum gravity and consciousness - what's the connection? Following Stuart Hameroff, Roger Penrose and their ORCH-OR theory, as well as au= Robert Lanza's Biocentrism, we say that, because of the Planck massenergy quantum decoherence limit, the microworld and the macroworld must shake hands, as it were inside our own heads, but only there. The only thing we know of with the power of the bootstrap is consciousness itself, and so a workable 'theory of everything', i e., a theory of 'something's coming from nothing' has to be sought there. I mean, a 'philosophical zombie' is not going to give us such a theory.' July 2013

"Shannon information with its notion of information being equivalent to a reduction in uncertainty does not take into account the intentionality and context sensitivity of information (the "uncertainty" must be "about something" because information itself - as interpreted data - must be "about something"). Reductionistic causal links dissolve into the inherent fuzziness of space-time (at the micro level), which is dictated by the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. It is intuitively evident that this fuzziness is dynamic and forms the substrate of the very operation of mind as a particular instantiation of consciousness even though mind cannot possess or conceive of a general notion, concept or category of what consciousness is, c.f., Gödel’s Incompleteness. Consciousness *as such* on the other hand, may well be more fundamental than this "spacetime fuzziness", which may indeed rather represent the natural indefatigable restlessness of this broader consciousness - what eastern mystics term "the play of Lila". The infinite regress prompted by the question, "why is there something rather than nothing", is not a reductio ad absurdum. It is rather the inevitably dynamic nature and restless condition of being. Quantum decoherence prevents the collapse of the causal chain (at the macro level) and thus allows the operation of temporality. In a subtly analogous way, quantum decoherence also prevents the reduction of the higher pleasures of life such as spiritual or intellectual pleasures to mere utilitarian calculated sums of equivalent small quantities of direct stimulation of the hominidape brain's pleasure center. In short, quantum decoherence introduces

just enough of just the right compartmentalization of experience in order to prevent the annihilation of spiritual potentiality which is otherwise borne of the totalization of experience as reprocessed stimulusresponse." They use the right language that proves they understand the problem. We don't need a concept of consciousness if there is only one consciousness. 'One of a kind' is not a kind and is a contradiction in terms. Daniel Yergin ....The Quest....lady on metro is intently reading. The information for the Cambrian explosion might have existed in reservoir during the Precambrian this is doubtful What else is entailed by supposing that if the evolutionary process was not actually random but possessed a kind of lookahead capability that the rate of evolution would simply be increased without any qualitative difference in the kinds of living organisms that evolutionary process produced? Latent information in reservoir as it were is equivalent to assuming a look ahead capability or teleology in evolutionary development. There is a very definite limit to the amount of information that can be drive from reprocessing pre-existing information in the absence of the introduction of any altogether new information that is June 2013

This notion of all together new information which necessarily comes from outside of the system rather than simply resulting from the reprocessing or reshuffling of information already latent in the system is interesting in connection with the theory of intelligent design. The paradox of functional information is that non- functional information plays an essential role in providing the infrastructural context which is

metainformation. If the universe has always been here, then why hasn't it collapsed under the weight of the trash piled up outside? There should be a big difference between genetic bootstrapping and the mere execution of a genetic algorithm. Quantum nucleation instead of singularity, decoherence, self- existence, thermodynamics. What if being and existence are derivative categories in but tiny portions of the unlimited? Such questions are prompted by meditation upon the notion of transcendence. Free will means if the unlimited opportunity is given humanity to go back and replay its historical course, then human history would never replay the same way twice, but only occasionally appear to do so. @$The singularity occurs at the point at which our software merges with the ancestor simulation software. August 2013

Given a properly full blooded concept of transcendence, existence itself becomes a predicate. This is because existence would no longer be the most general mode of being, but merely one mode of being alongside other modes of being, e.g., mathematical subsistence, and it would then become meaningful to speak of existence as a predicate, since existence would not then itself be utmost in generality. Can we generalize the Monty Hall probability puzzle by casting God in the role of Monty Hall in such a way as to explain wavefunction collapse? The Wheeler delayed choice experiment does not prove that there is backwards in time causation rather it demonstrates that a moment of time takes t me to be integrated at the quantum level. I wonder what Alvin Plantinga and Joseph Campbell would have made of the logic of the anthropic principle had they encountered it during their heyday as philosophers. The transcendental nature of the anthropic cosmological principle consists in the fact that this principle applies equally to each and every person amongst the myriad persons that exist in this universe.

The initial and boundary conditions of the universe are after a fashion like a Bible Code palimpsest. It depends on which encryption key code (in the sense of consciousness as individualized hard encryption) one applies in interpreting this cosmological Bible code in these boundary and initial conditions as to which solipsistic cosmological principle is realized in actuality. December 2012

The only thing we know of in the universe that isn’t a mechanism is 1) consciousness and 2) wavefunction collapse/reduction of the state vector. Time as fundamental apriori form/Kantian supercategory or intuition. Bergson says that consciousness is the intuition of time’s passing, i.e., Bergson’s Duree’. So we apparently must seek the chronology protection mechanism in consciousness itself. The mechanism of hard encryption is also intimately associated with consciousness, c.f., the absolute mutual compartmentalization of personal or individual consciousness. We already noted that decoherence rate is the one temporal aspect which resists the otherwise universal action of time dilation, which is an indication that the mechanism of time dilation is, according to this selfsame logic, to be sought in the underlying mechanism of quantum decoherence. July 2013

The magnitude of gravitational field intensity is ceteris paribus correlated with the strength of gravitational time dilation (weak field approximation), but is also thought to drive, in part at least, quantum decoherence, itself a temporal process. Quantum decoherence appears the only temporal process currently known to science whose rate is not subject to gravitational time dilation in the same uniform manner as indeed are all other known temporal (physical) processes. This suggests that the mechanism underlying quantum decoherence may be among the building blocks of the mechanism of gravitation. The discovery of any remaining building blocks of this mechanism perhaps have to await the identification of further nonuniformities in the response of specific physical processes to the effects of gravitational time dilation. Now if

per impossible some form of dualism turned out to be the case, then we might anticipate some new form of deep space sickness in the form of a kind of insidious and cumulative impairment of normal mental functioning experienced by astronauts during long voyages in zero gee or artificial gravity, say via nonuniform alternation in tubulin dimer decoherence in relation to the temporal evolution of brain quantum coherent states and this on account of the twofold differential action of gravitational time dilation upon quantum brain coherent and de-coherent processes, heretofore unseen by the processes of natural selection which originally fashioned an astronaut’s hominid ape’s brain. It is obvious that if there was sufficient chemicals self-organization at the level of atoms and simple organic molecules to drive forward the first billion years of chemical evolution prior to the advent of a unit of heredity then the first primitive organisms would have arisen everywhere across the surface of the earth and at more or less the same time. So Darwin's notion of descent with modification from a common primitive ancestor is thus seen to be readily falsified. Neither chance nor necessity can explain the origin of specified complexity in the genome. There is a third category which is the action of an intelligent will of a designer or genetic engineer. The third category is not self-organization operating exclusively on its own but that of a self-organizing dynamic operating under the influence and input of intelligence or conscious mind. Information doesn’t come from the physics and the chemistry, but out of how these processes are deployed or arranged just like how general anesthesia is not induced as a result of a specific chemical action. May 2013

But there's still the problem of how to avoid the seeming necessity of extending the logic of the anthropic cosmological principle from the penultimate fine-tuning of physical constants in terms of making carbonbased life a winning possibility to the ultimate fine-tuning of said constants in terms of *my* consciousness - inevitable in the fullness of infinite time (what is called the fine-tuning of consciousness) - that is,

within the context of a "Mixmaster multiverse" wherein every possible individual consciousness, yours, mine, Bhoutros Bhoutros Gali's, etc. is inevitably at some point called forth unbidden from the screaming abyss *into its own anthropically, er, uh, solipsistically fine-tuned, biocentric universe* populated by yours truly and a host of also-ran "philosophical zombies". http://wwwastro.physics.ox.ac.uk/~ddarg/pdf/FT_of_consciousness.pdf The happy appearances within this otherwise dismal poly-solipsistic scenario are presumably only saved by admitting, contra hyp, those aforementioned Boltzmann brains, albeit quantum-entangled ones (by virtue of BB's necessarily being engendered within a unitary underlying, fundamental physical, which is to say, quantum, process, e.g., "Big Bang" or whatever). The cash value of objectivity is "intersubjectivity" although logically the "subjective" (read here: "infra-subjective") has no analysis in "inter-subjective" terms. This emergent economy of rationally selfinterested, though cosmically lonely transcendent beings who are inadvertently collaborating to produce the workaday world of utilitarian common sense seems unavoidable when you consider that the realm of limitation (space, time, causality, and so on) provides the only possible avenue of escape for beings otherwise forever bored by the powerful illusion of knowing everything. This headlong dive into the realm of limitation is foolhardy based as it was upon a hope against hope that there must be others who are similarly bored. [insert forgotten quotation by Bertrand Russell on the power of boredom] [insert spooky quote by Wittgenstein on the necessity of remaining silent]Posted on May 23, 2013 in response to Jeremy White’s assertion that I could throw away my melatonin and not stay up worrying about Boltzmann Brains because the latest development in string theory had rendered BB’s highly improbable. June

2013

@$web=

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQPRqHZRP68 Combine Plantinga’s modal ontological argument (MOA) for God’s existence with the multiverse of Tipler and Barrow’s Anthropic Cosmological Principle (ACP) through identification of the term, “possible world” in the MOA with “universe” in the ACP in which these

universes comprise the multiverse. In so doing one naturally asks oneself the question: would I have been called forth from the void (by the solipsistic cosmological principle (SCP), i.e., the logic of the ACP applied and brought down to the level at which each self-aware mind is generated - by the multiverse) into a universe in which God, who is admittedly possible in some universes, i.e., “possible worlds”, is not possible? Perhaps only as a “philosphical zombie” (in other words only as an entity that others might confuse with being me). An important supplementary question here is…does God fail to exist in universes in which He is possible, which given God’s omnipotence should be rephrased as the following…does God choose not to exist in any universes in which He is possible, still more in which I now exist? To wit, did God abandon me? If so, then for what possible reason? The modal ontological argument can be attacked at an additional point to that of the concept or definition of a “maximally great being”. This second weak point of the MOA, which I have never seen anyone attack before is this notion that the actual world is included in the set of all possible worlds. But just as “fire must be breathed” into the equations of physics in order for our mathematically describable universe to be real as opposed to merely possible, some crucial factor sets the real world apart from this world as merely hypothetical. Similarly, there is an important distinction between an eigenvector in a quantum superposition and its corresponding eigenvalue as an experimental outcome of the collapse of the superposition’s wavefunction. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4QFsKevTXs June 2013

"The logic of the Anthropic Cosmological Principle (and in particular the update of this principle by quantum multiverse theory), truly only applies to the individual ego or *its* consciousness. It is mere courtesy which permits this principle to be applied to humankind as a whole and still more to carbon-based life," c.f., wik= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropic_principle#Character_of_anthropic_reaso ning But of course any argument which cannot be communicated (because of the necessary absence of an audience to hear and understand it) must be rejected out of hand. (yahoo email signature updated 06/01/2013 in an email of au=Russ Kick’s

cit=

TUTTO QUELLO CHE SAI È FALSO to Leah Haight).

One should, of course go on to consider the probabilities of the polysolipsistic cosmological principle. Each of us is “here” as a conscious being entertaining the logic of the anthropic cosmological principle and so the fact of one’s being “here” means that the universe or multiverse (in which a rampant fecundity principle is a corollary) had to be structured and function in just such a manner as to bring oneself into self-conscious existence. This notion carries the implication that the varying temporal (or multi-temporal for that matter) conditions that from eternity past had conspired to bring one into being, unbidden from the “screaming abyss” were enabling factors, i.e., some finite set of necessary conditions, say like the application of cold water, slaps to the face and smelling salts to a person who has fallen unconscious rather than a sufficient condition for creation of one’s self, whole-cloth ex nihilo. "There are great ideas, undiscovered breakthroughs available, to those who can remove one of truths protective layers" - Neil Armstrong, July 20, 1994 November 2012 That protective layer is what is called “the obvious”, i.e., that which obviates. Culturally based or traditional truth is pathdependent truth, which is to say conditional truth and points up an important question for philosophy: is path-independent or unconditional truth ever given or if such exists, but is not “given” can it nonetheless be accessed? (Leading us back into the notion of path-dependence, but now at a meta level). June 2013

Because the seemingly genetically hard-wired confounding of the rules of implication in the human brain, specifically that of modus ponens with modus tollens – undoubtedly selected for on account of its having all along worked more often than not, humans are inclined to confuse correlations for causal connections, think teleologically and still more characteristically, to regularly indulge in magical thinking. Mystical thinking, still more, i.e., the tendency to conceptualize in terms of all but rather than nothing but is also probably owing to this inborn

informal logic, which has been moreover promoted and sustained by the always unification/systematization-transcending “mosaic logic” of the consciousness-diversity-infused and highly social breeding population, which, after all, is what nature has all along been selecting for rather than the perfectly adapted individual/ego, which must be Gödelianincomplete as a survival-problem-solving-analytical engine! Coherence necessarily contains within itself the very seeds of incoherence (in the sense of not ultimately being practical as a survival strategy)! This is why the ideologues and system builders of western culture are so fascinating to study, historically speaking, but are so boring to attempt to understand on their own terms. "I know that most men, including those at ease with problems of the greatest complexity, can seldom accept even the simplest and most obvious truth, if it be such as would oblige them to admit the falsity of conclusions which they have delighted in explaining to colleagues, which they have proudly taught to others, and which they have woven thread by thread into the fabric of their lives." - Leo Tolstoy “One night, lightning struck the oak tree. Eddie saw it the next morning. It lay broken in half, and he looked into its trunk as into the mouth of a black tunnel. The trunk was only an empty shell; its heart had rotted away long ago; there was nothing inside—just a thin gray dust that was being dispersed by the whim of the faintest wind. The living power had gone, and the shape it left had not been able to stand without it. Years later, he heard it said that children should be protected from shock, from their first knowledge of death, pain or fear. But these had never scarred him; his shock came when he stood very quietly, looking into the black hole of the trunk. It was an immense betrayal—the more terrible because he could not grasp what it was that had been betrayed. It was not himself, he knew, nor his trust; it was something else. He stood there for a while, making no sound, then he walked back to the house. He never spoke about it to anyone, then or since.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged

You cannot quantize the probability of your falling in love with a given attractive and desirable person, which is to say that this probability cannot be represented as the absolute square of any possible wavefunction. http://reformedreflections.ca/other-religions/the-r-c-bible.pdf “This belief, however, elevates fallible human thought on par with the infallible Word of God. And what we discover is not a development of doctrine but a departure from it.” **Not if the HS guided the selection of books that were included in the Vulgate, and those who were guided in this were also guided in the development of early Church traditions and teachings.** “Rome does not allow private interpretation of Scripture out of fear that heresy could undermine the authority of the Bible and the Church.” **Just think about what a serious problem heresies were to the early Church. If one accepts the existence of a positive principle of evil (as opposed to a mere absence of good), does one imagine that this principle remained uncharacteristically silent and uninvolved with influencing the creation and dissemination of heresies? What better way to attack the Church than at its root, that is to say, during its infancy?** “Pope Leo XIII (1810-1903) stated: "God has delivered the Holy Scripture to the Church, and.... in reading and making use of His Word, (men) must follow the Church as their guide and teacher.” **So the Church should have just allowed members of the illiterate masses of all cultures and historical traditions to read the Holy Scriptures on their own, unsupervised and without any instruction as to interpretation and application of those Scriptures? Really? ** “The same Pope also said that it is impossible for any legitimate interpretation to be extracted from the Bible that is at variance with the

doctrine of the Church. Any interpretation that is opposed to Church doctrine is therefore false.” **The fundamentalist Protestant principle of Sola Scriptura could have only become viable after the fashion of the creation of a metabolic by-product as opposed to the spontaneous generation of a wholly intact DNA molecule within the primeval, prebiotic soup. Moreover, Sola Scriptura is supported by a vast infrastructure of Theological Seminaries. ** “In other words, the RC church professes to provide divine guidance for her members. She demands recognition as the infallible interpreter of the Scriptures.” **This is a twisting of words: the guidance to her members provided by the Church is informed by divine guidance. A Church that is not guided by God is no Church at all, but merely a house of spiritual complacency. There is an equivocation of doctrine vs. interpretation of doctrine here - God provides the former, while His Church provides the latter. ** “The 16th century Reformers were in unanimous agreement in their opposition when Rome claimed that teaching authority lay in the magisterium with the pope as its chief shepherd under Christ.” **To what do we owe the vast proliferation of Protestant denominations and their further 1st, 2nd, etc. order splinterings, which shows the triumph of chaos over the intention to faithfully transmit God's message down the generations?** “The Reformation of the Church was the Lord's intervention to lead His church back to the Gospel. The decline of medieval Christianity was very gradual. The more serious errors didn't arise until as late as the 14th and 15th centuries. Eventually the result of this descending darkness was serious. The problem was with what Rome had added to the Bible over the centuries.” **The errors, accumulated over many centuries more or less harmlessly, not having reached any critical threshold, only arrived at this threshold just at the end of the Middle Ages and just at the advent of the Renaissance - mere coincidence?** “The Protestant Old Testament is the same as the Hebrew Scriptures

(except for the order of the books). Roman Catholics, on the other hand, add additional books – Tobit, Judith, Wisdom of Solomon, Ecclesiasticus, Baruch and 1 & 2 Maccabees – as well as some extra sections to Daniel and Esther, to form their version of the Old Testament. Though most of the Old Testament books are quoted frequently by New Testament writers, these extra RC books are never quoted.” **Many books, over two dozen, in point of fact, are quoted from in the Old Testament that were themselves not included in the Canon of Scripture.** Sense perceptual juxtapositions that produce multimodal cognitive dissonance make excellent vectors for the insertion of wordless artistically fertile metaphors. #$

Add personal Kantian Metaphors here

Can we utilize and understand metaphor without being taken in, captured, hypnotized by metaphor (narrative structure)? Off the autism axis – between autistic and “normal”, disjointed recollected biography leaves room for revisionism, rationalization and higher integration (2d time). Dreams and multi-dimensional time, c.f., /\E/\t in the context of 2d time. Without transcendent universal mind there is no distinction between consciousness being a One or a many. The collective mass of what we don't know we know. And of course, it is this inherent and perhaps unbounded multifacetedness of the individually collected human experiential data, which must transcend the meaning of individual human experience (as attributed by each individual to his or her own experience) that so strongly suggests the reality of the transcendent realm and its Deity. But what services this “unbounded multifacetedness” is the underlying rationality of language qua infrastructure of intersubjectivity. This transcendent realm may be thought to be akin to Saussure's "unlimited semiosis". Deity is implied

by the notion that there is an objective observer that is in turn implied by the necessity of an ultimate “tying off” point of this otherwise unbounded semiosis. August 2012

Having the epiphany that you personally don’t really know anything at all means that Man’s knowledge can be at best but a collective illusion. . . and all this within the context of a sheer abundance of grace. How can one not then have faith upon recognizing the Providence involved in such a coherent manifestation of the radical unknown. One is called forth from the Void and enters the world from one unknown only to pass from it into another unknown. What is lost on some is that the world itself is yet a third unknown, rendering the first and the latter qualitatively distinct. And so metaphysical work can only be performed by experience if it is possible to transcend all dual opposite categories. You emerged into the world from a hole you didn’t crawl into and shall leave it from a hole you can’t crawl out of. No one as they say, “gets out of here alive”. “If a man is standing in the middle of the forest speaking and there is no woman around to hear him - Is he still wrong?” “Yep...because of the X chromosome lurking in each cell of his body.” “Clay tablets would have been better” Comment about the fragility of digital media data storage. http://www.scribd.com/search?category= HYPERLINK "http://www.scribd.com/search? category=&language=1&num_pages=100%2B&filetype=pdf&uploaded _on=&paid=false&query=%22Introduction+to+Virology%22"& HYPERLINK "http://www.scribd.com/search? category=&language=1&num_pages=100%2B&filetype=pdf&uploaded _on=&paid=false&query=%22Introduction+to+Virology %22"language=1 HYPERLINK "http://www.scribd.com/search? category=&language=1&num_pages=100%2B&filetype=pdf&uploaded _on=&paid=false&query=%22Introduction+to+Virology%22"&

HYPERLINK "http://www.scribd.com/search? category=&language=1&num_pages=100%2B&filetype=pdf&uploaded _on=&paid=false&query=%22Introduction+to+Virology %22"num_pages=100%2B HYPERLINK "http://www.scribd.com/search? category=&language=1&num_pages=100%2B&filetype=pdf&uploaded _on=&paid=false&query=%22Introduction+to+Virology%22"& HYPERLINK "http://www.scribd.com/search? category=&language=1&num_pages=100%2B&filetype=pdf&uploaded _on=&paid=false&query=%22Introduction+to+Virology %22"filetype=pdf HYPERLINK "http://www.scribd.com/search? category=&language=1&num_pages=100%2B&filetype=pdf&uploaded _on=&paid=false&query=%22Introduction+to+Virology%22"& HYPERLINK "http://www.scribd.com/search? category=&language=1&num_pages=100%2B&filetype=pdf&uploaded _on=&paid=false&query=%22Introduction+to+Virology %22"uploaded_on= HYPERLINK "http://www.scribd.com/search? category=&language=1&num_pages=100%2B&filetype=pdf&uploaded _on=&paid=false&query=%22Introduction+to+Virology%22"& HYPERLINK "http://www.scribd.com/search? category=&language=1&num_pages=100%2B&filetype=pdf&uploaded _on=&paid=false&query=%22Introduction+to+Virology %22"paid=false HYPERLINK "http://www.scribd.com/search? category=&language=1&num_pages=100%2B&filetype=pdf&uploaded _on=&paid=false&query=%22Introduction+to+Virology%22"& HYPERLINK "http://www.scribd.com/search? category=&language=1&num_pages=100%2B&filetype=pdf&uploaded _on=&paid=false&query=%22Introduction+to+Virology%22"query= %22Introduction+to+Virology%22 Begrudging the cultural and artistic expressions of others. Two forms of the very same kind of blind faith: that of the “God of the Gaps” versus “Science will eventually find the answers”. What are the implications of a radical logical self-consistency approach to a theory of truth? How does the principle of quantum superposition endanger the law of

excluded middle? Or does quantum superposition actually support the excluded middle? The principle of the loose ends only showing on the underside of the carpet? Is behavioral genetics fundamentally responsible for the coherence and cohesiveness of the perceived external world and society? http://www.scribd.com/doc/33520644/The-Nature-of-Qualia-aNeurophilosophical-Analysis-PhD-Dissertation-de-Sousa www.forgottenbooks.org ROUTLEDGE PHILOSOPHY GUIDEBOOKS Edited by Tim Crane and Jonathan Wolff, University College London @? Develop a list of kernel idea search terms to facilitate expanding expositions of the ideas in this text. (Actually, hyperlinked Excel spreadsheets should be developed for all of the above superscripted “footnotes” to include hyperlinking different Excel objects together. Better yet the Excel spreadsheets should merely exist in potentia as queries to an Access database. Developing a list of key terms, that is, those with say, more than 100 hits within this document, might facilitate this. “There is no remembrance of men of old, and even those who are yet to come will not be remembered by those who follow.” - Ecclesiastes 1:11. “Whosoever reflects on four things, it were better for him if he had not come into the world: what is above; what is beneath; what is before; and what is after.” - The Mishnah, Hagigah 2:1 “I could say harsh things about it but I cannot bring myself to do it—it is like hitting a child. Man is not to blame for what he is.... He is flung

head over heels into this world without ever a chance to decline, and straightaway he conceives and accepts the notion that he is in some mysterious way under obligations to the unknown Power that inflicted this outrage upon him...” – Reflections on Religion, Mark Twain My contributions to these writings during the period, January thru November 2011 were made while deployed to Bagram Airfield, Afghanistan with the 415th MI BN in support of DFIP operations for OEF. Contributions made during July 2003 through February 2004 were made during my deployment to Gjilane, Kosovo as THT 6 Team Sergeant in support of KFOR’s HUMINT collection efforts in support of OEF there. By the way, if you happen upon these writings and it is not yet mid-century (by that I mean the 21st !) then permit me to indulge in a bit of naïve, wishful thinking by saying that there is perhaps a fair chance that I’m still knocking about this rock and feel free to provide me with your feedback @[email protected]. Bitte Schön.

July 2011

The perception of one’s own intentional thought process is temporally interwoven with the perception of sense data, memory as well that of one’s own bodily movements and orchestrated within Libet’s 500 millisecond window of pre-consciousness in just such a way as to maintain awareness of intention and action as interconnected so as to present the appearance of a freely acting “center of volition.” This brings up the puzzling question of what might indeed be the value to natural selection of merely the appearance of a self possessing a free will if in fact the continual stable appearance to the human animal of its possessing a self as the author of its own decisions and actions is an illusion without substantive causal efficacy. We sometimes revisit perforce the haughty metaphysical opinions of our youth because the passing of all the learning and experience of the

decades has done nothing to undermine them and these same opinions if refined and dressed up as though uttered by a mature person will not so quickly be dismissed out of hand and thus lend their weight to sober consideration. cit=

ArXiv: hep-th/9308061v1: au= “Aharonov, Anandan, and Vaidman [1] have recently argued that in addition to its usual epistemological role, the wave function in quantum mechanics in certain situations also has an ontological status. In other words, in addition to acting as a device in the theory to encode the conditions (of our knowledge of the world) it must also, in certain circumstances, be regarded as real [italics mine], in the sense that one can completely determine an unknown wavefunction of a single system as opposed to an ensemble of states [italics mind]. Certainly if their claim were true, that one could take a single system with an unknown wavefunction, and completely determine that wave function on that single system, one would have to accord the wave function a reality on the grounds that that which is measurable is real. In the course of this paper I will argue that they have failed to establish the measurability of the wave function, and thus have failed in their attempt to demonstrate the reality of the wave function. The argument is however subtle. Thus the plan of this paper will be to first discuss the problem of reality in quantum mechanics, to set stage for the question that they are trying to answer.” My comment: au=Aharanov proved the reality of A, the vector potential so that if A is identified with the photon wavefunction (see au=Bohm in this connection), then the reality of Psi has been adequately demonstrated. "Science proceeds as if the past was the home of explanation; whereas the future and the future alone holds the key to the mysteries of the present. When that first cell divided, the meaning of that division was to be discovered in the future, not in the past; when some pre-human ancestor first uttered a human sound, the significance of that sound was to be

interpreted by human language, not by apish grunts; when the first plant showed solicitude for its seed, the interest of that solicitude lay in the promise of maternal affection. Things must be judged in the light of the coming morning, not in the setting stars." (au=Sedgwick, 1916) And here it is again as stated by au=Terence McKenna: “For me, the key to unlocking what is going on with history, creativity, and progressive processes of all sorts is to see the state of completion at the end as a kind of higher-dimensional object that casts an enormous and flickering shadow over the lower dimensions of organization, of which this universe is one”, c.f., cit=Trialogues at the Edge of the West. Philosophers have a term for this: causal supervenience. The details of how causal supervenience works may forever remain mysterious, however, in general we can say that in must involve the spontaneity (whether or not intended) of vacuum fluctuations, which are correlated in a manner which does not support a time-reversible causal connection. Presumably entropy-laden, irreversible processes also have a causal (time-reversible) physical basis, at least with respect to sufficiently small scales of spacetime, but at some sufficiently large spacetime scale, the nature of the correlation of vacuum fluctuations underlying the physical process in question invokes quantum entanglement that is not reversible. (Relevant to the issue of wavefunction collapse/state vector reduction). Given that quantum entanglement is a relation of absolute simultaneity, i.e., in all reference frames, we suspect the irreversibility comes into play on account of higher dimensions of temporality. November 2012 Quantum decoherence is intimately connected with entropy, statistics (probability) and temporal irreversibility. Reversibility of time seems to require an additional degree of freedom best provisioned within a plane of complex or otherwise multidimensional time. April 2011 “

Sedgwick’s principle” is particularly relevant in connection with higher order regulation of gene expression. 98.5% of the DNA base pair patterns in the human genome are held in common with the Chimpanzee

and the Bonobo Ape. Approximately 50% of base pair sequences are the common genetic heritage of both humans and the lowly yeast mold. Recent research reveals that approximately 50% of human DNA is also of viral origin. Perhaps so much of human DNA is of viral origin because these viral genes are leftover “vectors” utilized in the distant past as means of inserting gene sequences which otherwise would have taken too long to develop on their own via natural evolutionary processes. August 2011 Viruses, which are not included in either of the three Linnaean Kingdoms of taxonomic classification – well, arguably there are now four as of this writing, because they are not considered by biologists to be alive, seem to predate the appearance of the first unit of heredity, i.e. DNA and/or RNA, and so must have originated and developed according to the intrinsic self-organizing properties of atoms and molecules – what is thought to have been responsible for the first billion years of chemical evolution that took place prior to and wholly in the absence of Darwinian natural selection. Because viruses function so efficiently within the cell and cell nucleus as well as interoperate admirably with strings of DNA and/or RNA, both reorganizing genetic base pair sequences as well as altering the expression of these same sequences, it is tempting to suppose that viruses themselves originated within ancient living cells or cellular nuclei. But this would of course land us in a “chicken or the egg” paradox. November 2012 To recap: viruses came about prior to DNA/RNA, which themselves were necessary for the appearance of the first cells, but interoperate with both, even though viruses originated in an exclusively self-organizing process that is not dependent upon natural selection. And now, however, we are expected to accept on faith that random chance mutations working in combination with natural selection alone succeeded in bringing into being the entire spectrum of biological order that we witness today all around us. August 2011 This reminds us of the case in which a shattered hologram is gradually reassembled and meanwhile the image encoded in the hologram becomes ever sharper. (Do base pair sequences within viruses function akin to metaphors in relation to the base pair sequences of the DNA within the cellular machinery that the invading virus subverts?) Now if this impossibly causally twisted temporal relationship could be

shown to be a mere projection or shadow (appearance) of what is occurring in a higher dimension onto some lower dimension, then this paradox would be solved or, rather dissolved. Since causal relationships within 1-dimensional time are, according to Bohm’s causal principle, equivalent to a specific set of correlated vacuum fluctuations, but which only constitutes a tiny subset of the total array of correlated fluctuations within the quantum vacuum, we may seek the needed higher dimensional causal relationships, i.e., causal relationships within higher temporal dimensions, within the quantum vacuum, perhaps within its higher order, e.g., 2nd, 3rd, 4th loop, etc. (There is a New Scientist article of recent writing entitled something to the effect of “matter is composed of vacuum fluctuations”). Or perhaps even confining ourselves to 1 st order fluctuations, if two or more sets of frequencies can be shown to be orthogonal, out of which distinct time series can be constructed, then this may be strong indication of higher temporal dimensionality. (This orthogonality is distinctly different from that by which functions of different frequencies are assigned different weighting coefficients within a Fourier expansion of a single time domain function). August 2012

A unit of heredity is to natural selection as a rational individual is to the free market. Both DNA and the rational individual are providential kernels that grace their respective dynamical systems while transcending the scope of explanation supported by the logic of either. April 2011

What makes mankind different from his more primitive apelike forebears is not so much distinct differences in genetic base pair sequences as it is differences in the regulation of the expression of these genes held in common with earlier or less evolved life forms. There has been simultaneously two trains of evolution operating: evolution of the individual gene and evolution of the regulation of the expression of genes and gene sequences. It appears that the “temporal space” within which evolution takes place must possess a basis of at least two dimensions. June 2011 The fact that the regulation of the expression of genetic base pair sequences is open ended implies that the interpretation of the genetic code as a language is no mere cute analogy, @# but is a

fact of some profound and enduring significance! The context sensitivity of the genetic code is likely to be a two-way affair. The DNA only contains information if it is a component of an informational system, which is to say that any information stored in it has to have been put there and that the molecule is open to modification so as to receive additional information. All this is by way of saying that an element only contains information if it is contained within a feedback circuit or network such that the “flow of information” is two-way. April 2011

Communications refer to the necessary or important features of things without ever specifying the things themselves. Only data is transmitted between minds, which is then interpreted as information. Context gives meaning just as nonlocality gives reference. One comes from one unknown, spends the duration of one’s life in another unknown, only to pass on to still another unknown. (Aside: it is a most important life’s goal to find the message that was left waiting for one within the world into which one was born). And the two domains of the unknown bookending this infinitesimal existence, we tend to suppose are eternity past and eternity future. The question arises whether these two domains of oblivion are indeed identical or, does this mote of a single fleeting human existence enjoy or partake of the metaphysical power to divide eternity such that it must take on an aspect of everlastingness, itself of two parts. This brief speck in time represented by a human existence, converts eternity into an ever lasting oblivion. (Eternity into “everlastingness”) September 2011 I am reminded here of the playfully irreverent statement by the crucified character played by Terry Gilliam at the end of the Monty Python film, Life of Brian, which goes something like this: “you started with nothing and now you’ve ended with nothing – you haven’t lost anything!” September 2011 However, consider that the proposition, “Russell Clark does not exist” uttered in 1958 (a year before my mother conceived me) and “Russell Clark does not exist” uttered in 2058 (after I am dead) can’t possibly mean/refer to the same thing: @$in the first instance, the subject “Russell Clark” doesn’t refer to anything (only if the “Russell Clark” from the second utterance is what is intended), otherwise this term refers to any number of persons named

“Russell Clark” – past, present and future, including this Russell Clark. So intentionality doesn’t equate with reference because being and what is called existence are not coextensive categories. What distinguishes intentionality and reference, suggested above, shares some features with McTaggarts incompatible time predicates. For “Russell Clark” to successfully refer to this Russell Clark (the current one writing this), it must fail to refer to him at a certain earlier and all previous times. But there is something, which, if it were ever successfully referred to once and named at that time, it would be successfully referred to with this name at all other times. November 2012 This rather invokes the notion of registration, whether of one’s brain as a system that shall be “plugged into” and interoperate with some cosmic Internet or as a consciousness which is assigned, as it were, its own unique and delimited signal bandwidth, etc., we cannot say. September 2011 And this something is that something which avoids contradiction of the incorrigible principle, ex nihilo nihil fit. Things which don’t exist get and stay connected (say in the quantum nonlocality sense) with things that do exist via the operation of mind. In this way all things are connected regardless of what categories we might apply to them, including minds via the operation of mind. But how might two or more minds be connected when the subjective by definition is not composed of the intersubjective (“inter”-subjective), unless “inter” only obtains it meaning via the above alluded to connection principle. This is the case where the metaphysics of pluralism fails utterly and a kind of monism must take its place. Another example of failure to refer is what is called unspecified reference. An example of this is arbitrarily making up a name for a character in a story not yet conceived of and never written down. February 2012 All important philosophical, religious and evangelical atheistic writings (in fact, any writings, which imply metaphysical claims, affirmative or negative) are open-ended in that they necessarily contain equivocations of sense traceable to this confusion of the notions of being, existence and subsistence! January 2014 These evangelical atheists neglect the behavioral genetic basis of religion they ignore the fact that religion is part of the heritage of humankind.



May 2013 May 26, 2013

D-Wave Corporation recently offered a 512 Qubit chipset quantum computer capable of accessing 10154.127 distinct quantum states to perform a calculation. Lime Cat D-Wave Corporation recently offered quantum computer with a 512 Qubit chipset capable of accessing 10**154 distinct quantum states to perform a calculation. There's only about 10**80 particles in the observable universe. D-Wave's computer is then apparently capable of accessing 10**74 alternate universes to perform a calculation. Don't worry though, there's no people in those alternate quantum universes, just calculating zombies. The principle of spontaneous decoherence, namely that of Penrose’s “one graviton limit”, i.e., Planck mass limit in the magnitude of a single fluctuation of the vacuum, defies Leibniz’ principle that whatever conditions were sufficient to create a thing are necessary at every succeeding moment to maintain that thing in existence. We may take as a new principle that, the inadequacy of nonlocality implies the necessity of temporality. Correlated fluctuations embrace distinct subsets: those which are or are not causality preserving and/or energy conserving. This reminds us of the humorous saw that, “if it weren’t for the existence of time, everything would happen at once! The Planck mass fluctuation limit means thatcont’d August 2013

“In essence the solution to this would appear to lie in the use of gravitation theory by Penrose (2004) though the actual mechanism still needs to be fully elucidated. There and in earlier works he points out that general relativity (which must be included in an eventual integrated quantum theory, although it is still far from clear how this might be done) implies that quantum states which differ sufficiently in their gravitational fields cannot be superposed. Thus any future theory that integrates gravitation with the approach being used here will contain a lower limit for the time separation of moments of consciousness which matches the time scale on which the difference between the gravitational fields of alternative states reaches the level identified by Penrose. This limitation makes the theory consistent with data for atomic systems, while producing differences from conventional theory that should

already be detectable for large conscious systems. Note that this differs from Penrose (2004) for which only the size of the system, not its consciousness, is relevant, a criterion that may already be falsified (Schlosshauer, 2006)”, c.f., A New Quantum Theoretical Framework for Parapsychology (2008). January

2014

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1tVzGKY23hM "https://www.youtube.com/watch?

HYPERLINK v=1tVzGKY23hM&feature=youtube_gdata_player"&

HYPERLINK

"https://www.youtube.com/watch?

v=1tVzGKY23hM&feature=youtube_gdata_player"feature=youtube_gdata_player “A song for remembering lost loved ones, both departed and living.”

We are forced to presume that correlations exist and quite str ng ones those little ones exist between the various speaks on the rugged fitness landscape of biological complexity which is scaled by natural selection acting upon allegedly random mutations

The engineer is limited in his algorithm composition by Kurt Godel Incompleteness Theorem however random mutation is not in this way limited.

There is a point of diminishing returns perhaps unknown to intelligent design theorists where the tinkering of random mutation and natural selection can achieve deeper and subtler complexity then can be achieved by an engineer, regardless of how talented and gifted that engineer may be.

February 2014 Fcbk=

The philosophically naive error of intelligent design theorists is their presumption that grammatical chauvinism on the part of speakers of human languages possesses validity beyond the linguistic context in other words is valid is relevant to the description of objective being. They should remember that the passive construction leaves the question of a subject wholly indefinite. The adjective "intelligent" may only be a property of a fundamental process, i.e., one having no beginning in time. The noun, "design" does not necessarily imply an activity. An activity does not imply an agent. An agent does not imply an agency. An agency does not imply a founding. A founding does not imply a founder. Thanks, Michael! An old chestnut or shall I say "onion". : p. The motive behind ID is indeed disingenuous aka backdoor

creationism. Believing grammatical relationships to be as robust as logical or causal implications is my biggest criticism of the purveyors of ID. . .not their cynicism, which I take for granted. "You can't get something from nothing . . . unless its the quantum vacuum." I.e., the quantum vacuum is "nothing". And "nothing" comes from nothing...Heisenberg energy uncertainty is the causal basis of temporarily and so could have had no beginning in time And "everything" comes from "nothing" because the only difference between real and virtual particles and fields is (and here's the rub...*undifferentiated* energy). There are no things, only "things". All superposition states are collapsed by consciousness, therefore consciousness itself cannot enter into a quantum superposition state but does this in turn imply that there is only one consciousness that there cannot be orthogonal consciousnesses? fcbk=

Lynn, and are not mutually exclusive (what quantum physicists term "orthogonal") states and so cannot enter into an authentically quantum superposition. Also, because consciousness causes collapse of any and all quantum superposition states, consciousness cannot itself enter into, or form a part of, a superposition state. "Quantumness", as a property of brain functioning would not be connected in any predictable or law-like fashion, therefore to consciousness. Consequently, a quantum computer could not be expected to reliably indicate, e.g., lighting up or not lighting up when the brain or parts of the brain possess a certain type of consciousness (such as the "para-consciousness" of which you speak). I am uncertain how you define paranormal so I cannot speak to that part of your possibly whimsical question. German idealist philosophy contained the seeds of German nationalism which reached its full flowering in National Socialism.

Commonsensically, quantum nonlocality and entanglement appears to be a natural consequence of the notion of intrinsic spin which is a kind of inaccessibly internal form of angular momentum which possesses no equivalent in classical physics. There are conspiracy theorist who believe that Paul of Tarsus hijacked Christianity and realized his earlier goal of preventing the establishment of an earthly kingdom by doing away with the notion of an earthly kingdom in favor of a spiritual kingdom. Take a look at the following: http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/jefferson_jesus.html The notion in forming an aggressive regressive taxation system is one of that of the performing off work performing of work upon the economy versus performing of work within the economy which is at every turn facilitating ones productivity and profitability verses performing work upon the economy from outside where there is resistance friction and viscosity at every turn as one tends to out a small modicum of disposable income in orde to support ones family and build a modest future. August 2013

“Distinct memory/identity states of the observer (that are also his “states of knowledge”) cannot be superposed: This censorship is strictly enforced by decoherence and the resulting einselection. Distinct memory states label and “inhabit” different branches of the Everett’s “Many Worlds” Universe. Persistence of correlations is all that is needed to recover “familiar reality”. In this manner, the distinction between epistemology and ontology is washed away: To put it succinctly (Zurek, 1994) there can be no information without representation in physical states. There is usually no need to trace the collapse all the way to observer’s memory. It suffices that the states of a decohering system quickly evolve into mixtures of the preferred (pointer) states. All that can be known in principle about a system (or about an observer, also introspectively, e.g., by the observer himself) is its decoherence-resistant ‘identity tag’ – a description of its einselected state.

“Apart from this essentially negative function of a censor the environment plays also a very different role of a “broadcasting agent”, relentlessly cloning the information about the einselected pointer states. This role of the environment as a witness in determining what exists was not appreciated until now: Throughout the past two decades, study of decoherence focused on the effect of the environment on the system. This has led to a multitude of technical advances we shall review, but it has also missed one crucial point of paramount conceptual importance: Observers monitor systems indirectly, by intercepting small fractions of their environments (e.g., a fraction of the photons that have been reflected or emitted by the object of interest). Thus, if the understanding of why we perceive quantum Universe as classical is the principal aim, study of the nature of accessibility of information spread throughout the environment should be the focus of attention. This leads one away from the models of measurement inspired by the “von Neumann chain” (1932) to studies of information transfer involving branching out conditional dynamics and the resulting “fan-out” of the information throughout environment (Zurek, 1983, 1998a, 2000). This new ‘quantum Darwinism’ view of environment selectively amplifying einselected pointer observables of the systems of interest is complementary to the usual image of the environment as the source of perturbations that destroy quantum coherence of the system. It suggests the redundancy of the imprint of the system in the environment may be a quantitative measure of relative objectivity and hence of classicality of quantum states”, c.f., Decoherence, Einselection and the Quantum Origins of the Classical. “Hilary Putnam argued that ‘‘something is wrong with the [conventional] theory.’’ Superposition, an object being simultaneously in a state A and a state B, a particle behaving as if it goes simultaneously through slit 1 and slit 2, is the quantum-mechanical measurement paradox. But conditions in the macroworld are different: In the macroworld, a cat being both alive and dead at the same time does not occur; the conditions cannot be superposed. Therefore, Putnam claimed,

the assumptions of conventional quantum mechanics constitute a contradiction. He noted that Wigner (and Henry Margenau) defended the adequacy of the received view (quantum jumps, collapse of the state vector) along a somewhat different line: According to them quantum mechanics presupposes a cut between the observer and the object. Any system whatsoever can be taken as the object; however, the observer himself cannot be included. The observer always treats himself as possessing definite states which are known to him”, c.f., Wigner’s ‘‘Polanyian’’ Epistemology and the Measurement Problem. January 2012

Can it be demonstrated that the concept of temporally pure causation, i.e., pure temporal persistence, i.e., as an isolated system and in the absence of causal context of a substantive or “beable” is logically inconsistent? In a physical sense this appears impossible on account of the grounding of physical temporality in an embedding quantum vacuum energy fluctuation field (responsible for the decay of energy eigenstates, transition between energy eigenstates and temporal evolution of density functions). Could phase rotation of the system wavefunction qualify as pure, context-free temporal evolution? au=

“Von Neumann’s Process 1 is the physical aspect of the choice on the part of the human agent. Its psychologically described aspect is experienced and described as a focusing of attention and effort on some intention, and the physically described aspect consists of the associated choice of the basis vectors and of the timings of the action. Then there is a feedback quantum jump whose psychologically described aspect is experienced and described as an increment in knowledge, and whose physical aspect is a “quantum jump” to a new physical state that is compatible with that increment in knowledge”, c.f., cit=Gravity and Consciousness (35700017) Without quantum entanglement being involved in the act of perception of the outcome of a quantum experiment (likely through the quantum vacuum in which the observed system and the observer’s brain are commonly embedded), there would be the ever-present necessity of the

consciousness (whose brain it is supplying the observation to this consciousness) revamping its system of interpreting the quantum behavior of “its brain”, e.g., how does the observer synch up his subjective perception of “dead cat” vs. “live cat” with the actual Schrodinger’s cat experimental outcome of “dead cat” vs. “live cat”? November 2011

It is very significant that the prime phenomenological manifestation of the “ground of being” in the realm of physical being, i.e., “quantum entanglement” is just now making itself known. Science through the emergence of the field of the study of QE appears to be arriving at a point analogous to that of the dreamer who finds himself at the cusp between un-self-consciousness and “lucidity”. Science has finally found one of the “handles” of the “reality bootstrap mechanism” and so must be especially careful for it is just at the point of the onset of lucidity that the dream continuum encounters a bifurcation point between meta- and robust-stability. June 2012 I suspect that many of the properties of the wavefunction, particularly with respect to the function’s “fragility” are shared in common with those of the lucid dreaming state of consciousness and are manifestations of two things: 1) self-interfering feedback and 2) the limited computing capacity of the “cosmic CPU”. May 1997

Inertial mass may be based in the density of momentum exchanges taking place between the various subatomic particles and quantum fields composing a given mass, while gravitational mass may be based in the density of energy exchanges taking place between these subatomic particles/ quantum fields and the quantum vacuum field. The equivalence of inertial and gravitational masses may be an artifact of the conservation of momentum-energy uncertainty or the conservation of virtual momentum and energy as a momentum-energy fluctuation four vector within four dimensional spacetime. kwo=

“Detailed investigation by H. Poincare’ of the Lorentz detailed group invariants resulted in his discovery of the pseudo-Euclidean geometry of space-time. Precisely on such a basis, he estab-lished the four-

dimensionality of physical quantities: force, velocity, momentum, current. H.Poincar´e’s first short work ap-peared in the reports of the French Academy of sciences before A. Einstein’s work was even submitted for publication. That work contained an accurate and rigorous solution of the problem of electrodynamics of moving bodies, and at the same timeit extended the Lorentz transformations to all natural forces,of whatever origin they might be”, c.f., http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0210005v2, The Theory of Gravity by A. A. Lugunov. Relativistic mass increase may be associated with a shift in the relative densities of 3-momentum and imaginary 4-momentum exchanges taking place between the mass and itself and between the mass and its embedding quantum vacuum, respectively. (This remark added March 1, 2006 in terms of my “old parlance” of May 1997) June 2011 The reason for the equality of inertial and gravitational mass is to be found in the happy coincidence of there being a common mechanism between mass’ effect upon the vacuum and vacuum’s effect upon mass. @$ Mass is an effect of gravity’s interaction with the vacuum *and* gravity is an effect of mass’ interaction with this same vacuum. July 1997

It is only nonzero expectation values of momentum-energy which may possess gravitational or inertial mass. And what contributes to this mass is any boundary conditions placed upon the quantum vacuum field which alters this field so that the 3-momentum fluctuations and imaginary 4-momentum fluctuations do not precisely cancel. June 1998 The expectation values may always be defined in terms of a fluctuation term and an uncertainty. This fluctuation term may be intrinsic to the quantum vacuum field and the uncertainty may be associated with the observer of the quantum system. Through a kind of coherence (or resonance) between the intrinsic vacuum fluctuation term and the observer's uncertainty, the emergence of a nonzero expectation value, i.e., a classical observable, may emerge. There is no reason why we cannot attribute the entirety of the term, /\E, to the observer performing the energy-determining measurement. But to do so means that one is

considering the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle (HUP) to be entirely epistemological in nature. To attribute this uncertainty entirely to the quantum system itself is to maintain that the Heisenberg uncertainty is ontological in nature. This alternative interpretation of the HUP is not feasible, however, as the observer’s brain equally constitutes a quantum mechanical system just as does the system he is observing or performing measurements upon. The perhaps more reasonable approach to interpreting the HUP might be to compromise between the two extremes by admitting that there is a dynamic interrelationship between the uncertainties of both the observer’s brain and the quantum system he is observing. March 2006

It might be supposed that the manner in which the world appears, i.e., is perceived by the observer is merely a collaborative product of the observer and the world through the quantum interference between the correlated quantum fluctuations of the observer’s brain and the correlated quantum fluctuations constituting the system being observed. But this cannot ultimately be a correct description of the mechanism of conscious observation because the quantum correlated fluctuational structure of the observer’s brain possesses this “necessary interiority” by virtue of outstripping the brain’s embedding quantum vacuum’s computational capacity qua quantum computer.03/01/06 There must arise an exact matching or mutual coherence of internal and external frequencies for an object to become manifest. March 2006 Conscious manifestation of form within the observer’s perceptions of his environment is supported by the irreducible complexity of the quantum fluctuation-correlational structure, c.f., Rezik’s Three-way Vacuum Nonlocality, which we have said engenders interiority to this quantum fluctuation structure that cannot be modeled within the simpler fluctuation structure of the brain’s embedding in a quantum vacuum substrate, November 2011 c.f., au=Plotinus in cit=Ennead IV.4.23, 4–19: “Well, then, the soul will either apprehend alone by itself or in company with something else. But how can it do this when it is alone and by itself? For when it is by itself it apprehends what is in itself, and is pure

thought. If it also apprehends other things [i.e. sensibles], it must first have taken possession of them as well, either by becoming assimilated to them, or by keeping company with something which has been assimilated. But it cannot be assimilated while it remains in itself. For how could a point be assimilated to a line? For even the intelligible line would not assimilate to the sensible one, nor would the intelligible fire or man assimilate to the sense-perceived fire or man. . . . But when the soul is alone, even if it is possible for it to direct its attention to the world of sense, it will end with an understanding of the intelligible; what is perceived by sense will escape it, as it has nothing with which to grasp it. Since also when the soul sees the visible object from a distance, however much it is a form which comes to it, that which reaches it, though it starts by being in a way without parts, ends in the substrate which the soul sees as color and shape with the extension it has out there.” July 2011 If the substrate of being is information rather than independently existing fundamental particles, then there is really no impasse posed by it being otherwise necessary for matter to “bootstrap” itself into greater complexity. It is tempting to suppose that vacuum 3way and higher order nonlocality is the source of 2-way nonlocality of all quantum mechanical states/systems. The interiority of subjectivity would on this view not be a truly emergent quality of biological systems, but merely the awareness of this interiority would be. November 2012 The dependence of n-way nonlocality for smaller “n” on n-way nonlocality for larger “n” constitutes a kind of causal supervenience placed within the context of quantum entanglement and correlational structures and reminds us of holographic time scale reductionism, i.e., in which structures occupying smaller intervals of time are conditioned by structures occupying larger intervals of time. This “entanglement supervenience” for want of a more convenient term intuitively points up Kauffman’s fundamentality or principle of the fundamentalness (along with subatomic particles and fields) of consciousness as such (as opposed to any particular consciousness). One way to model the relativistic effects of mass, length and time might be to think of a mass as the result of the mutual interference of myriad

alternate universe copies of the abstract objects possessing the formal structure which the mass exhibits upon analysis. The greater the coherence of the MWI (many worlds interpretation) quantum copies of the object, that is, the more closely the copies mutually interfere, the greater is the mass of the object, the more dilated is the external time (and more contracted is the internal time) of the mass. In this way Penrose’s connection between gravity and wavefunction collapse may be explored further. March 2006 Perhaps this is better put in terms of the greater the density of cohering of (and mutually interfering, i.e., quantum correlated) MWI quantum near duplicates, the greater is the object’s inertial mass. These frequencies, or their spectra, would be associated with the fluctuations in the vacuum's intrinsic energy and with fluctuations in the ability of an ideal observer to determine the system's energy independently of the effect of the vacuum energy fluctuations, respectively. We are basing this idea of observer-system resonance as the basis of perception on an idea expressed by David Bohm in his book, cit= Quantum Theory. According to au=Bohm (1951), @$the fluctuations in an observable, in combination with the correlations of the phases of these quantum fluctuations, together comprise the average values and average temporal evolution of any observable. An act of observation has the effect of destroying the delicate phase relations between the eigenfunctions, the product of which constitute the pure state wavefunction representing the state of the system. July 2011 (Can changes in the entanglement signature of nonlocally correlated fluctuations induced by acts of conscious observation impact causal relationships? Conversely, can causally induced changes to the system’s momentum and energy be traced to corresponding changes in nonlocally correlated fluctuations in the system’s momentum and energy?) This is reflected in the instantaneous shift in the values of all incompatible observables relative to the observable the value of which is being more fully determined as a result of observation. The effect of the fluctuation energy upon our energy measuring devices is, of course, an

effect which even the perfect calibration of our energy-measuring instruments cannot in principle eradicate. If the observer’s consciousness inevitably induces collapse of the wavefunction for the system he’s observing, then this is perhaps because: @$1) The dynamics of the observer’s conscious mental processes is fundamentally quantum mechanical in nature and 2) The mental processes of the observer are quantum entangled with those of the system under observation. Mass-energy is a result of an imbalance in these two energy terms. In this way particles are seen to be not flux-stabilities in themselves, but structured alterations in the flux-stabilities as a result of the influence, penultimately, of our energy measuring devices - ultimately per von Neumann - the influence of not the individual mind per se but the consciousness, fundamental in nature, which is structured through the complex system of boundary conditions upon the very same vacuum field being measured (in essence) constituted from the operation of the observer's brain, since the existence of the brain as a mass-energy system, would otherwise presuppose, if identified with the observer's individual consciousness, the existence of that which its observations are partially constituting. @$“If reality is this second way, then the role of the neuronal system is not to mysteriously create awareness and mind from alien substance. Rather, it is to organize a pre-existing propensity for awareness into useful, functional awareness, and provide for its modulation by useful information”, c.f., cit=Implications of a Fundamental Consciousness, au=MacDonald (1998). "The mere possibility of observation results in the reduction of the state vector." November 2007 If a great enough interlocking feedback between such possibilities comes about which then alters the statistics of matter and energy (including the embedding vacuum energy field), which results in a great enough contraction/collapse in the density rate of change in these state vector reductions (through the conversion of disjoint states into correlated mixtures), producing an overall coherent state, then a barrier will spontaneously be created between internal and external, i.e., a rudimentary real, as opposed to a mere hypothetical, possible observer will be engendered. (consider here the necessary interiority of the brain

of the quantum observer), c.f., so-called “Boltzmann brains. ” June 2012 cit= “We would like to argue that this is not the case. Suppose we do not look at the whole box at once, but only at a piece of the box. Then, at a certain moment, suppose we discover a certain amount of order. In this little piece, white and black are separate. What should we deduce about the condition in places where we have not yet looked? If we really believe that the order arose from complete disorder by a fluctuation, we must surely take the most likely fluctuation which could produce it, and the most likely condition is not that the rest of it has also become disentangled! Therefore, from the hypothesis that the world is a fluctuation, all of the predictions are that if we look at a part of the world we have never seen before, we will find it mixed up, and not like the piece we just looked at. If our order were due to a fluctuation, we would not expect order anywhere but where we have just noticed it”, c.f., Richard Feynman on Boltzmann Brains by au=Sean Carroll. fcbk=

The Boltzmann-Schuetz cosmology is a weird idea, but weirdness alone ought not be held as an objection. There is a consequence, however, that Boltzmann seems not to have noticed. On such a scenario, the vast majority of occurrences of a given nonmaximal level of entropy would be near a local entropy minimum, and so “One should regard it as overwhelmingly probable that, even given our current experience, entropy increases towards the past as well as the future, and everything that seems to be a record of a lower entropy past is itself the product of a random fluctuation. Moreover, you should take yourself to be whatever the minimal physical system is that is capable of supporting experiences like yours; apparent experiences of being surrounded by an abundance of low-entropy matter are illusory. That is, you should take yourself to be what has been called a Boltzmann brain. (Footnote: “The term is due to Andreas Albrecht. It first appears in print in Albrecht and Sorbo (2004). The consequence of the Boltzmann-Schuetz cosmology, that we should take the fluctuation we are in to be no larger than necessary, seems to have been first pointed out by Arthur Eddington.)”, c.f., Notes on Thermodynamics and Statistical (Myrvold 2013) http://www.rotman.uwo.ca/wp-content/uploads/ThermoNotes.pdf

By the equivalence principle, fermion-antifermion production in a gravitational field should not exist for a freely falling observer. But neither should this freely falling observer witness a blackbody spectrum of photons. Since through the (likely identical) particle production mechanisms underlying both Hawking radiation and Davies-Unruh radiation, the fermion-antifermion and boson particle production fields are observer-dependent in their intensities, there should be an invariant transformation rule by which we can connect the respective particle production rates for bosons and fermion-antifermion pairs out of the vacuum. November 2007 This reminds us of the equilibrium principle manifest in the relationship of the charged particle and its electric field during free fall – a charged particle accelerates through an electric potential in such a manner that the particle’s electric field appears to it (relative to the particle instantaneous Lorentz frame) to be spherically distributed about itself. This invariance is probably not that of simple Lorenz-invariance because the observer-dependent shift in intensities/current densities of the particle production is dependent upon the acceleration of the observer not on his relative velocity. For instance, the masses of the particles produced, in the case of fermion-antifermion production, varies in an opposing sense to the manner in which the fermion-antifermion rate alters due to an arbitrary Lorenz-transformation of the gravitational field engendering the enhanced f(+)/f(-) production. And this occurs just in such a manner that the mass-creation rate for f(+)/f(-)'s remains constant. This would seem to imply that the concept of mass is absolute within the Theory of Relativity. The 4-voume in which f(+)/f(-) creation/annihilation is taking place within this gravitational field is also unaffected by an arbitrary Lorenz-transformation since the length contraction and time dilation take place in opposite senses as well. In this way, the mass creation rate for f(+)/f(-)'s divided by the local 4volume we are considering, i.e., the 4-current density of the general relativistic particle production, is conserved as a result of an arbitrary Lorenz transformation of the gravitational field inducing the particle

production field. Returning to our first analogy, this exchange of information is not actually occurring among the pixels (as was the case for the gnats), but is, for the greater part, occurring within the CPU itself, that is, between its individual circuit elements; in small part, this exchange of energy/information is taking place between the CPU and the pixels on the screen it is controlling. The greater the ratio of information exchanges taking place between the CPU and itself relative to the those taking place between the CPU and the screen, the slower will be the maximum permissible velocity across the screen for an object represented on this screen, assuming an absolute clock rate for the CPU (akin to the notion of cosmological proper time). A similar statement would apply to the "acceleration" of the cursor across the screen - the larger the group of pixels which one wishes to simultaneously move across the screen, the smaller will be the maximum acceleration attainable by the coherent group of pixels represented by the cursor. The quantum principle of the identity of indiscernibles is weakened for composite objects, which is related to the action of the principle of the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics. The discernibility of composite objects grows sharper as each object develops its own unique history (as opposed to mere “trajectory”) and the failure of this quantum principle, i.e., identity of indiscernibles in view of consideration of the 2 nd Law is bound up in the vacuum energy/cosmological constant paradox (nongravitating vacuum energy). It is moreover bound up with the important distinction of data and information. The acceleration of an object changes the state of the object in a way that must be reconciled not only with boundary but also with the initial conditions by which the object was originally constituted as well. Thus gravitational fields must be capable of possessing nonlocal components. 03/01/06We recall here that a Bohmian style interpretation of the EPR experiment with a SternGerlach device calls for backward-in-time signaling of the separately measured particles with their earlier state as part of a composite spin-0

particle just prior to this particle’s spontaneous decay.03/01/06 If we are looking for something to play the role of "mass" within our computer analogy we would do so in vain unless we modify somewhat (in a way which doesn't render our analogy useless, I think) the programming of the software driving the computer monitor (output device). If we were to think of the quantum vacuum field as generating and sustaining all of the various "forms" such as all of the particles and fields of spacetime, doing this in a manner exactly paralleling that in which a CPU creates/sustains all of the digital graphical representations appearing on a computer screen, then the suggestion arises that perhaps there is not only a maximum possible velocity, but also a maximum possible acceleration through spacetime. An obvious choice for this maximum acceleration is simply c2/Lplanck. (But certainly the maximum acceleration becomes smaller in magnitude as we treat progressively more complex systems) An equivalent representation of this limit is c/tplanck. And, of course, we are thinking of Lplanck as the dimension of a three dimensional "pixel" composing the spatial part of global spacetime, while (tplanck)-1 represents the clock rate of the "global spacetime central processing unit (CPU)," i.e. the global quantum mechanical vacuum. We stated earlier, that the temporality of a quantum mechanical system is owing entirely to the presence of energy 03/01/06 uncertainty within this system. (It should be noted here that different energy uncertainties of identical magnitude might represent different quantities of information upon interaction with the environment due to their possessing distinct quantum fluctuation-correlational structure.)03/01/06 We now realize that the temporality of quantum mechanical systems owes to the interaction of this system with the fluctuating quantum mechanical vacuum; consequently, the rate at which time passes within a given region of spacetime is a function of the energy density of the vacuum within this region. We have proposed that the inertial mass of a body is directly related to its binding energy due to nongravitational forces. This is a seeming paradox since binding energy is negative and should result in an overall reduction in the inertial mass (positive energy) of the body. May 1997

An example of where there is a change only in gravitational binding energy is when the increase in negative binding energy is resulting from the action of gravitation alone which is exactly counterbalanced by the general relativistic increase in the mass energy of the body. To wit, here we have increased the gravitational binding energy of a body without having affected the total energy, and hence, inertial mass, of the body. When the density of a given region of space increases, there does not result merely a simple decrease in the energy density of the vacuum. Rather, there is a momentum current density tensor, which is diagonal in free space, experiences a shuffling of its components so that it is no longer diagonal - with respect to a free space Minkowski spacetime. August 1996

There is another way of looking at the phenomenon of inertia in terms of how spin-coupling of real bosons of integral spin and real fermions of integral 1/2 spin to the spins of virtual bosons and fermions. The particle manifestations of the vacuum momentum-energy fluctuations may be incorporated into the view of the earlier stated mechanism of inertia/gravitation alluded to in the paragraph immediately above. It is through the spin-coupling of real and virtual particles that the momentum current density components are altered from their diagonal 2nd rank tensor distribution to a non-diagonal component distribution of this momentum energy which underlies manifest gravitational fields. The theory of "squeezed states," where the uncertainties in momentum along a particular axis are increased by borrowing momentum uncertainty from along other orthogonal axes, may provide the necessary mathematical framework within which the effects of matter upon vacuum momentum-energy uncertainty may be adequately described: matter affects the quantum vacuum by inducing a broadening of the vacuum's momentum uncertainty, i.e., its momentum fluctuation spectrum by utilizing fluctuation energy provided by the vacuum's uncertain energy, which is decreasing in step at the same time.

August 1996

This may be described in terms of the rotation of the matter + vacuum momentum current density tensor. A second rank tensor multiplied by this diagonal momentum current density four vector would produce the appropriate connection between this four vector at points in spacetime infinitesimally contiguous with one another. Such a 2nd rank tensor must somehow be assimilated to the metric tensor of general relativity. Instantaneous correlations would manifest themselves as a departure from locally deterministic causality and could constitute an explanation for the existence of Heisenberg energy uncertainty. I think there is no doubt that if the basic framework of Special Relativity is to be maintained, then we are forced to accept an origin for nonlocal correlations which lies completely outside four dimensional spacetime or at least outside the local absolute past/future of the best possible causal chain. Noember 2007 These nonlocal correlations must always comprise causal interactions and so never be explicable in terms of them. We know that a photon traveling though free space experiences acceleration due to the cosmological expansion, and that this acceleration is equal to Hc, where H is Hubble's constant and c is the speed of light in vacuum. Therefore, if a spherical mass is instantaneously converted into pure energy, i.e., photons, the photons will instantly, collectively exert a positive pressure, P = MHc/R. Consequently, the vacuum must exert a pressure upon spherical masses, which is equal and opposite to this above quantity. This notion should be investigated further in connection with the Pioneer Anomaly, i.e., the anomalous component of acceleration that some physicists have connected to either a cosmological constant or to the cosmological acceleration field in some other sense, dark energy. November 2007 Some theoretical evidence for this claim can be provided by the calculation of a work-energy integral. This integral is ultimately motivated by an extension of the equipartation theorem of kinetic gas theory to the cosmological distribution of energy in the Universe. This question will

be addressed at a later occasion, however. As for the integral itself, it is used to calculate the work which the Universe performed on some small volume of energy as the energy density of this volume decreased from a very high value early in the history of the Universe (say in the first few seconds) until the present epoch of cosmological expansion when the energy density of this volume has become almost negligible. One may think of this work as being performed on this volume by some cosmological acceleration force field and if we assume that this tiny volume managed to hold itself together without expanding throughout the entire expansion phase, then this volume must have exerted a force upon the Universe equal and opposite to the cosmological force which was attempting to spread it apart. Conservation of momentum holds for the combined mass-energy/vacuum-energy system so that there is a balancing of the force of the Hubble cosmological force field acting upon the vacuum and the gravitational force of the vacuum acting upon the total matter distribution of the Universe. We may even say that the vacuum's gravitational field is simply a reaction force produced by the tendency of the Hubble cosmological acceleration force to alter the momentum of the vacuum. @$This reaction force acts to conserve the momentum of the vacuum energy field. This action - reaction force relationship is expressed by the equation given below, H2r x Ev = Eo x GM/R2 , where GM/R2 = the acceleration field produced by the vacuum's gravitational field. The gravitational field of matter distributions is not an inherent property of these distributions, but must be conceived along the same general lines as the electrical repulsive force between dislocations or holes in an otherwise electrically neutral crystalline matrix. This idea is more or less captured by the following relationship, Ev/Eo x H2r = {c2/r x (1 - E/Ev) - c2/r} = g, where the term, c2/r, is the acceleration field produced by the vacuum reaction - force which compensates the action of the Hubble

cosmological acceleration force upon the vacuum energy field. Hc is the cosmological acceleration field, which acts upon freely moving photons, and implies the existence of a precisely balancing and opposing reactive force upon the particles forming a bound matter distribution. Let us assume that this tiny volume is that occupied by a neutron and that the work-cycle is to begin at an early epoch in the Universe's expansion when the average energy density of the vacuum was equal to that of the neutron itself: approximately 1033 Joules/m3. The work integral is defined to be: W=

P*dv,

where the limits of integration are to be from Pi = and

i

to

f,

where P

are the pressure and energy density of the vacuum, respectively.

We will at first define the work integral in terms of F*dr. F is just the cosmological acceleration force acting on the tiny volume and F = MH 2r, where r is the radius of the volume, M is the mass contained within the volume and H is Hubble's constant. If the volume were to expand exactly in step with the expansion of space in its immediate local region, then the surface of the volume would move with respect to its center (chosen as coordinate origin) with velocity Hr, and the acceleration of this surface with respect to the chosen origin would be d/dt[Hr] = H[dr/dt] = H2r, so that, again, F = MH2r. The work integral becomes W=

MH2rdr

between the distance limits Ri = Rneutron and Rf = Runiverse. To transform this work integral into one in terms of pressure and volume rather than force and distance involves defining the parameters e and de, i.e., mass density and differential of mass density, respectively. = 3/4M R3 ===> R = 3root[3/4M ] x

-1/3

dr =

-1/3 x 3root x [3/4m/4 ] x

-4/3 d

If one performs this work integral one finds that the energy necessary to expand neutron-packet of unbound neutron mass-energy is precisely, E = G(Mneutron)2/R, so that the energy necessary to prevent this expansion is E = -G(Mneutron)2/R. This result is, of course, provided that the mass density of the universe is given by the formula, = 3H2/4 G ess=

This formula for the mass density of the Universe is implied by an equality of magnitude of the kinetic energy and gravitational binding energy of the Universe as a whole. This equality constitutes a proposed solution to the so-called "flatness problem" of cosmological theory. Alan Guth's Inflationary Theory was originally proposed to solve, essentially, just this cosmological problem. A rough and ready definition of the flatness problem is the nearly exact equality between the Universe's expansion velocity and its "escape velocity" - of somewhere between 1 part per 1012 and 1 part per 1060, depending upon which sources in the literature are cited; the problem is not that this exact ratio conflicts with the standard "Big Bang" cosmological model, but rather that it is obviously a non-arbitrary (structural) feature of the Cosmos about which the model can make no meaningful explanation. Proponents of the Standard Model are forced to lump this fact in with the other initial conditions which were set at the beginning of the Universe's expansion, and which physical science cannot explain, such

as the fundamental physical constants and the Universe's initial mass. Other proponents of this model invoke the Anthropic Cosmological Principle to explain this ratio. Its argument goes like the following: if the ratio of escape velocity vs. expansion velocity is too much greater than 1, then the Universe would have already re-collapsed by this time and we would not be here; on the other hand, if the ratio is too much less than 1, then the density of the universe would not have been great enough, for long enough, to allow the formation of stars and galaxies so that yet again we would not be here to worry about the question. But the Anthropic Cosmological Principle cannot explain the exactness with which this ratio approaches unity, but can only provide relatively crude limits on either side of this ratio, say between 0.9 and 1.1, conceivably these limits could be one order of magnitude smaller - this shaves off only 1 or 2 orders of magnitude and there are still at least 11 more orders of magnitude in need of explanation. October 2011 A related problem in cosmology and one which is not currently thought to pertain to the sensitivity of initial and boundary conditions is that of the stupendous mismatch between the predicted and observed energy densities of the vacuum represented by the “cosmological constant”: cosmological theory predicts a value for this constant on the order of 10-26 kg/m3 while quantum theory predicts a value on the order of 1095 kg/m3 a discrepancy of approximately 120 orders of magnitude! When one considers on the one hand, that the densities of the mass energy and vacuum energy (cosmological prediction) are of the same magnitude, if not almost precisely equal (the condition for a “flat” universe) and on the other, that, if gravity were to be attributed, not to the absolute energy density of the vacuum, but to the difference between two large energy densities approximating one another by an order of magnitude and constituting two distinct components of the enormous vacuum energy density predicted by quantum mechanics, then, if this energy density difference

is attributed to an “effective energy density” for the vacuum, i.e., that to which Einstein’s equivalence principle applies, then in turn we would be able to explain away the enormous energy density predicted by quantum theory for the vacuum using a logic similar to that of prn=renormalization theory. The cost of all this is perhaps only an aesthetic one for purist relativists, that of the seeming loss of theoretical elegance and simplicity in the form of a considerably reduced universality of Einstein’s strong equivalence principle. Note that the effective energy density in this approach to solving the “cosmological constant problem” is now comparable to that of the cosmologically predicted mass density. The above approach does not seem so farfetched once one considers that the starting mass density of the universe must have been very sensitively determined by initial and boundary conditions upon the cosmological constant itself. An additional consideration here is that a so-called flat universe also requires that the density of the gravitational binding energy of the Universe be equal to its mass energy density, c.f., the derivation above for the equality of, e.g., the neutron’s mass and gravitational binding energy densities. On account of the combined principles of equipartation of energy between degrees of freedom and conservation of quantum entanglement between the two complementary components of the fluctuation momentum-energy of the quantum vacuum, which together make up its total energy density *(zero-point energy), we suspect that it is these two components of the physical vacuum, which are placed out of mutual balance by the perturbing effect of inertial mass, while the back reaction of this induced vacuum momentum-energy imbalance upon mass constitutes the origin of gravitational mass. *

(zero-point energy as dictated by the fact that not only are momentum and position “incompatible observables” - /\p/\x > h, but all functions of momentum are similarly incompatible with all functions of position and so the kinetic and potential energies are mutually incompatible, i.e., H =

f(p) + f(x) = Total energy, which must fluctuate due to /\f(p)/\f(x) > f(h) where h is Planck’s constant and H is the total energy Hamiltonian). Here the mismatch is still greater. @$But invoking the so-called Solipsistic Cosmological Principle may well place far tighter constraints upon the value of the cosmological constant than does a mere Anthropic Cosmological Principle. “The strong anthropic principle (SAP) as explained by Barrow and Tipler (see variants) states that this is all the case because the Universe is compelled, in some sense, for conscious life to eventually emerge. Critics of the SAP argue in favor of a weak anthropic principle (WAP) similar to the one defined by Brandon Carter, which states that the universe's ostensible fine tuning is the result of selection bias: i.e., only in a universe capable of eventually supporting life will there be living beings capable of observing any such fine tuning, while a universe less compatible with life will go unbeheld.” The above is from the wikipedia entry on the anthropic principle. Making a few substitutions to convert from the general to the particular, we have the following: “The strong anthropic principle (SAP) as explained by Barrow and Tipler (see variants) states that this is all the case because the Universe is compelled, in some sense, for my conscious life to eventually emerge. Critics of the SAP argue in favor of a weak anthropic principle (WAP) similar to the one defined by Brandon Carter, which states that the universe's ostensible fine tuning is the result of selection bias: i.e., only in a universe capable of eventually supporting” my life “will there be” me, “capable of observing any such” ultra-fine “tuning, while a universe less compatible with my life will go unbeheld” by me. The key here is that, the physical constants of the universe, e.g., gravitational constant, Planck's constant, electron mass, electron charge, fine structure constant, speed of light, Bohr magneton, electric field permittivity constant, etc., ad nauseum, must all be fine-tuned to six decimal places for carbonbased life to be possible. However, for something very similar to humanity to be possible, then these constants must be tweaked to perhaps eight decimal places. The catch: these constants might need to

be tweaked to 12 or more decimal places for creation to be tuned to the precise information frequency spectrum of my consciousness for it to be put into operation!

November 2007

The theory which I propose, however, which can be considered to be an extension of Van Flandern's S-hypothesis, explains this ratio not as an arbitrary initial condition, but as a necessary feature of any universe where the energy of cosmological expansion drives the forces of the universe's gravitation; to wit, if the expansion velocity of the Universe were greater than it is, then the energy of its expansion would be greater and hence the gravitational energy of the Universe would be correspondingly increased such that the ratio of unity would be maintained. This postulate has a favorable bearing on many other unsolved problems of cosmological theory. Our postulate states, in essence, only that the total gravitational potential and kinetic energies are equal. The postulate is not a mere arbitrary assumption however, as it is supported by the principle of energy equipartation. However, this principle can only be applied if it is assumed that there exists some form of energy which acts as a medium physically linking these two types of energy, i.e., the energy of position with the energy of momentum, in order that the equilibrium between them can be maintained through mutual energy exchanges - in much the same way that the rotational and vibrational energies of gas molecules maintain a balance through continual exchange of kinetic energy between these molecules through random collisions. February 2013 A chaotic, thermalized-entropic Anthropic proto-consciousness forms the dynamical substrate of this third medium. Due to the availability of infinite time, Boltzmann brain-like large entropy fluctuations occasionally occur, say, every quadrillion centuries or so, producing an intensely focused stream of Anthropic-consciousness for the cosmological equivalent of a nanosecond – 80 years or so... February 2013 What happens when a material with a larger thermal equilibrium time constant thermally interacts or exchanges energy with a

substance possessing a relatively smaller thermal equilibrium time constant? kwo=“According to recent astrophysical observations the large scale mean pressure of our present Universe is negative suggesting a positive cosmological constant-like term. The issue of whether nonperturbative effects of self-interacting quantum fields in curved space-times may yield a significant contribution is addressed. Focusing on the trace anomaly of quantum chromodynamics, a preliminary estimate of the expected order of magnitude yields a remarkable coincidence with the empirical data, indicating the potential relevance of this effect”, c.f., cit=VOLUME 89, NUMBER 8 PHYSICAL REVIEW LETTERS 19 AUGUST 2002, Small Cosmological Constant from the QCD Trace Anomaly? August 2013

If the maths pointed to Boltzmann brains outnumbering humans, our theories of space and time could be compromised. That's because we would no longer be 'typical' observers, and might not have the ability to see reality from the 'correct' perspective. But according to a new report by New Scientist, new understandings of string theory and the theory of multiple universes might just give us an escape clause. Physicists Claire Zukowski and Raphael Buosso at Berkely say that the key to this balance (of us, versus the superbrains) is whether or not universes expand forever and linger - full of Boltzmann brains - for much longer than creatures like humans would be able to survive, c.f., http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/05/23/boltzmann-brain-theoryspace_n_3324003.html?just_reloaded=1. February 2013 The growing amounts of man-hours and money being dedicated to developing more efficient search engine software along with the ever increasing collective number of man-hours being spent on performing, e.g., google web searches along with the most recent response to this demand for connected information in the form of Facebook’s beta test version of graph search, the now long under way explosive growth of interdisciplinary science, the increasing perception that the growth

paradigm of the 20th Century has had its day and is now safely retired, improvements in nanotechnological science, the growing viral nature of information and last but not least the subtly evident expanding colonization of sociolinguistic consciousness by a syntax of web search strings which are more and more supplanting snippets of moderntraditional “self dialogue” – all of this and more suggests that a new knowledge and information paradigm is about to befall the postmodern mind. And because as noted elsewhere language is not a mere passive implement for the communicating of ideas, as it was conceived to be during the Enlightenment through the first half of the 20th Century, nonlinearities of thought and conception were inevitable though the accelerating coordination of human and machine is set to potentiate this. The specialized concepts and protocols of programmers and software developers are collectively constituting a new and fertile field of handy metaphors with the power to reprocess and transvaluate what was until recently an inviolable naïve realism and common sense of scientists and intellectuals. In a similar way, particles are no longer the passive occupants and passengers of the void as they were understood to be prior to the advent of 2nd quantization quantum theory. This was in large part owing to the democratization of particles and waves as both different aspects of an underlying active quantum field, i.e., zero-point field or quantum vacuum. So too, ideas as the occupants and passengers of a universal dynamic medium, that of language, must lose their presumed qualities of sharpness, discreteness, unchangeableness and wellbehavedness. Mankind is on the verge of having his concept map redrawn for him in ways yet to be imagined. There’s money to be made in search engine algorithm development because as Bob Dobbs says, “You’ll pay good money to know what you think!” Of course the down side of rapidly advancing search engine technology when combined with similar trends in the social networking domain is that all of us

subgeniuses belatedly realized that the vast proportion of our most original insights were indeed shared with thousands of other similar “subgeniuses”. The difference between the genius and the ordinary man is that the genius merely possesses more sensitive “antennae”. February 2013

Because the quantum decoherence problem will never be solved for field-mobile units (androids), the truly powerful conscious computing, i.e. the computational “heavy lifting”, will have to be performed at a specially isolated location, i.e., one that is insulated electrically, magnetically, acoustically, etc., as well as cryogenically cooled and the results of these continuous real time computations transmitted to the brain of the mobile unit, which is a classical digital computer, except for specially designed interfaces composed of filters, tuners and transponders, etc. Soon after this technology gains currency, it will be realized that neither has nature solved the decoherence problem, but has indeed evolved (in man and the higher animals) an adequate quantum-classical interface substrate in the form of neural microtubule structures and their tubulin dimers. (Since the selforganizing properties of atoms and molecules are derived and more or less continuously sustained by the dynamical evolution of an underlying quantum field, i.e., the quantum vacuum, it is not surprising that a “remote control connection” (in the truest sense of this phase) would be maintained – all the way up to the Penrosean decoherence limit. One should expect there to be a penumbra region somewhat beyond the decoherence limit wherein the bidirectional, mutual updating of system and underlying quantum field is no longer nonlocal/instantaneous and a system of “real time” becomes necessary. The phenomenon of decoherence may not merely be integral to the emergence of a direction of time, but of temporal structure and scale.) Like the mobile field units, each human has their own dedicated pertition of the entire quantum vacuum signal spectrum. The question arises as to where each

“base station” is. (One reason data and information are two different things is that all information is quantum encrypted and encoded information and hence is nonlocal (perhaps in the same sens in which Hilbert space is nonlocal.) The nonlocal nature of conscious computing data (information) means tha the individual mind possesses no specific location within any particular spacime. So now then the appearance of a common spacetime, one populated with friends, family, acquaintances, etc., must be taken in light of a likely providential arrangement, and indeed adds new force to Alvin Plantinga’s dichotomy of theism versus solipsism. Is it that our/their “base stations” are local and our interface radio spectrum is nonlocal? Putting the question in these terms may lead us to suppose that self and other are both projections. We trust that my projection of the other and the other’s projection of the self synchs up with his projection of the other and my projection of the self.

May 1997

A ready candidate for this medium connecting the gravitational potential and kinetic energies of particles, for example, is the fluctuating component of the Hamiltonian for the quantum system in question. As stated earlier, this fluctuation component of the Hamiltonian cannot be "screened." This fluctuation component of the Hamiltonian may be thought of as the product of its space and time components, H(r) and H(t). This Hamiltonian is, of course, only and average, . There are three basic types of interaction for this system: exchanges of momentum/energy between the parts of the system entirely among themselves, exchanges of momentum/energy between the system and other similar systems, and exchanges of momentum/energy between the system and its fluctuation Hamiltonian. July 1998

The equation, constant = p*p + r*r, seems to imply that p and r may both be incompatible observables despite the absence of fluctuations in the sum, p*p + r*r. But if one looks at this equation, one

immediately realizes that it is the equation of a circle in phase space. But a circle in phase space represents a precisely defined trajectory in phase space which, in turn, implies that p and r, though each uncertain in an epistemological sense, must at any moment both possess precise values. And this fact would contradict the thesis of p’s and r’s incompatibility as observers. Conservation of vacuum 4-momentum is asserted here to provide the mechanism by which the necessary energy exchanges are effected between the gravitational and kinetic energies of the vacuum. We have already seen how gravitational acceleration itself ,i.e., the conversion of potential energy into kinetic energy (the converse of acceleration under thrust) which has been formalized by, e.g., Hamilton's canonical equations of motion, results from a spatio-temporal vacuum energy density gradient which itself, in turn, comes into being through the operation of the principle of vacuum momentum conservation, and which sustains itself in existence through the vacuum's fundamental dynamism of self-energy-exchange. Gravitational potential, it is said, cannot be defined absolutely. Rather, only relative differences in potential are meaningful. For mathematical convenience, all potentials are referenced with respect to a potential at infinity where the !/R dependence of the potential causes it to vanish to zero. Yet this definition contains a presumption, namely, that is meaningful to speak of a gravitational potential at an infinite distance. In actuality, the furthest that a mass can be placed so that its potential is a minimum, is at the socalled edge of the observable Universe, that is, just this side of the spherical light horizon - where the cosmological red-shift of electromagnetic radiation becomes infinite. According to some simple calculations I have performed, this distance is roughly 1.1 x 10 26 meters. In the particular case of our own Earth this potential is about 20 orders of magnitude smaller than the potential at the Earth's surface - a vanishingly small value of approximately 10 -30 Joules per Kilogram. prn= The Schrodinger equation may be thought of as describing diffusion along the ict axis. Moreover, Graham's Law of effusion states that more massive particles diffuse more slowly than less massive particles.

According to Hawking and Bekenstein, the entropy of a black hole is directly proportional to the surface area of the hole. This relation is given below. S ~ 4 R2 But the energy density of the black hole is given by the relation, = 3c4/4 R2G so that,

S = e-1

where S is the entropy and e is the energy density of the black hole, respectively. Consequently, if the energy density of the vacuum is equal to the energy density of black hole masses, then the entropy of the vacuum should increase with decreasing vacuum energy density. We believe that the energy density of the vacuum is equal to the effective energy density of black holes because the radial outward pressure of the vacuum, Pvac, must be 0 at the event horizon surface of a black hole and the vacuum obeys the equation of state, namely, e vac = Pvac. Furthermore, as already stated elsewhere, eo = emass + evac. because there is no fundamental distinction between creating mass from the vacuum energy locally available within a particular region of spacetime and importing already existing mass from outside this region of spacetime into this region because, in turn, matter particles may not be thought of as having a permanent, continuous existence after the manner of the substances of Aristotelian physics; this follows from the fact that there is no real distinction between relativistic and non-relativistic mass. Pvac must be 0 here because the matter composing a black hole may exchange energy only with itself; it exchanges no energy with the vacuum energy field outside its event horizon. e matter = eo in this particular case and, as well, evac = Pvac = 0. Again, half of the massenergy contained within the black hole is due solely to the general relativistic increase in mass which had accumulated once the hole had formed.

e = eo{1 - GM/RC2}, where

eo = 3c4/4piGR2.

Generalizing this result, we may say that prn=the maximum rate of increase in the entropy of the vacuum is parallel to the direction along which the decrease in the vacuum's energy density is maximal. In socalled free space, the direction along which the maximal decrease in the vacuum's energy density exists is along the ict axis; in other words, the vacuum energy density varies in a purely temporal manner in free space, i.e., due to cosmological expansion. Therefore, the so-called thermodynamic arrow of time points in a direction orthogonal (in free space) to any 3 dimensional rectangular system of coordinates describing an inertial frame of reference; moreover, a gravitational field is associated with an alteration in the orientation of the thermodynamic arrow of time because a component of the direction of the maximally increasing vacuum entropy now points radially inward - in the simple case of spherical masses. The thermal particle creation which is observed to occur within accelerated reference frames is a manifestation of a creation/annihilation process which is normally balanced in the free space vacuum but which is unbalanced within the accelerated frame. In the presence of a gravitational potential, the arrow of time possesses a component along the vacuum energy density gradient so that a new time axis is defined within this new vacuum which exactly corresponds to this new time axis as defined within the general theory of relativity as applied to the Minkowski light cone. November 1996

The second law of thermodynamics only applies to physical processes taking place within a closed system which is in interaction with an infinite heat reservoir. The 2nd Law does not, however, apply to open thermodynamics systems since in these systems no global thermodynamic arrow of time can be consistently defined. Such thermodynamic arrows can only be defined locally. This reminds us of how standing waves cannot form in containers of infinite size. So the

concept of a particle, which is itself just a Gaussian packet of superposed standing waves, can only possess validity in a local sense; globally speaking, the notion of a particle does not refer to anything which possesses ultimate reality, but an abstraction grounded in a low order approximation. See Quantum Field Theory in Curved Spacetime and Black Hole Thermodynamics by Robert M. Wald, Chicago University Press, for further discussion of the limitations of the "particle concept" in strongly curved or rapidly time-varying spacetimes. This book also discusses the phenomenon of particle production in expanding EinsteinDeSitter spacetimes as being closely related to Hawking radiation. December 1996

Changes in the boundary conditions of the wavefunction which take place with a rapidity such that, dB/dt > /\B//\t ~ /\E/h X /\B, where B are the boundary conditions of the quantum mechanical superposition state, S, will inevitably result in a collapse of the wavefunction, Psi, into one of its eigenstates of the observable bound by B. This is provided that the new boundary conditions, B', are stabilized to within c x /\t, where /\t is the time uncertainty in the time interval of this transition, B ===> B'. Wavefunctions representing locallyconnected quantum mechanical systems are constituted by a system of boundary conditions placed upon the nonlocally-connected quantum vacuum stress-momentum-energy field. The principle of superposition illustrates the importance of unrealized possibilities: they play a substantive role in the behavior of the real. October 2011 This notion apparently does not occur to defenders of the doctrine of Modal Realism, e.g., au=David Lewis. Initial and boundary conditions are what distinguish the merely virtual from the real, the possible from the actual, c.f, Max Tegmark’s hierarchy of multiverse types. The energy uncertainty of a quantum mechanical system, /\E, is both independent of the observer, that is, it represents an ontological, rather

than a, merely epistemological uncertainty in the energy of the system and it is dependent upon the state of the observer's knowledge of this system. This suggests that the observer and his state of knowledge are essentially separable. His knowledge of quantum mechanical system states is from the inside, meaning that the observer's knowledge is coded nonlocally in the quantum energy uncertainty of his own brain, itself a quantum mechanical system!@$ The brain of the observer simply provides a set of boundary conditions upon the quantum vacuum energy field. Thermal particle production is expected to occur in the direction of the entropy gradient of a vacuum possessing a gravitational potential; and the principle of relativity demands that particle production be associated with the global increase in vacuum entropy engendered by the process of cosmological expansion. The maximally entropic state within any region of spacetime is that of the vacuum itself. In general, due to gravitational time dilation, the entropy of matter distributions can never catch up, so to speak, with the entropy of the vacuum: the result of this is that matter and energy distributions can never quite reach a state of thermodynamic equilibrium within an expanding universe. December 1996

It is our belief that the global orientation of the arrow of time is determined by the global distribution of matter in the Universe, and that without the presence of matter, there is no determinate direction for the arrow of time. This implies that the Universe conceived of as a radically open system cannot possess a complete, self-consistent topological description. Using the analogy of a system of vibrating strings: a finite sum of Fourier component functions, F(w), adequately describes the system of string vibrations provided that each of the strings be "anchored" on at least one end, which is to say that, in the absence of spatial boundary conditions placed upon the strings' vibrations, standing wave patterns of string vibration cannot exist and no purely spatial description of the system of string vibrations is possible - only a spatiotemporal description is possible in this case, and one in which there is no unique decomposition of the spatiotemporal description into a particular 3(space) + 1(time) manifold. The result similar to the one above obtains where no unique time direction for the dynamical

evolution of the system can be specified. The ratio of mass energy density to vacuum energy density varies with R-1 for spherical masses. e = eo{1 - GM/RC2} The previous formula seems to imply that when R = RSchwarzschild, the energy density of the vacuum has only been reduced to 1/2 of its normal free space value. However, this is to neglect the effect which a reduced vacuum energy density has upon the measurement of mass values: the inverted fraction by which the vacuum's energy density is reduced gives us the fraction by which the masses occupying this vacuum relativistically increase. In other words, the mass of a body may increase to just short of 1/2 of its Schwarzschild value and still remain stable against total gravitational collapse. When the mass of a body increases to just over its Schwarzschild mass a positive feedback occurs between each successive "cycle" of relativistic mass increase, whereupon half of the vacuum's energy has already been "displaced" by the piling on of mass from outside, while the other half of the vacuum's energy is converted directly into mass energy entirely through relativistic mass increase. This is the reason why we may properly say that the true energy density of the vacuum is not 3c4/8piGR2, but actually twice this value: eo = 3c4/4piGR2. Also, when one considers the process of "evaporation of black holes" via the mechanism of Hawking radiation, it is easy to see that in a very real sense the density of black holes must be exactly twice that predicted by the general theory of relativity, more particularly, via the Schwarzschild solution to the field equations: @$a quantity of mass, 2mc2, where m is the mass of the black hole, must be created from out of the vacuum before a black hole of mass, m, evaporates completely. The ultimate substratum which mediates all the fundamental physical interactions must itself be nondeterministically chaotic in nature; or else time cannot be considered a true dynamical variable. Since a fundamental process of creation and annihilation underlies all particle interactions, the action of the vacuum energy field may be identified with the translation of all composite matter along a direction orthogonal to the total set of orthogonal spatial axes.

January 1997

Space without Time is Determinism. Time without Space is Chaos. Determinism and Chaos are simply opposite ends of a single continuum. Complexity is that which governs the movement of a dynamical system back and forth along what we might well term the Cosmos/Chaos continuum. The underlying order which pushes a dynamical system this way and that along this continuum cannot itself be described in terms of a classical, dynamical system because this order necessarily operates from outside this continuum. What ultimately governs this movement of dynamical systems along this continuum is the underlying fluctuations in spacetime. November 1997

Deterministic change can only be a phenomenal appearance since either the deterministic phenomena are the play of projections from determinate objects from within higher dimensional spaces containing our space or the phenomena conceal an indeterminism at a deeper level behind the appearances. In the same way that the continual creation and destruction of a circular disk confined to a two dimensional sphere may be thought of as the continuous penetration or projection of a three dimensional cylinder orthogonally through this two dimensional spherical surface, we may model the continual process of creation and annihilation of spherical massive bodies as the continuous penetration or projection of hypercylindrical bodies orthogonally through a three dimensional hypersurface constituting normal three dimensional space. If massive bodies were composed of permanent, continuously existing substance, there would be no reason to postulate the existence of an additional 4th spatial axis associated with the dimension of time. It is the energy of matter's continual re-creation of itself which constitutes the latent energy of matter, E = mc2. When a material body is uniformly accelerated, the body is no longer re-creating itself along the time dimension alone, but must be considered to be in the act of re-creating itself along two orthogonal component directions: part of the energy of re-creation is associated with a momentum in the direction the body is accelerating, and the remaining part of this re-creation energy is associated with the body's momentum in a direction orthogonal to this

acceleration vector, and moreover, orthogonal to the 3 dimensional space (instantaneous inertial frame) which it occupies at any given moment. Our question at this juncture, then, is: is there any reason for treating a 4th spatial dimension as being ontologically real, rather than as just an abstract entity within a particular formalization of special relativity? Yes. We list them below. 1) Conservation of vacuum momentum. 2) The conversion of mass to energy as the 90 o rotation of imaginary momentum. 3) The thermodynamic arrow of time in a gravitational field. 4) The Hubble distance-velocity relationship describing galactic recession. 5) The tunneling of all masses through a hyperspherical potential barrier. The derivation of Einstein's mass-velocity relationship within an expanding four-hyperspherical universe. 7) The conservation of four dimensional angular momentum as an explanation for the perihelion advance in the orbit of the planet Mercury. 8) The implication of quantum mechanics that real particles possess no continuous existence, but are essentially being continuously created and destroyed. ds2 = c2t2 - x2 -y2 -z2 , so that the interval, ds, may take on either real or imaginary values. If ds2 > 0, then two events separated by this interval are locally connectable, and may be connected by a series of reversible interactions. If ds2 < 0, then two events separated by this interval are nonlocally connectable, and may only be connected by a series of irreversible interactions. All reversible processes are mediated by vacuum processes which are themselves irreversible. Because

gravitation is a phenomenon resulting from conservation of fourmomentum, the sign of mass (+/-) is immaterial to the direction of the gravitational acceleration vector. If anything analogous to what might be termed mass charge exists, it is in the form of an imaginary mass. Imaginary mass would have the effect of producing a gravitational field with an acceleration vector which is reversed in its normal direction. This suggests to us that the mass, or energy, of the vacuum field is itself imaginary so that real mass may be understood as a deficit of imaginary energy within the vacuum field, producing an acceleration vector of the normal gravitational acceleration vector field. If gravitons, as massless particles, are assumed to be the true mediators of the gravitational force, then there is a serious problem with interpreting the gravitational field associated with a spherical wavefront of gravitons which is expanding outward at the speed of light: We notice that in the many various forms in which the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle may be stated there is always the product of two uncertainties in physical quantities which is greater than or equal to Planck's constant and that one of these paired uncertainties is with respect to a physical quantity which is conserved, and for which there exists a quantum number, while the other paired uncertainty is with respect to a physical quantity which is not conserved, and for which no quantum number exists. To list just a few examples of this general rule: ^E^t > h, ^p^x > h, ^n^L > h, etc. Moreover, each form of expression of the fundamental Heisenberg uncertainty relation may be, in turn, paired with another such expression where the conserved quantities of the two paired expressions form with one another a symmetrical tensor which possesses the property of Lorenz-invariance, while the unconserved quantities of the two paired expressions form, with one another, another symmetrical tensor which also possesses the property of Lorenz-invariance. It is the Lorenz invariant tensorial relationship of the paired conserved quantities which is responsible for the Lorenz invariance and tensorial nature of the paired unconserved quantities and not the converse. For example, the fact that momentum and energy may be subsumed together under a unified description as the relativistic momentum-energy tensor is what is

responsible for the tensorial nature of the interrelationship of the space and time variables, i.e., the Lorenz-invariance of space and time which manifests itself separately as time-dilation and length-contraction which is observed within frames of reference traveling an appreciable fraction of the velocity of light relative to an observer reference frame. The momentum-energy tensor is, by the way, also responsible for the Lorenzinvariant, tensorial nature of the Maxwell tensor describing the electromagnetic field, and we may now see why the Maxwell tensor does not possess a term denoting the divergence of the magnetic field, i.e., why magnetic monopoles do not exist in nature. Aesthetically minded physicists have for generations noted this missing term in Maxwell's equations and suggested the inevitable existence of monopoles, since their existence would render the electromagnetic field equations more perfectly symmetrical. But we see now that the lack of greater symmetry in Maxwell's equations is explicable in terms of the presence of the even deeper symmetry of the Heisenberg uncertainty relations, and so this apparent lack of symmetry on the part of the electromagnetic field need no longer be viewed as a "flaw" in the structure of mathematical physics. This deeper symmetry may be understood in the following way: the fluctuation in electric field strength ( an unconserved quantity ) is due to the uncertainty in the position (an unconserved quantity) of a conserved quantity - electric charge, combined with the uncertainty in momentum ( a conserved quantity ) of the magnetic charge ( an unconserved quantity ). If we try to establish the fluctuation in the magnetic field strength independently of the fluctuation in electric field strength, we end up violating the symmetry of the uncertainty relations, e.g., the fluctuation in magnetic field strength ( an unconserved quantity ) is due to the uncertainty in charge momentum ( a conserved quantity) of a conserved quantity - electric charge, combined with the uncertainty in charge position (an unconserved quantity ) of the magnetic charge (assumed here to be a conserved quantity ). Again, the symmetry is only restored here by treating magnetic charge as an unconserved quantity. We may apply our rule in a more direct fashion by postulating an

uncertainty relation which obtains provided that magnetic charges do exist. This uncertainty relation is the product of uncertainties in electric and magnetic charge. To wit, the product in the uncertainties of these two physical quantities must be greater than or equal to the value of Planck's constant. Following our same symmetrically-based rule, we find that Planck's constant must be less than or equal to the product of uncertainties in a conserved quantity and an unconserved quantity. This new uncertainty relationship would be written, expressing Planck's constant as the lower limit for the product of the uncertainty in electric charge with the uncertainty in the quantity of magnetic charge, divided by c, the speed of light, in order to have consistency of physical dimensions. Again, only one of these paired quantities is the conserved quantity, and this conserved physical quantity must be the electric charge. So we see from consideration of the symmetry exhibited by the many alternate expressions of the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, that if monopoles exist, their charge cannot be a conserved quantity so that magnetic charge may not possess a quantum number. However, if Maxwell's equations are modified to allow for the existence of magnetic charge, the symmetry of these equations demands magnetic charge conservation, but this leads to a contradiction with the more general symmetry argument for the non-conservation of magnetic charge, and so we see that magnetic charge cannot exist. QZ Particle creation in a non-inertial reference frame is not a symmetrical process: it is not possible for one to accelerate in such a manner that real particles become virtual particles, i.e., are absorbed back into the vacuum energy field from which they were originally created in the same way that it is not possible to accelerate in such a manner that the local rate at which time passes increases rather than decreases; however, if a given real particle does not have an infinite lifetime (which no particle does), then within an unaccelerated reference frame, the lifetimes of quasi-stable particles, as viewed from an accelerated reference frame, will be shortened by the relativistic time dilation factor.

It is in terms of this fundamental asymmetry that we can more simply resolve the so-called twin paradox of special relativity: the acceleration of the spacefaring twin and the earthbound twin cannot be considered to be merely relative because the twin in the rocketship observes thermal particle production within his vacuum, while the twin confined to the Earth observes no such phenomenon within his own vacuum. This phenomenon of particle production within accelerated reference frames is to be expected because a particle is real only if its energy is greater than the energy uncertainty of quantum system to which it belongs, and the time dilation associated with accelerated motion affects the fundamental uncertainty relation, ^E^t > h, such that some particles which were virtual within the unaccelerated frame relativistically increase their energy which is now even greater in relation to a reduced energy uncertainty, and so "become" real particles within the new vacuum state. All particles which are virtual in one particular reference frame are real particles with respect to some other reference frame; the converse of this is not the case, however - the irreversibility enters the picture, as stated before, through the differential observations of thermal particle production within the vacuum of observers within different inertial frames of reference. This relationship between real and virtual particles within special relativity can perhaps be understood as a restatement of the principle of causality within special relativity: events which are causally connected in one particular reference frame are causally connected and have the same time order within all possible reference frames, and it is only those events which are not causally connected (nor potentially causally connected) which might have the order of their occurrence switched when observed from the standpoint of different reference frames, from which it also follows that events which are not causally connected within a given frame of reference, are not connected in any reference frame. Real particle production within a vacuum of reduced energy uncertainty may be interpreted as being converse but parallel to the process of virtual particle production within a vacuum of increased energy uncertainty. Also, if real particles are understood as feedback structures of virtual particle processes which essentially may be understood as a network of

circular energy fluxes, these individual processes being causally connected with one another within one particular spacetime, then these feedback structures are destroyed when the energy uncertainty of the vacuum becomes greater than the energy of the real particles, so that an increase of energy uncertainty is associated with a loss of information in the form of the cybernetic control "holding the particles together." June 2013 The so-called twin paradox of special relativity is easily solved using the principle of the conservation of four momentum. It is only the accelerating twin who changes the distribution of three momentum across the four components of his conserved four momentum. The other, stay-at-home twin does not change the distribution of the four components of his four momentum and so all relativistic effects are only associated with the accelerated twin. Consequently, the particles which are produced within an accelerated reference frame, say, within the curved spacetime of a gravitational potential, may not "appear" out of the vacuum in a collective state of causal interconnection with one another. The only assurance that a set of particles is not causally connected with one another, i.e., locally connected, is if they are nonlocally connected. Moreover, the notion of the continuous existence of particles is simply not consistent with the asymmetry of virtual particle/ real particle transformations which are necessitated by a change in Lorenz frames. We know that virtual particles do not preserve their identity from one moment to the next; by "moment" we mean a period of time greater than h/E , where E is the total energy of the virtual particle-antiparticle pair which has been spontaneously created out of the vacuum state. We also know that this particular virtual pair will appear as a pair of real particles with respect to an accelerated frame of reference. So if the virtual pairs possess no enduring continuous existence within a flat spacetime, then neither do they possess a continuous existence within any other possible frame of reference. This notion follows simply from the principle of the general equivalence (from the standpoint of the fundamental invariance of physical law) of all frames of reference. From this we arrive at the

general result that real particles, what we call matter, must be a stable pattern of fluctuation of the field energy of the quantum mechanical vacuum, whereas virtual particles are unstable patterns of vacuum field fluctuation. Here we see that the fundamental difference between stable and unstable patterns of vacuum fluctuation, real and virtual particles, respectively, is not qualitative, but quantitative; it is due merely to the availability or non-availability of raw, undifferentiated energy. The structure of all possible matter configurations already exists latent within the vacuum fluctuation field; what is required to "create" these configurations is simply the necessary quantity of raw energy. April 2011 But this is only true up the limit set by the Planck energy. Configurations of vacuum stress-momentum-energy larger than E Planck must have been “assembled” from configurations smaller than EPlanck, c.f., arXiv:quantph/0603269 v2 12 Jul 2006 April 2011 When energy is supplied to the vacuum, the structures which are produced are simply those which are the most probable and hence the simplest. More exotic configurations of matter may be produced if energy is supplied to the vacuum field while it is experiencing "improbable" fluctuation patterns. These so-called improbable fluctuations are simply those which possess a more fleeting existence. In the August 1993 issue of Scientific American there appears an article which describes experiments in which the time for photons to quantum mechanically tunnel through a barrier is measured for a coherent beam of incident photons where 99% of the beam is reflected off of the barrier, but in which approximately 1% of the photons are transmitted ("tunnel") across the barrier. The experimental data indicated that the photons which tunneled through the barrier traveled at superluminal speeds, some of the photons reaching 1.7c. The phenomenological explanation for this was that the tunneling photons changed the shape of their wavefunctions such that the peak of the wave function is shifted in the direction of photon tunneling, resulting in the photons having a finite probability of being found just on the opposite side of the barrier somewhat earlier than if the shape of their wavefunctions had experienced no distortion. Increasing the width of the barrier decreased

the probability of photons successfully tunneling through the barrier, but resulted in increased measured superluminal velocities for the photons, which actually succeeded in tunneling through the barrier. June 1997

In this case, the photons' wavefunction peak had to shift toward the opposite end of the barrier faster if they were to be observed on the other side of the barrier within the short time that it would have taken for the photon to be absorbed by the barrier. In theory, particles which quantum-tunnel through a potential barrier possess a negative kinetic energy, and hence an imaginary momentum while engaged in the tunneling process. If the four-momentum of the tunneling photons is conserved (as it is required to do by special relativity), then an increased photon imaginary momentum must be precisely compensated by an increased real photon momentum such that the magnitude of total four-momentum of the photon is, again, conserved: the tunneling photons are effectively being scattered in fourdimensional spacetime! April 2011 The tunneling photons possess a negative imaginary momentum while in the act of tunneling through the barrier. April 2011

A photon scattered within a four-dimensional space would experience a decrease in its so-called real momentum; (actually, in this case, the real momentum of the photon is simply the momentum associated with its motion though the space which is directly observable to us, i.e., 3 dimensions) however, the scattering of a photon within a 4-dimensional space where it is possible for the interval, ds2 < 0, superluminal velocities are made possible by the conservation, as stated earlier, of the photon's four-momentum. If there is a functional relationship between the integral of both the gravitational self-energy and the kinetic energy of cosmological expansion, then there will be a functional relationship between the gravitational self-energy of expansion and the kinetic energy of expansion such that when the kinetic energy of cosmological expansion approaches zero, the gravitational self-energy of the Universe approaches zero, implying a flat global spacetime geometry. Because of

the negative feedback coupling between the kinetic and gravitational self-energies, we expect that these two energies are strongly coupled in the early history of the cosmological expansion, but become very weakly coupled by this relatively late epoch in the history of the Universe. In this scenario we expect a time variation in the strength of the Newton's gravitational constant which is proportional to the time derivative of the quantity, e-t/T , where T = 1/H where H is Hubble's constant. This gives a time variation of G of H/e x G. Since the coupling between the gravitational self-energy and the kinetic energy of cosmological expansion is virtually zero in the present epoch of the Universe's history, we expect that there will obtain a force of cosmological repulsion which almost exactly counterbalances the gravitational force which would tend to slow and eventually reverse the process of cosmological expansion. QUESTION: We know that for low velocities, the addition of velocities is according to Galilean relativity, i.e., velocities are simply additively superposed. However, it does not appear that small accelerations may be simply additively superposed according to Galilean relativity. According to what rule are both large and small accelerations added together to yield the total relative acceleration? The energy required to rotate a pure imaginary momentum by 90o so that this momentum becomes a pure real momentum is just mc 2. This quantity of energy may be thought of as the latent energy of matter which it possesses by virtue of its being initially accelerated by the forces of the Big Bang explosion. The negative kinetic energy of matter implies the existence of a hyperspherical potential barrier through which all matter tunneled (in quantum mechanical fashion and through which it continues to tunnel. This notion constitutes a kind of hyper-extended inflationary theory. The gradient of this potential associated with this barrier may be described by a pure imaginary four-vector ( in "free space" ), while the orientation of the gradient of this hyperspherical potential is altered in the presence of mass-energy in such a manner that the magnitude of the gradient (in four dimensions ) is always conserved. Given a typical

distribution of matter, in general this four vector will possess no nonzero components, and the introduction of new matter into this distribution will transform the components of the potential gradient fourvector after the manner of a second rank tensor. In fact, this tensor provides the "connecting rule" by which the gradient transforms, as we move along an arbitrary trajectory through a given matter distribution, considering in succession points along the trajectory which are only negligibly distant from one another (so that the potential does not change "too rapidly" between successive points). All of the terms of Einstein's general relativistic field equations are second rank tensors, the energymomentum tensor providing the rule by which the metric tensor at one point in spacetime is transformed at infinitesimally contiguous points of spacetime. We must keep in mind that the potential gradient around any particular particle of matter is described by a four-vector, and it is only the meshing of the gradients of one particle's vector field with that of its neighbor which requires the use of a tensor description. July 1997

Russel Clark send me this Email:

Thema: Luxon Theory Datum: 30.07.97 02:39:28 From: [email protected] To: [email protected] In support of your rather interesting theory the following: Imagine, as you say, that matter is indeed travelling at the speed of light all the time, even when it appears to be at rest. The initial momentum of a given mass then might be,

p = m(ic) Now when the mass is accelerated to a velocity v, the mass' new velocity becomes,

v'= sqrt[v**2 + (i**2)c**2] = v'= sqrt[v**2 - c**2] such that the final momentum of the mass is now

p'= m' x sqrt[v**2 - c**2] If we equate the intial momentum with the final momentum (conservation of 4-momentum, if you will) we have,

m(ic) = m' x sqrt[v**2 - c**2] yielding, m = m'/(ic) x sqrt[v**2 - c**2] but

ic = sqrt[i**2 x c**2] = sqrt[-c**2] so that

m = m'/sqrt[-c**2] x sqrt[v**2 - c**2] = m = m' x [1 - v**2/c**2] such that

m' = m/[1 - v**2/c**2] which is just the special relativistic mass formula of Einstein. The coefficient "i" comes into play in the above manipulations because multiplication by "i" or e**(i)pi/2 is the only way to rotate a vector in 3 space without producing another vector within the same 3 space; multiplication by "i" takes a 3-vector out of the 3-d manifold and so represents the relationship of time to the other three spatial axes. There are other reasons for, perhaps, including the coefficient "i" within quantum tunneling, for example, as in the case of matter tunneling through a hyperspherical potential barrier while appearing at rest in 3 spatial dimensions. Moreover, we may integrate the momentum of a mass, m, as it is accelerated from a velocity v(init.) = ic to a final velocity v(fin.) = c. This yields,

Intgrl[mv]dv (v = ic to v = c) = 1/2 mv**2 evaluated between the limits of v = ic and v = c which yields,

1/2m(c**2) - 1/2m(i**2 x c**2) = mc**2 Of course the energy of motion is just the integral of the momentum from the initial to the final velocities. Best Regards, Russell Clark

If this vector field were assumed to be quantized, so that a unique exchange particle, or boson, were thought to mediate the action of the field, then this boson would have a spin of 1, not 2, and hence could not be described as a graviton, itself the mediator of a purely attractive force field; a spin 1 particle, however, is the exchange particle of a force field which is, like the photon, either attractive or repulsive, depending on whether the gradient of the potentials of both particles are of like sign or of opposite sign. The "charge" of the matter particles corresponds to the case of the particles being either of real or imaginary mass, as stated earlier. The effect, however, of two matter particles of either both real mass or both imaginary mass upon each other's spin 1 vector fields is to

create a stress within the spacetime between the two particles which, as we stated earlier, must be described in terms of a tensor field. The imaginary mass of virtual particles, as alluded to earlier, would result in a mutually repulsive force field tending to drive these virtual particles apart from one another, resulting in the cosmological expansion of the vacuum, or of space itself. Localized deficits in the density of imaginary mass (due to the "displacing" presence of real mass) would manifest themselves in a diminution of the cosmological acceleration vector describing the cosmological force of repulsion obtaining between all virtual particles. The acceleration of massive particles due to gravitational fields may be interpreted as an attempt on the part of real massive particles to maintain a spherically symmetrical distribution of vacuum energy about themselves - a condition obtaining for a particle at "rest" with respect to some fundamental reference frame. The general relativistic effect of mass increase within a gravitational field may be explained in terms of a function of the alteration in the three variables: vacuum energy density, magnitude of the hyperspherical potential barrier, and the imaginary momentum of the particle experiencing the mass increase. The mechanism by which the vacuum energy density is reduced by the presence of mass-energy has already been discussed. The reduction in the local value of the hyperspherical potential is explained in terms of the projection of its gradient within an altered spacetime. The alteration in the imaginary momentum is also explained in terms of its projection within the same altered spacetime. The retardation in the local rate of cosmological expansion which manifests itself as a linear increase in the loss of synchronization of clocks separated by a difference in gravitational potential and which according to general relativity is an effect of gravitational time dilation alone, is on our view on account of the conservation of four-momentum of the body engendering the gravitational potential. The mass of the body, as measured from the point of weaker gravitational potential, is increased by a fraction equal to the fractional change in the vacuum's zero-point energy density at the point of greater potential, relative to the point of weaker potential, where the density of this vacuum energy ( in

free space ) is equal to the density of mass energy of a black hole mass of radius equal to the radius of the body in question which is producing the difference in gravitational potential. One might justifiably ask about any 2nd or higher order effects which could arise out of the particular cosmological vacuum mechanism that we propose for the gravitational field. For instance, if the time rate of decrease in the energy density of the vacuum is suppressed (relative to its "free space" value) in regions of spacetime possessing massive bodies, then wouldn’t one expect a kind of "piling up" of vacuum energy in those regions of spacetime where general relativistic time dilation is locally strongest in such a manner that a repulsive gravitational field develops? , c.f. , Dr. Brian L. Swift. The relationship in general relativity between mass and curvature where increasing curvature leads to increasing mass as well as increasing mass leading to increasing curvature has an analogy within our theory of gravitation based on spatiotemporal variation in vacuum energy density. Within our theory, decreasing vacuum energy density leads to increasing mass and increasing mass leads to decreasing vacuum energy density. Within our theory, the role of the metric tensor components, gik, correspond to the 2nd partial derivatives of vacuum energy density with respect to the variables x,y,z, ict. The stress-momentum-energy tensor of general relativity corresponds to the 2nd partial derivatives of the mass, or nongravitational binding energy density within our theory. The 1st partial derivatives are not sufficient to provide the mathematical structure needed to describe the spatiotemporal variations in the vacuum energy density responsible for the parasitic gravitational force. We must remember that Newton's third law of action-reaction is modified within relativity theory and that it does not strictly hold within this theory. No gravitational forces must lie along any 3-hypersurface of simultaneity within 4-dimensional spacetime. It is easy to see why this is so when one considers two distinct points which are gravitationally coupled, i.e., connected by a geodesic arc. The time rates of change in the vacuum energy density at these two spacetime points differ by an amount related to the differential severity of gravitational time dilation (relative to some arbitrary 3rd point in

spacetime) and so there is a variation in the time rate of change of vacuum energy density as one moves along the geodesic arc connecting these two points. We believe that the role of the curvature tensor within general relativity is to fix the relationship of the metric and momentumenergy tensors with respect to the condition of spacetime at the arbitrary point within it where the observer is located. Are two gravitationally coupled points within spacetime linked by a geodesic arc of the spacetime, or are they linked by an arc length of null spacetime interval, where ds = 0? If a spin 0 particle decays into two spin 1/2 particles of opposite sign (so as to conserve spin quantum number ), and the two spin 1/2 particles become separated by a great distance such that when a quantum spin measurement is performed upon one of the two particles, the wavefunction which describes both particles "collapses" so that the spin orientation of the unmeasured particle must instantly become opposite to that of the spin orientation observed in the measurement of the former spin 1/2 particle. This EPR (Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen) type gedanken experiment, performed within a curved spacetime raises an interesting question concerning the wavefunction which describes the two particles, as this wavefunction takes two different forms at two points along any segment of a curved spacetime. If the communication between the two spin 1/2 particles is nonlocal and hence "instantaneous," then the wavefunction experiences a discontinous change at the point in spacetime occupied by the second particle, i.e., the wavefunction as expressed within spacetime B is instantaneously expressed in terms of the nonlocally connected spacetime A, where measurement of the spin of the first particle was performed; in this way the spins of the two particles would add to zero, resulting in spin remaining a "good" quantum number. However, the only way to avoid the appearance of discontinuity (of the wavefunction) , in this case, is to postulate the existence of a physical description which is more fundamental than the wavefunction itself so that the wavefunction becomes but the projection, within a given local spacetime, of the more fundamental physical description. which itself remains continuous. June

1997

If such a more fundamental description of the quantum

mechanical system exists, then why is the reduction of the wavepacket or collapse of the wavefunction itself necessarily accompanied by a discontinuous change in the probabilities for observation/measurement of physical observables? We might rather assume for consistency's sake (that of QM) that the wavefunction describing the particle pair must undergo a "self-collapse" when some critical separation of the particles is reached - a separation at which the difference in the representation of the pair, in terms of its wavefunction expressed within the local spacetimes of either particle of the pair, has reached some critical value. This critical value would, according to Penrose, be related to the massenergy difference of the spacetimes in which each particle is embedded. Perhaps as long as this mass-energy difference is less than the most energetic massless particle which can be defined within a self-consistent theory of quantum gravity, say, the mass-energy of a Planck particle of some 10-8g, there is no necessity that the wavefunction describing the particle pair undergo what Penrose terms "Objective Reduction," (OR), because, perhaps, the energy difference up to this critical value of massenergy can be compensated through the exchange of a massless quantum (boson), i.e., through exchange of a virtual particle representing a vacuum 3-momentum fluctuation. Another possible explanation of the objective reduction of the pair's wavefunction is related to the overall energy uncertainty of the component of the quantum vacuum of both particles. This is to suggest that when the difference in mass-energy of the local spacetimes of both particles exceeds the energy uncertainty of the nonlocally connected component of the local vacua of the particles, objective reduction of the pair's wavefunction must take place - for otherwise, the mass-energy difference in the local spacetimes of the particles has outstripped the nonlocally-connected vacuum's ability to compensate the disparity in the local spacetime representations of the pair's wavefunction in the spacetimes of each particle, resulting in the incommensurability of the quantum numbers of each particle should a reduction of the pair's wavefunction take place after this critical difference in spacetimes has been reached - as a result of the spatial separation of the particles. What has been said thus far suggests that quantum entanglement, i.e., nonlocal connectivity, of particles or fields

within significantly differing local spacetimes may not be admissible in a consistent theory of quantum gravity. This, in turn, suggests that nonlocal vacuum process may not actually be responsible for the maintaining of particular spacetime geometries or that, there is some rather small limit to the differences in local spacetime curvatures within an overall nonlocally connected vacuum. We must investigate the possibility that the temporality, i.e., the rate of time's passage relative to cosmic time, of a local spacetime is directly related to the nonlocal connection of the local vacuum of this spacetime to the nonlocallyconnected vacuum of the universe at its largest scale. The result of this maneuver, however, is that quantum mechanics could no longer be viewed as a "complete theory," since the wavefunction would no longer constitute a complete description, in general, of a quantum mechanical system. On the other hand, if the expression of the wavefunction remains in terms of its own local spacetime, then there is no unique wavefunction which describes both particles prior to a measurement being performed on one of the particles, so that the spins of the two particles would not necessarily add to zero after a spin measurement is performed, with the result that spin would not be a "good" quantum number within a curved spacetime. In such as case, the general invariance of physical law within the theory of relativity would be violated. According to the physicist David Bohm, in his book, The Special Theory of Relativity, the latent energy, E = mc2, which any particle of mass, m, possesses, exists by virtue of internal motions, which may be thought of as taking place within the particle, or alternately defining the existence of the particle, and that the conversion of mass into energy, and vice versa, consists merely in converting the circular internal motions of a number of mass(ive/less) virtual particles into a set of linear external motions of a number of massless real particles, and then converting them back again into the original set of circular internal motions. It is as though one were to take a tiny particle in rapid linear motion, bend or divert this motion

so that it assumed the form of a rapid circular motion, so that the particle now possessed the appearance of a ring, and then utilize a portion of this circular motion to set the ring rotating so rapidly that the ring now took on the appearance of a solid sphere, most of which, to be sure, would be composed of empty space, but which would possess a great deal of energy by virtue of the two perpendicular internal circular motions which, in conjunction with one another, defined the sphere's existence, and then to proceed to undo, or reverse this series of operations, retrieving the original linear motion with which one started. We know, of course, that this simple analogy of the "kinetic sphere" is rather naive, and that it is only intended as a basic model of the interconnected meshwork of virtual particle reactions, which defines the existence of any real particle. The important point here is that there is an exact parallel between this internal circular motion and the linear motion of massive particles along the imaginary axis of our cosmological model of the hypersurface which is expanding at the speed of light, or rather, of the hyperspherical potential energy barrier through which all massive particles are presently in the process of quantum mechanically tunneling, at approximately the speed of light. To explore this parallel, we need to make a relatively simple observation about the relationship of the internal circular motions to the external linear motions into which they are converted whenever mass is converted into energy. We notice from the example of the "kinetic sphere," that it only required two independent (orthogonal) internal motions in order to define the existence of this 3 dimensional object. We imagine that this conversion of these two circular, orthogonal "internal" motions will result in the creation of two linear, orthogonal "external" motions. We believe this conversion process is described by an isomorphic group operation, such that the number of dimensions of motion is conserved, while the orthogonality of the motions is retained, because the conversion of energy into mass, the reverse of this operation, is accomplished through a continuous series of simple Lorenz transformations, i.e., through the relativistic mass-velocity relationship of Einstein, and because we know that the conversion of energy into

mass is a reversible (symmetrical) operation so that the conversion of mass into energy can be described in terms of a linear matrix operation; i.e., it is group-theoretic in nature. But we know that the direct conversion of mass into energy produces an out-rush, if you will, of released energy which streams outward in 3 spatial dimensions. This obvious empirical fact seems to require that there be 3 independent orthogonal, circular, internal motions which underlie the latent energy of massive bodies, and this implies that massive bodies which possess this latent energy, E = mc2, must be, either themselves, 3 dimensional hypersurfaces binding a 4 dimensional hypervolume, such that the mass possesses three independent degrees of freedom, or that they must possess two circular (orthogonal) internal motions, defining two dimensional surfaces binding 3 dimensional volumes constituting the massive particles, and that the third orthogonal internal degree of freedom is that associated with the linear motion of these 3 dimensional objects which occupy a 3 dimensional hypersurface which is expanding within four spatial dimensions at the speed of light. There seems to be a problem, however, in associating all of the latent energy of motion, E = mc2, with the linear degree of freedom associated with the cosmological expansion, simply because it means ignoring the contributions from the two other internal degrees of freedom, corresponding to the internal motions of massive bodies. If, however, we assume an equipartation of energy between the energy magnitudes associated with all three degrees of freedom, and this seems reasonable because the Lorenz transformation of special relativity represents a symmetrical operation, then the energy, mc2, which is needed to rotate the pure imaginary linear momentum by 90o, to convert it into a pure real momentum, is provided by the two energies, 1/2mc2 and 1/2mc2, respectively, associated with the two circular internal degrees of freedom. In this way, the two energies, 1/2mc2, combined with the negative kinetic energy, -1/2mc2, of massive particles, tunneling through the hyperspherical potential energy barrier, yields the new energy, +1/2mc2, associated with the pure real momentum of outstreaming massless particles which results from the total conversion of a real massive body into energy.

We now see that the energy of massive bodies, mc 2, may be thought of as stemming, alone, from the internal motions defining these bodies, which is released whenever these circular internal motions, i.e., the energy circulating within the feedback loops of the virtual particle reactions composing the massive bodies, is "deflected" into the linear motion of real massless particles. An additional bonus from these considerations is that it is now possible to see that the distinction between virtual and real particles is not a fundamental one. Mass, on this view, is simply a function of the topological structure of the virtual particle reactions which occur everywhere within the quantum mechanical vacuum on account of a fundamental energy uncertainty of the vacuum state which, in turn, stems from the fact that the Hamiltonian of the vacuum is, itself, a function of the "incompatible" observables, position and momentum. Moreover, the massless force-carrying particles, i.e., bosons, which are the end product of any total conversion of matter into energy, exist solely by virtue of their interaction with the vacuum state, and in no way depend upon, or are defined by, any selfinteraction. Consequently, these massless bosons, e.g., photons, can be considered to be virtual particles even though are capable of being observed. In other words, the mass which a given volume of space possess is merely a function of the imbalance in the ratio of the volume's self-interaction to its, if you will, not-self-interaction: in free space, where no matter is present, the flux density of energy exchange between the interior of an arbitrary volume with itself and the flux density of energy exchange between the interior of this volume and its exterior, is delicately balanced. It is the alteration of this balance in favor of greater self-energy exchanges, which engenders the phenomenon of mass. The self-energy exchanges correspond to the energies of circular internal motion, discussed earlier, which we invoked as a simplistic model of the interconnected meshwork of virtual particle reaction paths defining the existence of massive bodies. There is a very convenient mathematical description of this self-energy and so-called not-self-energy exchanges; these are, respectively: the energy density and the pressure of the vacuum. This balance of external and internal vacuum energy exchanges is exact, indicating the condition of free space, obtains,

therefore, when the pressure and energy density of the vacuum are equal, and it is on this condition that the speed of light has its maximum local value, as seen from application of Mach's formula for the speed of pressure wave oscillations within a material medium. There is no reason why we may not apply Mach's formula in this case because the only essential difference between the propagation of pressure oscillations in a material medium such as the Earth's atmosphere and such oscillations in the vacuum is that of Lorenz invariance, i.e., the value of the speed of sound within a material medium is dependent on the state of motion of the observer performing the velocity measurement, while the velocity of "sound," i.e., light, within the vacuum is itself independent of the state of motion of the observer within this vacuum. Another way to point up this difference between the vacuum and an ordinary material medium is to note that the particles within the vacuum, being virtual particles, do not possess a continuous existence with time and so cannot be chosen as the origin of an absolute frame of reference within which the velocity of pressure oscillations of the vacuum might be measured relative to an observer's state of motion. An ordinary material medium such as the atmosphere is composed of particles which possess a continuous existence and so an absolute frame of reference may be established within this medium by which the velocity of pressure oscillations of the medium may be measured which is then dependent upon the state of motion of the observer. The ict axis of Minkowski four-dimensional spacetime, may be understood not to represent a physically real 4th dimension, in an analogous sense to the other three familiar spatial dimensions, but that it merely functions as an abstraction within the formalism of special relativity to model conservation laws, e.g., energy, momentum, etc., and the linear transformation law connecting inertial reference frames (the Lorenz transformation) which, in turn, govern the general relationship of the internal and external motions of real/virtual mass and field energy within a universe of three spatial dimensions and one time dimension. Perhaps now it is easy to see why it is not necessary to underpin the

mathematical structure of special relativity with a physically real 4th dimension. It is perhaps possible to remain consistent with Einstein's and Minkowski's view of time as being associated with what is merely an abstract (not physically real) dimension. If the Universe is not, in fact, and expanding 4-dimensional hypersphere, then the Hubble distance-velocity relationship for galactic recession requires the existence of a repulsive cosmological force field whose force increases linearly with galactic separation. The gradient of the hyperspherical potential, postulated earlier to explain, in part, the imaginary coefficient of the ict axis, would itself then have to be interpreted as a manifestation of the negative time-rate-of-change in the energy density of the quantum mechanical vacuum which occurs due to the global cosmological expansion. Moreover, the continuous series of local Lorenz transformations which may be thought to connect two non-inertial reference frames (centered about two points in space of differing gravitational potential) would be understood in terms of a continuous tensor transformation of the four independent components of spatiotemporal variation in vacuum energy density, i.e., the gravitational energy gradient (spatial variation in vacuum energy density) in conjunction with the temporal variation of vacuum energy density, connecting the two non-inertial frames of reference. The equivalence between spatiotemporal variations in vacuum energy density and variations in spacetime curvature may be more simply grasped by examining two different expressions of the Heisenberg uncertainty principle within curved spacetimes. These two expressions are: ^E^t > h and ^p^x > h. We know that within a curved spacetime, say, in the vicinity of a massive spherical body, there is a general relativistic length contraction along the spherical body's radial direction while at the same time there is relativistic dilation of time. If we are considering virtual particles, then the > sign appearing in the two formulas, above, may be replaced by an

= sign so that a dilation and a contraction in the variables, ^t and ^x, respectively, must be coupled with an inversely proportional shrinkage and dilation in the dual variables, ^E and ^p, respectively. In this way, the energy of the vacuum decreases as one moves into regions of increasing gravitational potential while the momentum of the vacuum, if you will, increases along this direction. If the vacuum momentum is correctly described by a four-vector of conserved magnitude, then the vacuum momentum may only increase with increasing strength of local gravitational potential at the expense of a compensating decrease in the vacuum's momentum along an orthogonal direction. It is the decrease in the vacuum's momentum in the direction orthogonal to the radius of our spherical massive body with which we must associate the decrease in the vacuum's energy along the body's radial direction. So we obtain what perhaps appears to be a trivial result: the momentum of the vacuum along a certain direction may only be increased by utilizing the energy of the vacuum itself associated with its momentum in directions orthogonal to the direction of increasing momentum, so that local mass distributions do not, themselves, provide the energy required to support the existence of a local gravitational field; the effect of mass is merely to redirect the vacuum momentum, utilizing the locally available energy of the vacuum itself; to put this in the language of Einstein: mass does not produce spacetime curvature, it locally alters the global curvature of spacetime. This may all seem like an exercise in splitting hairs, but there is an important difference in these two interpretations in the relationship of mass to spacetime curvature: if mass, or what amounts to mass, alone, is responsible for the existence of spacetime curvature, then an "empty" universe may not possess a globally curved spacetime. On the other hand, if mass merely locally alters the background spacetime curvature, then there is nothing to prevent the existence of so-called empty, curved spacetimes. It is not correct to say that energy and information are interdefinable so that if energy is a conserved quantity, then information is also a conserved quantity. A simple counterexample suffices here. It is possible for transitions to occur, within a gas, say, where both the

entropy and the energy of the gas are conserved, even though the different configurations between which the transitions occur may be thought of as representing different quantities of information so that information is not itself conserved. The notions of energy and entropy are separable from the notion of information because the former are only definable with respect to a closed system of a finite number of distinct state space configurations while the latter is always defined with respect to something outside the system in which its coded configuration is defined. It is not possible for one thing to represent another unless there be at least two distinct levels of description available to the system within which the representation is to be constructed. If we waive the requirement of an "external" observer who is to give different meanings to the different configurations, then information and energy are not interdefinable. Another reason for not equating the two, i.e., energy and information, is on account of the existence of energy degeneracy. Since different wavefunctions may possess the same associated energy eigenfunctions, it should be possible for a quantum mechanical system possessing energy degeneracy to undergo arbitrary transitions from one degenerate eigenfunction to another without the changes be associated with changes in any definable QM observables. 07/98 I have found that under certain unusual sleeping condition such as the presence of bright lights, chemical stimulants (caffeine or a nicotine patch), after having previously taken a standard dose of melatonin, and especially after having returned to sleep just after being briefly awakened, that I am able to experience dreams in which I become aware that I am, in fact, merely dreaming and that none of what I am witnessing and doing is real but is something which I am manufacturing out of my own consciousness, including myself as one of the participants in the action. But precisely when this happens, when my consciousness of my role as creator of all I survey becomes total, the events I am witnessing begin to lose their independent character and the whole scene begins to quickly dissolve whereupon I immediately

awaken. It is as though my simultaneous existence as subject and object is outlawed as paradoxical, except in the partial sense of my being a mere participating "character" in the unfolding action. This is perhaps because the "currents" which power the dream become like the tributaries of a river whose flow must quell upon reaching the level of the river's source; as long as the "self" which is creating the dreamphenomena (the source) is "higher" than the "self" which participates in it on equal par with the other "participants" (the tributaries) the action continues in a natural and uninterrupted manner. In the fleeting moments of near total consciousness, before the dreamscape has had adequate time to disintegrate, it usually occurs to me to try to do something, which is considered impossible in waking life. I may cause various objects around me to leap into the air or explode or I might even move myself to hover in the air and fly about. But usually there is barely time even to begin to try out my new "powers" before I am forced to awaken. Overwhelmingly, such miraculous acts as these I freely perform in the normal state of dreaming consciousness in which I have not the slightest clue that I am doing anything extraordinary. 

cit=

“Furthermore, we have even developed a basic understanding about how these afferent-efferent connections are blocked, normally during REM sleep, allowing the brain to self stimulate and generate the strange "offline" realities we experience during dreams (Gottesmann, 1999; Maquet, 2000)”. . . Thus, we can describe the brain, metaphorically, as a kind of “virtual reality generator”, which allows the environment outside the brain to be experienced inside it. This "out-of-brain" world comprises not only the body's external environment, but also the internal environment of other organs outside the brain (actually, we are going to demonstrate that the brain's "virtual system" generates not only a virtual world, but also a virtual self in the center of this virtual world). Each brain generates this virtual world and self using the afferent stimuli, external and internal to the body, and the virtual self produces virtual decisions and actions that will affect our body through efferent outputs (Merker, 2005). . . “1- THE "BRAIN IN

THE VAT" ARGUMENT: as brains do not exist in isolation from their surrounding environment ("inside vats"), it makes no sense to postulate that what we experience as our day-to-day reality was generated by and inside our brains (Dennet, 1991)”. April 2014 The inputs and outputs to the “virtual reality generator” of the brain, however, possess a distinctive structure that is peculiar to a linguistic grammar, which necessarily differentiates interaction of the person’s brain via coded impulses with other intelligent entities possessing brains from the mere interaction of his brain with an unintelligent environment populated by a cadre of automata or “philosophical zombies.” Consciousness on this view is a reified projection of an ego qua sociolinguistic construct, rather than being a kind of unique and mysterious “thinking substance”. (One is reminded here of how it is very difficult to fake an authentic sounding laugh.) In other words, one cannot achieve selfconsciousness, which is the precondition of reified consciousness as the medium of conscious experience in the absence of a properly robust sociolinguistic context. On an underlying physical level, one would expect “grammatical structure” to be coded in terms of a set of programmed actual and potential quantum entanglements that provide an encrypted signature of quantum correlates of conscious states. Descartes’ “thinking substance” here is a kind of hard-encrypted quantum entanglement signature possessing an open-system topology that is altogether distinct from that of a closed system machine intelligence. For one, time is spatialized in such a closed system, whereas temporality is a genuine possibility for an open system. For another, closed quantum mechanical systems do not decohere, being isolated from the environmental influences (to include vacuum electromagnetic field fluctuations), that otherwise induce this decoherence of wavefunction collapse. Coherence, cohesiveness, robustness, unity, integration, reflexivity, and so on, are system qualities that cannot be supported within a closed form computational state space, i.e., a state space that is not “context-embedded”. So chance combinational/permutational shufflings cannot bring about new

states of the system which are capable of sustaining themselves against a background of perturbing fluctuations, i.e., “noise”. It is true that “without context there is no meaning”, but the converse of this is also true” without meaning there is not context. Clearly, structures of quantum entanglement of real or simulated computational state space states cannot be included as additional states within the preexistent state space for this leads to an infinite regress. 2- THE "ROBOT/ZOMBIE" ARGUMENT: As we can imagine, and perhaps even build, organisms and machines that can behave in a way similar to humans, but without having an internal (and conscious) "virtual reality", evolution had no reason to have selected the development of "neuro-virtual" processes inside our brains (Chalmers, 1996). The answer to this argument is related to the answer to the “Brain in a Vat” argument. What functions analogously to “grammar” here is the notion of supervenience or of supervenient causation. The Gödelian flexibility to “jump outside the system”, e.g., throw out the current set of postulates and axioms, rules of inference and even to assume the truth of theorems not provable from the newly adopted logico-deductive system and what is more, to guess well the time to do this, is just the kind of neural flexibility a person needs, which I believe demands supervenience. Causal supervenience could be serviced and supported by sufficiently sensitive microstructures in the brain being slightly altered so as to come into resonance with the vacuum electromagnetic field in such a way as to facilitate information exchange between “brain and creative void” so as to, in turn, facilitate the otherwise relatively diminished capacity of a classical, unsupervised neural network to reprocess its data into higher order structures that more aptly simulate the external world along with the mental worlds of would be competitors for limited resources. We already know from Bohm’s causal principle that the fluctuation-correlation subspectrum representing deterministic cause-and-effect constitutes but a tiny subdomain within the total



spectrum. c.f., The Phenomenal World Inside the Noumenal Head of the Giant: Linking the Biological Evolution of Consciousness with the Virtual Reality Metaphor. http://www2.marilia.unesp.br/revistas/index.php/reic/article/viewFi le/733/635

Sam Bankester My internal virtual reality generator is quite mad really! vor 3 Stunden · Bearbeitet · Gefällt mir nicht mehr · 1 

Lime Cat Yeah, but it really only got out of control after you realized that you have one - a probable case of system instability provoked by outputs feeding back into inputs! Sam Bankester Oh wow..if the internal virtual self is aware he exists, creating a strange loop, then the possibility arises that strange loop entanglement between internal and external selves is taking place every time we dream. Ahhhhh!!!!! Of whom is each self aware? Tiny explosion just erupted somewhere in my hippocampus. Pretty sure I'm permanently baked now. 

Lime Cat Nah, you've been ready for that insight for a long time now.  

Lime Cat For my part, I am still trying to live down this bizarre notion of my having all along been a virtual Lilliputian living within the neural network simulation of some alien Brobdingnagian brain!

 wik=

Lime Cat http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulliver%27s_Travels...

Gulliver's Travels - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia en.wikipedia.org Travels into Several Remote Nations of the World. In Four Parts. By Lemuel Gulliver, First a Surgeon, and then a Captain of Several Ships, better known simply as Gulliver's Travels (1726, amended 1735), is a novel by Irish writer and clergyman Jonathan Swift, that is both a satire on human nature and… 

Lime Cat Of course, this lumbering Brobdingnagian is not actually selfconscious, rather, his brain has created a simulation containing a virtual self along with a consciousness of and referring exclusively to…this virtual self. So self-consciousness is really only "self"-consciousness, i.e., it is not actual, but merely metaphorical. Jesus Christ informs us that were we to have a mustard seed's faith we would be able to hurl mountains into the sea. As Christians we cannot help but take him at his word on this. Perhaps here we are now able to glimpse a fundamental difference between certainty and what we call faith. Usually Christians equate the two in some fashion, but confer with such common exhortations as "You cannot be certain of this, but you must have faith." If ordinary parlance can clarify the point I want to make it can also obscure: " I'm not as certain of this as you" vs. "He has more faith than I." That is, we commonly speak both of degrees of certainty as well as degrees of faith. Yet in the most literal sense faith is something which indeed admits of degree, certainty, on the other hand, doesn't - you are either certain about something or you are not, in which case, you are entertaining doubt. But if faith and certainty are different in the way I describe, then one cannot have faith and have certainty at

one and the same time. But we just said that if we are not certain then we must in some way entertain doubt. Faith can exist in the face of doubt, but it takes a faith, which is completely free from all doubt for us to budge mountains from their very foundations. We cannot, of course, have certainty that any thing in particular shall come to pass unless we have the type of assurance which only God himself provides in the form of Scripture or Revelation. Can we distinguish Jesus and God the Father in the following manner: Jesus is the incarnate, humble God; we might say that the Angels and ourselves witness his glory in Heaven, but not experienced by Himself personally. God the Father is Himself not a humble Being having never experienced the humiliation which Christ experienced for us on the Cross, but experiences this Glory in an intimately personal way which we sill never be able to imagine; by meditating upon it, however, we may learn to marvel at the mere idea of it. Jesus says that we must come to him as little children. What this means is that our belief in Him is based on our faith and has nothing to do with our intellects and so what we call certainty is not here the relevant quantity. We should not therefore envy those who seem to possess intellectual certainty concerning their Christian beliefs as still more clever arguments to the opposite side may be waiting just around the corner. And one is in a Catch-22 situation here because if one possesses the headstrong pride to resist the seductive and highbrowed attacks upon one's own intellectualized beliefs, then one holds these beliefs for the wrong reasons. On the other hand, if one gives way to "superior" argument, all is lost; if indeed anything worthwhile was risked in the first place. Faith can exist in the face of the gravest of doubts, c.f., "Oh Lord, please give me faith now in my moment of doubt." Intellectual certitude is toppled by even a slight suspicion. It is characterized by ignorance of the subtler complications at still deeper levels and dismay is perhaps experienced when they are suddenly uncovered, threatening what were thought to be pat arguments. However a Christian who has tried his hand at intellectualizing his beliefs but who has now learned to base them on faith, probably retains

some respect for their intellectual dimension although he now trusts that the hidden complications must ultimately work out in his favor. The Sophists of ancient Greece enjoyed indulging in disputation and debate for its own sake alone and used to pride themselves for being able to make the worse side of an argument seem the better one. Although these kind of people are still around today, intellectual justifications need not even be attacked to lose their quality of conviction as they have a natural half-life which is on the whole quite short; the newness of discovering or inventing them must soon enough begin to wear off. The Christian beliefs which they were thought to support are now weakened although the intellectual vanity which they are really in service to merely goes on to still more subtler or fancier arguments. Christian apologists must realize that part of what motivates them to put pen to paper is identical to that which motivates any writer, that is, intellectual vanity and pride. It is an inevitable fact that if one were ever to become conscious of not being a proud person one would at that very same time become proud about it. If I work a miracle I do so in complete humility; as soon as I become conscious of myself as the author of this great sign the conduit of my power becomes squelched. The faith of the mustard seed which allows me to hurl the mountain is intimately connected with my conviction that it is not myself which is the source of this terrific power, but God Himself. This complete humility which is inextricably one with the faith necessary to perform miracles can only exist if it is not conscious of itself. As we know a miracle involves the suspension of natural law which normally prevents it. We also know that natural law can only be formulated concerning objects or processes which are in principle reproducible as reproducibility depends in turn upon what is called reducibility. This is why we refer to deterministic laws describing reproducible phenomena as reductionistic. Reductionistic laws are "closed" form expressions of physical relationships which is to say they are mathematical. "Closed" because the expression contains in an abstract way everything that can possibly occur between the terms related to one another by the expression - all that is needed are the initial and boundary conditions ; nothing is able to come in from "outside," as it were, to disrupt or complicate the lattice-work of physical

relationships. @$

And this is just the point. In interacting with a truly unique entity or system I am not able to independently vary the circumstances in which I observe this system unless I am capable of distinguishing what are the dependent from what are the independent variables and to succeed in doing this I must be able to vary these experimental circumstances in a way which can be disentangled from the resulting changes in the behavior of the system itself as opposed to the conditions of the experimental setting. I can do this if the pervious state of the system is made not to carry over and influence the experiment at a later time when the system is in its new state, c.f., au=Rupert Sheldrake, cit=The Presence of the Past. Essentially this can only happen if the new state of the system is just the state of some different but identical system so that these states become decoupled from each other thus allowing that mutual relationships among the dependent (internal) variables to be distinguished from the relationships of the dependent variables to the independent (external) variables which can now in this way be manipulated independently. So "closedness" and "openness" of a system are not merely convenient descriptive labels but quite aptly describe genuine topological relations between the system variables. Should there exist variables which can be varied independently but which we are not able to control, then usually this is a symptom of overcomplexity of the system which is best overcome by the defining of various "random" variables which are then treated statistically. However, this leaves the possibility of independent variables which are neither random nor which we are able to control. These would be not definable or unknown variables and represent influences upon our system which issue from some hidden region "outside" the space-time continuum. Naturally, such systems will not be reductionistic and hence they are not reproducible but instead, are unique indeed. Every act which issues from the Will of God is necessarily a mystery to all but Himself. But the difference is that a good apologist knows how hopeless it is to completely subdue this monster and so exploits it in the service of a lofty purpose: that of hopefully turning the intellectual vanity of

others against their unbelief for just long enough so that something of real convicting power might be given its chance to work, which is to say, God's grace. By a natural extension of this analogy we may easily illustrate the major difference between what might be termed the Eastern versus Western view of God and Man as well as their relation to one another. The eastern view of this relationship seems to be that secretly the dreamer himself and that even though the dream eventually passes it is soon enough replaced by yet another where this special participant assumes some other possibly quite different form and perhaps even recalls events and participants from some previous dream. June 2013 @$

The greatest necessity for providential intelligent design is pointed up by the plurality of consciousness, i.e., consciousness’s, each of which possesses recursive privileged access and sense data incorrigibility as there must be supervenience of being (of some kind) over these multitudes of consciousness’s. The only potential candidate to provide said supervenience (c.f., philosopher Daniel Dennett) constitutes a “field of one, which is to say, God. Consciousness works for everybody and not just for one person, which would indeed have been the case for a solipsist who did not indeed possess the creative powers of a bona fide deity. Although reincarnation is usually associated with this kind of conception it is not really consistent with the full-blooded Eastern view that the individual soul is just an illusion; if I am, on account of this doctrine, not really different from you or anybody else for that matter, then neither am I any more like one particular person who lived at any time in the past than I am from any of his millions of contemporaries unless, of course, I secretly subscribe to the more or less theistic view that there is, indeed, such a thing as an individual immortal soul. If I were to claim that I am the reincarnation of Thales, the founder of Greek philosophy, then you may make the deduction from this that I could not then be the reincarnation of Laotzsu, the founder of Taoism as he and Thales were contemporaries; but then this in turn implies that the distinction between Thales and Laotzsu cannot secretly be an illusion and this is contra hyp.

Salvation for the Easterner is effected by the shedding of this illusion of individuality; the paltry and minuscule particle of being returns to its source which is Being itself. Here the Ego is identified with selfconsciousness. On the Western, theistic view, on the other hand, the Ego and the individual Soul are indeed two distinct entities, the Ego being a false aggrandizement of one's true individuality (the Soul), alienating it from the Divine Will and known as Sin which is Pride. Salvation for Christianity is effected by the removal of Sin (Pride) with the result that the individual Will and the Divine Will become One. We should consider in this connection the puzzling statement in the book of Ecclesiastes, that the spirit returns to the Father who made it. ( August 2012 This is apparently without regard to the ultimate fate of the soul). Another important distinction here is the manner in which Salvation is effected. For the Easterner, Salvation can be achieved through the individual's own efforts, through the practice of various types of selfdiscipline, and concerns itself not so much with seeking a desirable state in the Afterlife as with the avoidance of suffering in an endless cycle of Death and Rebirth to which one is confined through the influence of Karma. @$

Perception is largely governed by expectations conditioned by previous experience. Memory is selective. The tale grows in the retelling. The most we can mean by "objective reality" is intersubjective reality. December 2012 However, the subjective cannot be analyzed in terms of intersubjective categories; that is by definition, from which it follows that, 1… the subjective is not objectively real and 2…what is called the real contains more than the merely objectively real. If the objective and subjective are truly disjoint, then how are they to be related together? Only by being meaningfully related (please pardon all of the italical “foot stomping”; it is not intended to be patronizing) together, of course, that is, by the grasping of a subjective insight by a solitary mind…. Language is incapable of conveying actual substance, or content, but can only convey distinctions and similarities at multiple levels of abstraction. Human suggestibility December 2012 and auto-suggestibility

(these go hand in hand, e.g., guru vs. initiate, mentor vs. protégé’, sleeping prophet, entranced yogi, etc.) … is always a factor in the seeming immediacy of interpersonal communication. The commonality of language and environment structure creates the illusion that our perceptions of this environment are similar, if nonidentical to those of our neighbors. The vagueness and confusion, if not the outright contradictory nature of, our conceptions and beliefs is never fully revealed to the individual in the absence of problem-solving applications. The courtesy and civility of strangers and acquaintances is frequently mistaken for genuine caring and regard for oneself and one's interests. The continual appearance of so-called "coincidences," which make life seem more intimately related to the individual than it is in reality, are largely artifacts of the filtering of sensory/perceptual data in the light of recent learning, still reverberating within the individual's subconscious. Altruism is an investment in the future caring and kindness extended to oneself. (One assumes that investing in raising one’s self-esteem based through the practicing of generosity shall someday reap a dividend in the form of like generosity of others.) Originality is frequently a combination of sloppy scholarship and an imperfect memory. Superstition is a metaphorical, inductive generalization upon coincidentally connected events.

“Your brain is not like a computer. It’s well laid out and energy efficient, but it’s really a survival machine that has been optimized over millions of generations of natural selection and evolution to help you survive, even lying to you when necessary in the interest of keeping you alive. That’s a central principle of how brains are organized”, c.f., The Neuroscience of Everyday Life, Sam Wang, Ph.D. epi=

We do not change. We simply embark upon new self-deceptions.

December 1999

Around 2015 rocker Michael Jackson will undergo the lengthiest surgery to date

to become the world's first human cyborg. He will be plugged into the next generation of the internet utilizing biochips implanted in his brain. Twenty years later Michael will have his brain removed, placed in a vat of some nutritive media, and with his brain connected by myriad electrodes to a quantum neural network computer, will manage to more or less download himself into a still later generation of the internet composed partly by computers capable of directly interacting with the quantum vacuum of spacetime. By 2060 AD, Michael will be the undisputed ruler of cyberspace. By this time a whole generation of persons will be spending most of their time in this simulated world of cyberspace. Many of these will decide to live the rest of their conscious lives there. Michael will become in a very real sense a God by this time. By the time a move is made to destroy his brain, he will have succeeded in totally incorporating his mind into this quantum vacuum (Inter) net and will possess genuine, if dubious immortality. By this time, it will be discovered that existence had already been taking place, prior to the emergence of the first generation Internet, for countless millennia within an ancient Internet established by our true ancestors millions of years ago. What we had all this time interpreted as the precise mathematical physical laws of nature was merely the manifestation of ancient cyber technology and programming engineered by those distant ancestors of ours, hideous, tentaculated, if not totally formless, beings of pure energy. It will only take the simulated reality (Internet) approaching the subtlety and complexity of this ancient reality simulation for this to become apparent centuries before the dawn of 3000 AD. As Carl Sagan has said, if the Universe is billions of years old, then the average age of civilizations in the Universe would be on the order of 100's of millions of years. So what are the chances then, that ours is only five or six thousand years old? Given a Gaussian distribution of civilization age, ours would occupy the 0.0000000001st percentile. What are the chances of that? By the year 3000 AD, our civilization will have discovered its true age - perhaps 1000,000,000 years or more! Hopefully Y2K is only a glitch in the topmost (incomplete) level of simulation and exist on any deeper levels, i.e., Y2M, Y2G, etc., or we might all be in for a real surprise!

Are all signals secretly meaningful, none intrinsically noisy? July 2011 Or is it just that one man’s noise is another man’s signal? There’s no clear demarcation between, data, information and executive function signaling in the brain as these all are quantities of different levels of abstraction, each possessing the same underlying biophysical reality as the other, or so we suppose. The probability of a given complex signal belonging to two or more distinct contexts should be rendered small by virtue of the complexity potential of the signal carrier code addressing a much greater number of contexts than which are actually possible. October 2011 @$There may be a necessity of making a further distinction between data and information in the light of recent quantum entanglement and teleportation experiments and in light of Hawking’s notion of chronology protection. We perhaps need to distinguish between controllable, intentional information and information merely as “interpreted data”. Thought experiments involving quantum entanglement based communication between two or more quantum computers is what suggests the need for this additional distinction. Since the gimmick of “parallel universes” is the favorite mechanism of choice by science fiction writers for the obviating of time paradoxes, it might be worthwhile to seek one or more of the essential components of chronology protection in gedanken experiments connected with quantum superposition, specifically in the observational/experimental logic pointed up by “delayed choice”, “quantum non-demolition” and “quantum eraser” experiments. There are several distinct stages in any causal chain of events that potentially lead to a “time paradox” where one could insert a “no-go” theorem in order to head off its formation. An event horizon of a black hole is an example of chronology protection. This is because the formation of a “naked singularity”, which is otherwise permitted would enable backward timelike trajectories through spacetime. But causality is also violated by any freely willed act. The causal paradoxes involved in free will are most likely buffered and defused through the probabilistic quantum structure of spacetime, in particular the superposition principle and the principle of the complementarity of incompatible observables, i.e., the fact that

these paired observables are related through Fourier Series and inverse Fourier Series expansions. April 2014 Take a look at the link below on the two-way relatedness of quantum mechanics and free will, c.f., http://www.uncommondescent.com/physics/free-will-creates-quantumphysics-and-not-the-other-way-around/ “A quantum experiment consists basically in a device (e.g. an interferometer or a polarizer) that receives energy (light, electrons, etc.) from a source, and thereafter can produce two different detection outcomes we denote ‘1’ (if detector D1 clicks), and ‘0’ (if detector D0 clicks). The outcomes refer to registered results that are accessible to the experimenter (a human observer). Consequently, the final results of an experiment after many runs build a registered sequence of bits: 1,1,0,1,0,0,0,1,0,0…The distribution of the bits ‘1’ and ‘0’ in this string depends on device’s settings, which the experimenter can choose. For instance, by changing the settings the experimenter can cause the outcome’s distribution to go from 45 percent ‘1’ and 55 percent ‘0’, to 70 percent ‘1’ and 30 percent ’0’. Standard quantum physics establishes two things: a) For a large number of detections the outcomes fulfill a determined statistical distribution depending on the settings (for instance: 45 percent of ‘1’ and 55 percent of ‘0’). But the theory does not establish how many outcomes make a large number of them. b) For each single quantum event the outcome (which of the two detectors clicks) is unpredictable in principle for the experimenter. In this sense it is said that the quantum laws are essentially statistical, and the order of the outcomes unpredictable. However quantum physics does not establish that the sequence of outcomes (the bit string) must happen without any order and be meaningless. What is more, recent experiments are bringing to light that the experimenter’s free will and consciousness should be considered axioms (founding principles) of standard quantum physics theory. So for instance, in experiments involving “entanglement” (the phenomenon

Einstein called “spooky action at a distance”), to conclude that quantum correlations of two particles are nonlocal (i.e. cannot be explained by signals traveling at velocity less than or equal to the speed of light), it is crucial to assume that the experimenter can make free choices, and is not constrained in what orientation he/she sets the measuring devices.” (July 2012 Parallel multiverse selves act freely without engendering causal paradoxes – this is a corollary to the principle of chronology protection and what should be understood to be a kind of defn=“containment principle”.) Turning to the theory of the correlation-dissipation of fluctuations in the vacuum’s energy within the finer “interior structure” of manifest Heisenberg energy uncertainty, i.e., the “hidden variables” of quantum uncertainty we may profitably seek to define each stage in the causal chain of a “closed spacetime loop” in its act of establishing itself where nature could reliably and opportunistically intervene. The development of a standing wave structure within a superluminal signal wave packet allows us to make signal phase velocity effectively dependent upon the wavepacket group velocity instead of vice versa (the usual case), provided that the wavepacket is itself built up from the mutual interference of “retarded” and “advanced” waves, which are in turn dependent upon the initial and boundary conditions. This presupposes the notion that wavepackets, which travel with group velocity can be treated as “phase waves”, c.f., signals propagating with imaginary momentum during “quantum tunneling”. But this is subject to the special conditions for wavepacket lifetime in relation to the wavepacket’s Heisenberg energy uncertainty, i.e., simply that /\E/\t >= h. The distinction between the measurability of real particles and fields on the one hand and the immeasurability of virtual particles and fields on the other (except in statistical terms) should be of service here. Again, at each crucial step in the would be formation of a closed spacetime loop (which by the way seems to necessarily invoke a topology of twodimensional time), there should be opportunity for a presumed chronology protection mechanism to intervene. Note that if causality is really underpinned in higher dimensional time, i.e., 5d, 6d, etc.

spacetime, then closed time loops in 4d spacetime are no real threat to causality, but merely present the appearance of such to creatures not possessing the perspectival advantage afforded by intersubjectively mediated theories of causality within these higher spacetime dimensions. @$ The final stage at which a chronology protection mechanism could reasonably intervene, actually is composed of three distinct stages, namely the following: that of the formation of the observer’s and experimenter’s ideas, that of the reliable recording and that of rational application and implementation of these ideas. We would of course like “chronology protection” to possess an underlying mechanism, but unfortunately, “mechanism” by its very nature is essentially part of the general thing which a chronology protection “mechanism” is there to protect. This suggests that the chronology protection “mechanism” is to be sought within recursive structures, which would have to possess no beginning in time (to exempt them from needing to be “chronology protected”) It is starting to look like we shall be forced to seek chronology protection at some “transhuman” level, e.g., Lazslo’s Akashic Record, Hawking’s Chronology Protection Agency, the bigheaded alien programmers” “outside” the Ancestor Simulation, and so on. Because of the fundamental limitations imposed upon automation, i.e., “mechanism” by Gödel’s and Turing’s theorems, and the suspected immunity of consciousness to the theoretical limitations imposed by these theorems (probably because consciousness itself is the theory builder), we shall have to take our lead from au=Chomsky that, the most crucial step in the state censorship of ideas does not occur “at the printing press”, i.e., the mechanism, but at the very root of the process for the operation of an otherwise free press, that is, at the level of “the formation of ideas”, i.e., at the level of “consciousness”. We may ultimately seek the master mechanism of chronology protection at the highest possible level of correlation of quantum fluctuations in the sense of “higher” versus “lower” information processing, or at the boundary between reducible and irreducible complexity within the quantum vacuum, namely at the Planck energy. December 2012 @$ “Every recursive function has its equivalent iterative (non-recursive) function. Even when such equivalent iterative procedures are written, explicit stack is to be

used”, c.f., the following Scribd link: web= http://www.scribd.com/doc/57626488/Data-Structure-SampleQuestions This can be considered an alternative way of defining reductionism, which may facilitate defining more helpful concepts within philosophical discussions involving determinism, e.g., artificial intelligence, free will, reductionism, consciousness, quantum nonlocality and hidden variables, etc. December 2011 epi=

"God didn’t build the prn=Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle into the fundamental structure of the Universe in order to grace humankind with the "elbow room" befitting a free will, but merely to spare Him the annoyance of attending to the myriad details of His creation." http://phys.org/news/2013-08-teleportation-easierbut.html November 1996

What psychologists, philosophers, and theologians have referred to for millennia as "conscious-ness" is something apart from any structures of thought which might "inhere" in it and is apart from any particular sensory, perceptual, or conceptual modalities of this consciousness. This is related to Hume's complaint that whenever he tried to perceive what is called the Self, he only could seize upon some particular sensation or perception or other. July 1997

The fundamental process by which the objects of perception are generally constituted cannot itself, of course, ever be itself an object of perception. Stating this in quantum mechanical terms, quantum observables cannot constitute or be used to describe what consciousness is in its essence, but are necessarily mere manifestations of consciousness. Now the quantum state of a system is what creates the possibility of observables. Consciousness, therefore, must be intimately associated with the creation of such quantum states, but not through the mere temporal evolution of pre-existing quantum states. Consciousness must be ultimately mediated through discontinuous changes in boundary conditions, the primary example of which is the instituting of boundary

conditions upon the fundamental quantum (vacuum) field from outside spacetime. This is what essentially the process of informing means. “The question is actually quite simple in nature. Is consciousness a primordial aspect of existence, or is consciousness somehow derivative of the information that is quantized out of the void of empty space? Does consciousness somehow arise from the way information is coherently organized, or is its nature primordial, an aspect of the existence of the void? Is the void the true nature of consciousness?” “…It is possible to prove that it is impossible for consciousness to arise from the way information is coherently organized, no matter how complex that organization. If the only logical alternative is proven to be false, then in effect we have proven the only true proposition, which is that the void is the nature of consciousness.” See Non-duality: A Scientific Perspective, c.f., www.nonduality.com/publications.htm

wik=

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pontiac's_Rebellion_school_massacre

An example of school shootings that, though perhaps not "senseless", still constituted a stark example of the regretable taking of innocent human life. . . a heinous moral outrage in any historical epoch. I hate media discussions of shooters' motives because the notion of "motive" implies another notion, that of rational action, which the taking of innocent human life indeed never is. In future, dear mass media, please withold the identity of the shooter, do not discuss his supposed motives or agenda, do not interview his former girlfriend, classmates, family members, do not publish his suicide note, direct viewers/listeners to his Facebook, Twitter or Youtube page, etc. Grieve for and lend support to the families of the survivors, but by all means allow the grotesque and twisted soul of the shooter to anonymously return to the terrible void from which he was unfortunately called forth, unbidden. (Posted via Facebook on the day of the Sandyhook Elementary School mass shooting in Connecticut, USA) And so, information, unlike energy, cannot be understood in terms of the

operation of any continuity equation. The action of consciousness is inherently discontinuous with respect to any particular system of abstract forms. This type of action necessarily involves violation of any conservation laws and so the action of consciousness is inherently asymmetrical and irreversible, and, moreover its dynamic cannot be understood in terms of quantizable physical parameters/variables. An operation, such as the searching of a memory cache, does not constitute what is called thought, but is merely the seeking of thought for a connection which will merely enable its manifestation or expression in terms of a representation which is not unique, as would be appropriate to the operation of a code, and is always completed through a kind of openended complementing of the cipher medium through the interpretive action of its ground. This complementing is not logical, but translogical. Consciousness, as understood by these thinkers, if it indeed "exists," as opposed to possessing being, must be something forever prior to and underlying all these modalities or structurings of it. Consciousness is not something which is merely common to all these, for if it is, it is something which transcends individual experience since common to the experiences of any and all possible/actual persons, but the most that one can possibly mean by the term "consciousness" is one's own individual consciousness. The only way we can actually possess a genuine intuition of consciousness is if the distinction between different individual consciousnesses is merely like the distinction between a given individual's consciousness at various particular times within that individual's biography but with the merely incidental difference that the structurings/ modalities of one individual consciousness are not crossreferenced to those of another individual by virtue of a more general modality which includes them - itself less general than consciousness at large. February 2013 (020713)

It is not that a paradigm shift or Copernican revolution, i.e., where Man is pushed once again, precipitously (the wind from my fan just now pushed the sticky note off of my web cam lens as I was writing “precipit” – I had placed it there about eight hours before) away

from his center (in the Biblical Garden) and something “we know not what” is pushed toward the center, is signaled by a contradicting of reason, but by merely the appearance and current understanding (of the appearances) which is evaluated in terms of a “transcending of reason”. Reason, like consciousness then is something that we never actually have ever caught hold of, ever only having possessed a metaphor masquerading as a concept, and yet somehow we find ourselves convinced, unreflectingly that we indeed possess a concept of it (reason). Triviality as in mathematics sometimes is only itself an appearance that masks the profound and mysterious. Just as in the question of the topology of the real line there is an infrastructural context gracing things ab initio as it were. Of course, this line of critical reasoning is very question-begging in nature, considering that we are presupposing some kind of distinction between concept and metaphor and we have secretly questioned the very possibility of there being concepts at all – only metaphors. This is similar to the self-thwarting metaphysical assertion that reality is just a dream or “I have only ever known my own sense data or psychological states”. The word, “psychology” for instance presupposes not merely an umbra of context, but also a penumbra, that is, a kind of meta-context, c.f., my playful text messages to Ziad on the afternoon of February 6, 2013. Wittgenstein would berate us here for trying to get language to do more work than it has the capacity for (which is his general critique by the way). One must wonder how he ever satisfied himself that the indescribable part, what fundamentally couldn’t be communicated via language, even existed in the first place – a clear case of Russell’s so-called privileged access. A sufficiently advanced hardware/software combination would appear as the natural infrastructure gracing creation, i.e., physical reality.

December

2013

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polignac%27s_conjecture “In 2013 an important breakthrough was made by Zhang Yitang who proved that there are infinitely many prime gaps of size n for some value of n < 70,000,000.” It appears that not only the real line, but also the natural

numbers possess a non-trivial topology.122013 The principle that Emerson seems to be illustrating can perhaps lead us to a deeper understanding of time and a more hopeful appreciation of time's potential, which goes beyond the usual paltry conception of time as unidimensional and inexorably finite. The higher dimensionality of time is to be sought in its multiplicity of scale and connectedness. The endless, open-ended reprocessibility of the data of experienced time (memory) in the light of novel and unpredictably unfolding future contexts, points to an infrastructure of intelligibility gracing existence at its root and is indeed what makes the faculties that we instinctively take for granted possible. The data of individual human experience are not solipsistic, but are secretly collective inputs to a much larger system, one capable of combining and reprocessing this data into transpersonal and even transhuman meanings. Enrico Fermi once famously asked, "Where are they?" For my part, I have my answer. They are here. They are us. Or, rather they will be us. November 2013

Each great surge in evolution is signaled by a "mass extinction". But avoiding the mass death doesn't guarantee "you'll" advance. Just take a look at how many living fossil species there are still thriving on this planet. One has to have been favored by the process. @$ Despite all of the restrictions and conditions posed by the laws of physics, chemistry, psychohistory, etc., there's still plenty of room available for grace to operate. Here's a few notable examples: general anaesthesia is solely a function of its concentration in brain lipids and is independent of chemical properties off the anaesthetic used, the information specificity of DNA genetic base pair sequences are not in any way determined by the chemical properties nucleotide bases or sugar-phospate bonds, covalent bonding is only possible because of a fundamental indeterminacy (Heisenberg uncertainty principle) in an electron's position, the three-body problem has no closed form analytic solution, etc., ad nauseum. Since causal connections (local causality) constitutes only a tiny subset

of the entire available spectrum of correlated fluctuations, it may be that although the three body problem is not solvable in terms of physics, it may be solvable in terms of engineering. The three body problem may find its solution if each body is conceived of as a nonlocally connected fluctuation packet that possesses nonlocal connections to each of the two other “fluctuation packets”. "...when you ...look back over your lifetime, it can seem to have had a consistent order ... as though composed by someone. Events that when they occurred had seemed accidental and occasional or as if by accident turn out to have been indispensable factors in the composition of a consistent plot. So who composed that plot? Schopenhauer suggests that just as your dreams are composed by an aspect of yourself of which your consciousness is unaware, so, too, your whole life is composed by the will within you. And just as people whom you will have met apparently by mere chance became leading agents in the structuring of your life, so, too, you have served unknowingly as an agent, giving meaning to the lives of others, the whole thing gears together like one big symphony, with everything unconsciously structuring everything else...it is as if our lives are the dream of a single dreamer in which all the dream characters are dreaming , too; so that everything links to everything else, moved by the one will to life which is the universal will in nature. It’s a magnificent idea – an idea that appears in India in the mythic image of the Net of Indra, which is a net of gems, where at every crossing of one thread over another there is a gem reflecting all the other reflective gems...." - Joseph Campbell, The Power of Myth. All representation requires a figure and ground relationship all figure cannot be ground just as all ground cannot be figure for this would create a closed system devoid of any context resulting in a complete absence of meaning. February 2013

Meaning requires context and interpretation and therefore temporality in this way consciousness in temporality cannot be separated temporality is unavoidable in open systems so all future developments cannot be in

compass in the permutational and combinational possibilities of a state space. Meaning requires context and interpretation and therefore temporality in this way consciousness in temporality cannot be separated temporality is unavoidable in open systems so all future developments cannot be in compass in the permutational and combinational possibilities of a state space. On subjectivity ...if the logic we invoke is able to convince our own selves but no one else, can we really say that it has value If we say that sanity is merely relative do we not embroil our self in an infinite regress or self-contradiction? Gradually in imperceptibly the palimpsest is eventually accepted as the genuine document Distinguish earthly enlightenment from metaphysical in like mint with respect to the boat philosophical system of Buddhism if want to view God as an invention of mankind then the Copernican revolution pushes mankind further and further from center but also pushes God further from the center towards periphery. Narrative structure of consciousness the integration of time memory updating 2d temporality metaphor vs. concept consciousness as medium or substance of experience as a projection of the self as an intentional object and 'structure of consciousness' If Cantor’s diagonal is longer than it must be infinitely longer and there is no definition of infinitely longer is there a hidden contradiction in Cantor’s diagonal argument? We can apply Richards paradox to unearthing the contradiction of cantors diagonal argument Richards paradoxes founded on the notion that there is indefinability at work. a similarly ill-defined notion lies at the root of cantors definitions for his diagonal argument

Consciousness primarily has a context updating and pattern recognition function. This is in part why we say that consciousness is the metaphor of all metaphors. We could try to run through in 'life review' fashion all of the possible cultural memes in the state space but the meaning of the memes added amongst those already accumulated must shift in meaning and significance in a way different from how they could possibly be predicted in short there are no memes state spaces with compact support. Also there is back reaction of newly added memes onto memes already stored in memory. We must distinguish projection of lower dimensions onto higher dimensions from the case of the projection of higher dimensions onto lower dimensions. Is there a distinction to be made here between hard encryption and decompression? In the absence of consciousness temporal evolution of information already stored in memory would not require a second or higher dimension of time with which to consistently describe it Memory cannot be analyzed in terms of simultaneous experience because experience requires memory to come to consciousness Learning a language is like learning the story and the dramatis personae. Are backstory possibilities be woven at the same time as one is learning more of the explicit story? Memory cannot be analyzed in terms of simultaneous experience because experience requires memory to come to consciousness Learning a language is like learning the story and the dramatis personae. Are backstory possibilities be woven at the same time as one is learning more of the explicit story? Paradigm shifts help to prevent paradoxes from developing during the course of the evolution of Science and scientific theory. What kind of shift would prevent a temporal paradox? In both cases it is the same kind of shift when one is talking about the consistency of one's personal

biography. Paradigm shifts help to prevent paradoxes from developing during the course of the evolution of Science and scientific theory. What kind of shift would prevent a temporal paradox? In both cases it is the same kind of shift when one is talking about the consistency of one's personal biography. Hypothesis theory law paradigm. Is this series multi directional with feedback loops? Search strings which produce no hits on Google but which produce results when a specific website is searched is an example Internet compartmentalization. What about Google searches that will produce hits for certain search strings when the same search strings produce no hits when any given compartment is searched? I just noticed this morning that I was receiving text messages to myself in my email inbox this seems somehow thematic and coincidental.

Cantor's diagonal argument depends on the notion of 'infinitely longer' in order to prove the existence of higher orders of infinity In this way Cantor's argument is proved invalid because it is shown to beg the question. One has to already have the notion of higher orders of infinity in order to define the concept of 'infinitely longer'. There are indeed higher orders of infinity but this is not been adequately demonstrated by Cantor's Diagonal Argument. What are likely to be the psychological effects of inadvertently stumbling upon one's own nexus of meaning and significance? There must be a valid way of establishing Cantor's conclusion say, by using quantum information theory perhaps combined with topology. We don't necessarily have to specify numbers in order to count them -

the principle of integration is proof of this. This may help us to avoid David Deutsch's infinite parallel universes as the necessary metaphysical implication of quantum computation. The number theoretic concept of compact support poses problems for the notion of computational state spaces as models of parallel universes and meme state spaces, which are essentially viral. What will happen as the web more aggressively enables self-selection effects for example applied to predictive searches for products services information and contacts? This reminds us of the restriction of vacuum resonant mode spectra in quantum cavity electrodynamics experiments. From the date of his retirement from the chair Kant declined in strength, and gave tokens of intellectual decay. His memory began to fail, and a large work at which he wrought night and day, on the connection between physics and metaphysics, was found to be only a repetition of his already published doctrines', 1911 edition of Encyclopedia Britannica, c.f., www.1911encyclopedia.org/Immanuel_Kant March 2013

http://www.hoodnews.org/video/problem-know-what-it-is I was doing research on 404 errors and do not recall stumbling upon a 404 error for the past few years what a coincidence specifically I was going to find out where the 404 area code was located Multigenerational succession of knowledge sociology of Science paradigm shifts all of this verses accumulation of knowledge within the mind of a single individual. Automaticity, operational modification (Op Mod), creativity, viral memes and Bohm's active information as word to the wise hints to a radically creative medium. There must be a fundamental recollected component to learning. There must be a viral mimetic component to learning. The 4 types of causation: efficient material formal teleological must all play a role in the transmission of information. July 2013 Teleology of an evolutionary look-ahead or “heads up” capability wherein alternate or parallel courses of development (entails that each evolutionary course be tracked and therefore “threaded”) are continuously compared, say in terms of leading or not to

structures down-line that involve back-reacting consciousness would seem to offer a much faster evolutionary development than the near infinite stretches of permutational-combinational time required for tinkering or cobbling together the boundary conditions necessary for self-aware or volitional consciousness. If it is not the case that there is no “there there” in the sense of an overarching context for these evolutionary processes, then there must be an embedding self-organizing information storage and processing substrate qua underlying evolutionary infrastructure gracing everything. As long as one stays within the domain of one's naturally given talents and abilities it is easy to imagine that the self is coherent unified, integrated, coherent, freely willing in its decisions and judgments, creative, perceptive, etcetera. Very similar to the sundowning phenomenon however is the on graceful and uncertain behavior of the individual when I'm praying outside the restricted domain of his natural endowments. The determinism within the moment is distinctly different, radically different in fact from the determinism which connects distinct moments. If I had but known that immortality would be discovered 10 years after my death I would have surely taken much better care of myself in my youth. For those of you over 30...you say you want to find yourself? Well then, become the scholar of all upon which you "expertly" held forth in your youth. Otherwise, in your quest for self-discovery, you are likely to find someone else. Feedback, returnings, retracings - without context there is no meaning. The doubling back of experience upon itself is certainly an integral part of this meaning providing context. @$http://phys.org/news/2014-06weird-magic-ingredient-quantum.html#ajTabs Not only must we have context to have meaning, but this context must

be narratively structured and narrative structure demands dramatic personae. Narrative structure requires multiple independent centers of volition Man fails to realize is that he has all along been packing on the shell of the cosmic egg . . . from the inside! Is there a middle ground between noise and an intended message, say through filter adjustments of mutually interfering signals? The epistemological infrastructure enabling the possibility for reprocessing of information, moreover for unlimited semiosis, strongly suggests this third category of signal. Here is the real reason why the anthropic principle is anthropic... Selfconsciousness requires a narrative structure which in turn depends on dermatitis personae to function. Check out this article! http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/03/130314144348.htm Stress- momentum energy are in coded in the fluctuations to the vacuum similar to the matrix in a fashion which simulates curvature of space and time you're correct space and time are not 'actually' curved. But on a deeper philosophical level Oliver concepts are merely metaphors masquerading as such. That's why all of our concepts should be mentioned in double sets of quotation marks and used within a sentence in a single set of quotation marks. This possibly brings up rather thorny metaphysical issues. :p Concerning anthropic bias: how do you determine what a representative sample is? Karma is superstition applied to the fact that everyone is born selfinterested and nobody gets out of here alive.

The facade of the future as a projection of the past shall change before its substance can be fully fleshed out as it were. In other words, Karma would appear to be as it so appears regardless of whether or not the concept possesses any genuine metaphysical underpinnings. Is there a concept of a reverse anthropic principle that needs to be investigated? It should be obvious that the observer selection effect does not fine tune for a particular observer, but rather fine tunes for an admittedly highly constrained class of individuals into which the selected observer fits. If a system is fine-tuned so that it selects for an entity possessing an internal principle of unity, coherence and integration, then we would expect there to be a similarly unifying, integrative principle at work within the dynamics of *that* system. 'If a system exhibits fine tuning such that it selects for an entity possessing an internal principle of unity, coherence and integration, then shouldn't there be a similarly unifying, integrative principle at work within the dynamics of the system that gave rise to that entity?' This begs the question: 'what is meant by 'internal' here?' How do we reconcile egalitarian copresence of 'me-like' selves with the competitive fine tuning of universes individually and anthropically selected for? Is it inevitable or at least overwhelmingly likely that 'me-like' selves have evolved on me-like brains? This is exactly similar to the question of the probability of human-like life having evolved on Earthlike planets. Could there be anything analogous to a Disclosure Project for the existence of other minds?

March 2014

Thinking outside the box like Jacques Vallee, let us suppose that the riddle of extraterrestrial beings shall only be solved once the philosophical problem of other minds has also been solved. In other words, we shall only detect extraterrestrial beings in the same manner that we become able to detect the existence of other minds. Since indirect detection is out of the question on account of the vastness of interstellar distances, e.g., radio waves, we shall only detect extraterrestrial minds via quantum signatures which their intelligent or conscious mental activity leaves behind in the form of entanglement in the vacuum electromagnetic field or "Akashic record" that we don't yet possess the proper encryption and frequencies to access. But the method will undoubtedly be the same that shall one day allow us to detect the quantum signature of other minds. Whatever new technology that entails, it may well lie a century or more in the future. As humankind’s scientific description of space, time, matter and energy changes as its scientific understanding grows, and its technology along with it, there shall be reached a stage where the seemingly insuperable interstellar distances between earth and the nearest extraterrestrial civilizations @$ can have been overcome. However, by then our conception of spacetime and mass-energy, along with our deepest understanding of life, consciousness and the basis of our personal identity shall have necessarily radically altered in step with what shall be seen as an enormous technological advance - along a path cannot be charted, even with the advantage of hindsight. Does egalitarian yet competitive self-selection have more to say about the structure of the universe than it does about the structure of the multiverse? Wet paper bag project The only being in a position to select in an anthropic cosmological sense is either the self, that is, true self or God. This is why the true dichotomy is not between atheism and theism, but between solipsism and theism. Either God created this single universe or the self selected its own

universe from out of a virtually infinite multiverse that was eternally preexisting. What context systems and controls must be in place for 0's and 1's to behave just like real currency? Is this analogous to how zeros and ones can function as thoughts and intentions in a conscious computer? Recapitulate my discussion on context continuity and consciousness with Captain Guise. Static or snapshot structure is never adequate for establishing the identity of an entity which requires continuity over time. An example of the flow of the multiverse theory is N Out cropping of rocks in a particular universe out of the virtual insanity of universe is that looks exactly like Mount Rushmore. An example of the flow of the multiverse theory is N Out cropping of rocks in a particular universe out of the virtual infinity of universes that looks exactly like Mount Rushmore. If a mind could be present in that universe to make sense of the outcropping, i.e., human faces, political leaders, colonial American, etc., then continuity becomes a meaning giving contextual component. Having successfully deconstructed the desire for approval from a peer group with whom one does not really wish to conform is one of the milestones of personal maturity. When reason is enlisted to aid moral courage on the one hand or disingenuous cynicism on the other, then this is rhetoric. April 2013

Hawking introduces imaginary time into cosmology

The black hole collapse stop at the event horizon is conservation of momentum important here or is information theory the more important consideration for example the holographic principle Meditate upon language in which every possible simple combination has assigned meaning

An example of irreducible complexity in the realm of reproduction that does not explicitly involve small nucleic acids and proteins is the following. The 1st litter is composed of the last generation's kids and the litter they produce themselves (the 2nd litter) is adopted and raised by the grown kids of the first litter. Metaphor as scaffolding for construction of concepts that otherwise must spring into being whole. Concepts prompted by metaphors prompted by experience conditioned by forms of intuition which constitute our broadest concepts. There is a distinct difference between random mutations to a pre-existing highly ordered cybernetic control system vs random changes which were thought to have led to the original development of said cybernetic control system Relate the quantum no cloning theorem to the possibility of transhumanist consciousness uploading. Is there a tension between the quantum no cloning theorem and the principle of the indistinguishability of quantum particles? Cryogenic patients involuntarily enlisted to take part in an expedition to the nearest star. For every universe anthropically selected from out of myriad other universes in the mix master multiverse there would be a great number of universes possessing the same potential for conscious entities such as human beings as the anthropically selected universe, but in which no intelligent life is existing and only awaiting the design engineering collection of special conditions in order to bring about intelligent beings similar to humans. The second dimension of time could indeed be the timeline of the will and intention of the Design Engineer. How do multiple centers of free volition arise from a process that possesses only a single dimension of time

We need to look at things in a less metaphorical and more and a more abstract manner. For random changes to be meaningful and functional, there must be a pre-existing framework of interpretation available to make sense out of the random changes. The structure that suffers a random change must ab initio be about something. Holism, irreducible complexity and two dimensional time. Metaphysics of cancer. Be active seeing which we take for granted requires training and experience. It is by no means a passive process. Its a critical developmental window is have you in the early childhood in which the appropriate in three line is not received by the occipital lobe of the brain then the necessary neural network required to process visual data into visual information will never be properly formed. There are no uninterpreted data. This is true for any sense perception process that requires pattern recognition functions. Human language is still bear the imprint of the block headed neural network pattern recognition hominid linguistics system. But what started out as block headedness in the pattern recognition and speech recognition program turned into something much more subtle and useful the facility of metaphor. Speech pattern recognition which was at first applied to the other eventually became applied to first person speech production. The principle of ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny very much applies to the acquisition of linguistic capability. Only a transcendental mind can possess a concept of consciousness. The falsity of solipsism implies the existence of a transcendental Universal Mind.

The fact that there was a beginning to tine proves that there is more than one dimension of time. Only the transcendent other can pierce the veil solipsism. What is more important to the formation of life, boundary conditions in the initial conditions or the innate dynamic process? The question of which makes life more probable is undefined in the case of the dynamic process, in other words no probability can be assigned to the dynamic process relative to the probabilities of favorable initial and boundary conditions for life. Do we land ourselves in an untenable position of infinitely regressive Bayesian statistics that is in terms of ever deeper levels of initial and boundary conditions? Bayesian statistics is a merger between set theory and probability theory. Finding life on other planets is not going to help those dissolve the irreducible complexity problem of the origin of life. A Little Golden Book. Scribd search. May 2013

Investigate the problem of how the multiverse and anthropic reasoning doesn't really allow us to sidestep the other problem of fine tuning and intelligent design. The difference between accidental fine tuning such as the case of the multiverse and intentional or intelligent fine tuning is that in the case of intelligent fine tuning there is a dynamic underlying which necessarily involves continual adjustment that is ongoing rather than merely ab initio. So there is a very real and qualitative difference between intentional and accidental fine tuning which should be detectable by observation and experiment say of dynamical quantum processes in the vacuum. We should eventually uncover evidence of the action of this sustainment of fine tuning of the underlying physical substrate in line with the intended continuum of the

computational state space. December 2013

Michael Behe asks in his book, The Edge of Evolution, how far does the intelligent design extend downward into the lower tiers of the taxonomic hierarchy, e.g., beyond sub-phyla and on to classes, orders, families, etc.? This suggests that intelligent design is an interaction between an Engineer and a preexisting dynamical substrate, which itself may well require its own intelligent design-based explanation of origin. This is the God “who does not make His own dust.” Behe points out that the hox gene “tool box”, which is responsible for orchestrating anatomical development during embryogenesis, as well as for underpinning the morphogenetic relationships within a taxonomic category, was already in place perhaps 50 million years or more prior to the advent of the Cambrian explosion, which is to say, prior to the advent of the anatomical forms, the development of which, that these same regulatory genes would in a later geological epoch be destined to orchestrate and control, c.f., http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hox_gene_family I am reminded of the open-ended rationality of being. If we cannot logically disprove a proposition to which our opponent is emotionally attached it is not enough to merely demonstrate that there is no logical or experimental or observational ground in favor of the proposition. One must go on to deconstruct the discourse and narrative behind the position of one's opponent. To help us more fully understand the relevant connection between the philosophical problems of the other minds and the theological problem of the being in existence of God we must first pose the question what is the relationship between the question of other universes the existence or nonexistence of God. The problem of other minds and the problem of other universes are at a deeper level ultimately the same, that is, in the absence of an ultimate context and backdrop of a transcendent Universal Mind, itself possessing a true concept of consciousness, such that each individual particular mind is but an instantiation of consciousness as

such, there is a degeneracy of indicators of possible worlds, namely, consciousness (in the sense of ultimate selfhood) and universe. It is said that without context there is no meaning but this question is still more complex because we have to talk about meaning for whom which bespeaks the possibility of multiple and perhaps altogether disjoint contexts. Topology is of course an important consideration here. The inbetweenness which lies between universes is one and the same with that which is given prior to the beginning. Empedocles' paradox concerning reasoning and determinism is related to John Searle's notion of the closed system, intentionality and hard artificial intelligence. Duration or emergent time as opposed to deterministic time seems to require continual input from outside the time line. In the same with the quantum computing which is intrinsically parallel in its structure can reduce linear time to log a rhythmic time such that anything that normally would take a bath to mail when your time can be accomplished in a much shorter. Of water with the time similar to this, we don't need an infinite amount time for any and all possibilities to be realized because of the quantum nature of the vacuum is the underlying infrastructure of all structure and function within space and time. Isn't it time Justin abstraction just a projection from within finite spacetime and does this concept fall into the same category as things like the Soul free will and consciousness for which we have no self-consistent abstract category or concept? So the totality of possibilities can only be realized within a structure of multiple finite space-time manifolds. No fun night set of possibilities over large can be defined against the backdrop of an infinite spacetime. One wonders then what is infinite spacetime for other than an abstract category for purposes of argumentation and analogy making or illustration. Unlimited symbiosis must fulfill the role of the possibilities grounded by I supposed infinite space time. A new variety of solipsism has reared its head with the advent of the

latest cosmological theories concerning the anthropic principle, Boltzmann brains, the multiverse, cosmological fine tuning and so on. This new version of solipsism invokes the notion of the fine-tuning of consciousness along the same lines as the anthropic cosmological fine tuning with which one is already familiar. In this updated version of solipsism, other minds do indeed exist but they do not exist within the same universe within the multiverse as does one's own mind. In this particular case, a concept of consciousness which underlies the possibility of the existence of other minds would only be possible if there was some transcendent or Universal Mind which could bridge the gap between universes within the multiverse as the basis of the intersubjective subjectivity, which is absolutely required by a self-consistent notion of a plurality of subjective individual consciousness’s. Consequently, a valid concept of consciousness must presuppose that consciousness and its operation and function transcends the physical laws of this particular universe, as embodied in the particular exact values of fundamental physical constants which had to be fine-tuned to produce this particular universe that gave rise to this particular individual consciousness, namely mine. We say this because the infrastructure for the fine-tuning of physical constants for distinct universes within the multiverse must exist within the multiverse itself and is not accessible within any given particular universe within such a multiverse. http://www-astro.physics.ox.ac.uk/~ddarg/pdf/FT_of_consciousness.pdf Unity of space and time with its implication of a concept of unified spacetime places space and time on an equivalent footing. One possible implication of the concept of spacetime might be the following: if there is nothing after (time), then there is nothing outside (space). Is there any significant difference in the philosophical implications of the fact of our all meeting in an afterlife vs. us all having met in this life? The requirements of cosmological fine tuning are far greater for

mammakuan species than for bacterial species. It is clear that the requirements for fine-tuning physical constants and other cosmological conditions becomes more inexact and less demanding as one considers ever simpler forms of life. The case of there being a single consciousnesses or a 'consciousness -as-such' which is merely structured in myriad distinct ways representing different structures of self-consciousness where each is not substantially distinct, i e., multiple self consciousness in which each is grounded in a non-unique consciousness qua medium of egoic experience. With regard to the appearances, these two cases are not in any way distinguishable. That is, given the absence of an over arching cosmic, transcendental consciousness. April 1997

In other words, if consciousness possesses being as a particular among particulars, it may only possess an objective meaning if it possess an intersubjective meaning. But according to what has just been observed, various self-consciousnesses must be merely different structurings of a single consciousness and so consciousness therefore must have a being which transcends any particularity, any particular form of itself. Consciousness as such is therefore nondual, transcendent of Form and so must be constituted from beyond the "field of time." Consciousness is constituted within Eternity and so qualifies as the ground of existence. This is pure Consciousness. It is just that the many different structurings of consciousness at large do not completely cohere, but form numerous relatively disjoint domains marking the different individual consciousnesses. Consciousness as such, on this view, cannot be understood by an individual conscious which is merely a transitory, finite structuring of this fundamental consciousness. Here again, we see our principle of the inability of the stream ( the individual's stream of consciousness, in this case ) to rise to the level of its source ( consciousness at large). It will not be possible for computer science or brain physiology or whatever to come to an adequate theoretical understanding of the process which gives a

particular individual the gift (or curse) of the individual consciousness that he happens to possess unless any of these sciences can somehow ground the explanation of his mental processes in the consciousness originating utterly from outside him qua individual. One must, in other words, first understand consciousness as such before moving on to an explanation of the individual's own particular consciousness. But this means that science will not be able to arrive at a general theory of consciousness through induction from individual cases. So application of the scientific method is barred from treating the problem of consciousness as such. Nothing that the individual is capable of perceiving could count for the essential feature which makes both his consciousness and that of the other examples of consciousness as such. Suchness is inherently transcendental. Negative Karma is the result of the individual's choices made in previous lifetimes while the equivalent to this in Christianity is Sin which is inherited by all human beings at birth and cannot be overcome through the individual's efforts alone but only through the active intervention of God himself in His immanent form as Jesus Christ. Although in a historical sense the person of Jesus is the incarnation of God the Father in human form, in no way does He become absorbed or lose His identity upon being assume into Heaven but is Himself unique and eternally part of the Divine Trinity. We know that the individual soul does not return to the great Ocean of Being at each interval between incarnations as the identity of the individual is utterly blotted out whenever this occurs. May 2014

Karma is not a conserved quantity and therefore the law of karma, should one exist, must be fundamentally dissimilar to a physical law, which is invariably alternately described in terms of the conservation of some key physical quantity such as momentum for energy or spin. The principle of the positivism of evil demands that Karma not be a conserved quantity. Free will necessarily involves creativity and therefore non- conservation of certain qualities.

It is quite humbling to reflect upon how there are two distinct kinds of unknown - the unknown which is continuous with the known to which inevitably a pathway leads and that other unknown, which is all together disjoint from or discontinuous with the known. Good karma does not always make up for bad. There are impersonal natural forces which appear to change the local zero point or set point of karma. There is no platonic heaven of sensations or subjective perceptions or thoughts has indeed there are abstract objects such as perfect triangles. Concrete things cannot be built up out of timeless abstractions. May 2014

"Next life" . . .next here is in the sense of metaphysically different rather than later in time. To simultaneously avoid the reductio of solipsism and maintain the utter distinctness of “suchnesses” (“consciousnesses as such”), the multiple instantiation of consciousness posed by temporally existent minds must be not be simply, but complexly multiple. There must indeed then be an order of transcendence possessed by consciousness as such. This points to the necessity of a multiverse in a metaphysical sense.

November 2011 (Edited for Facebook posting in November 2013)

What I like about Biocentrism is this dumping of our unfounded prejudice about the alleged necessity of time being linear. Well then, after the fashion of the main character from the British comedy, The Black Adder there remains the ever present possibility that one should arise again anew from the turbulence endlessly generated by the tension within the interface of existence and being, that is, whatever the original sufficient reason may have been that originally brought one forth, unbidden from the screaming abyss of the ever creative void, should do so again, in fact, an unlimited number of times and this despite the necessity of “metaphysical work” (the realm of being having been enlarged, at least in terms of an expansion of being's "ground of existence" ) being performed during each “incarnation”. That particular quiddity or "haecceity" specified by the unique anthropic cosmological constraints posed by

the individual consciousness as "substantial medium of one's possible experience" shall always abide as the exactingly fine filter of the fluctuating quantum vacuum underlying all physical reality and which tirelessly spin off these ever so slightly though distinctly different universes, each complete with its own vast locker combination of finely-tuned fundamental physical constants, determined to 14 decimal places as befits a precise resonant tuning of each fractally branching universe to the demands of a stable, unified and integrally whole consciousness. The multiverse embraces an unlimited multidimensional time and temporality. Death is only a "dead end" therefore with respect to a given particular time line. Your life is being lived out in *this* time, which is not to be identified with some unique, one-shot, all-encompassing physical time (there's that unfounded prejudice again). New timelines are always being generated as the multiverse continues its eternal, playful and experimental, budding, branching and blossoming process. The transcendent shall always continue to explore the realm of limitation, that is, "the realm of what it's like to not know everything", since that's the only field that is open to the transcendent's hopeful/fearful curiosity. Although this body and brain pass away, the abstract laundry list of precise conditions for one to be, not "reincarnated", but generated anew (just as one was originally gestated and born this time around) in the midst of the unending novelty of Brahma's (Lila's) dance and play, does not. This infinitely fine and subtlest of sieves, the anthropic cosmological principle, shall be ever present to filter the unending noise, *the vast majority, but not all of which belong to other minds.* As the Universe was not created in time, but time and temporality were created with it (along with space), there is no limit to the number of dimensions of time. February 2014 A natural question is whether, in light of the metaphysical puzzles and paradoxes which attend the logic of the Anthropic Principle, there is any determinable relationship between possible temporal dimensions and the parallel universes of the Many Worlds Interpretation (MWI) of Quantum Mechanics, i.e., the many distinct minds, which may indeed constitute determinations of distinct grounds (of being).

Otherwise there would be no definite guarantee that one's eventual escape from the Wheel of Life, through Spiritual Enlightenment, would be indeed a permanent one since obviously whatever process started the chain of incarnation in the first place might well again give rise to one's very self-same soul, as it would customarily do between each incarnation, reinitiating the whole process; if one insists that the original process is unique and hence unrepeatable, then one is implying that each person's individual identity is really unique and therefore not in the least

illusory and furthermore that neither is our separation from the Godhead an illusion, but the very real and potentially alarming circumstance of our Earthly existence. January 2013 Again, laws are abstractions that relate classes of individuals and not the individuals themselves. Following Russell, physical laws are mere descriptions of how nature in fact behaves and hence carry nothing in the sense of a governing force. Physical law artifacts such as “curved spacetime” and “wavefunction” are perhaps nothing more than scientific metaphors and far from being bona fide metaphysical entities – they are the user friendly “front end” for accessing a “back end” that is indeed very remote from the potential tinkering of simulated beings. In software architecture there may be many layers between the hardware and end user. Each can be spoken of as having a front end and a back end. The front is an abstraction, simplifying the underlying component by providing a user-friendly interface. January 2013 cit=

“In software design, the model-view-controller architecture for example, provides front and back ends for the database, the user, and the data processing components. The separation of software systems into front and back ends simplifies development and separates maintenance. A rule of thumb is that the front (or "client") side is anything you can see when you view the code source of the page (when you are on the client side, i.e. not on the server.) To view the server-side (or "back-end") code, you must be on the server. The confusion arises when you have to make front-end edits to server-side files. Most HTML designers, for instance, don't need to be on the server when they are developing the HTML; conversely, the server-side engineers are, by definition, never on anything but a server. It takes both, to be sure, to ultimately make a functioning, interactive website.” September 1992

Leibniz writes in 1714, "Moreover, it must be avowed that perception and what depends upon it cannot possibly be explained by mechanical reasons, that is, by figure and movement. Supposing that there be a machine, the structure of which produced thinking, feeling, and perceiving; imagine this machine enlarged but preserving the same

proportions, so that you might enter it as if it were a mill. This being supposed, you might enter its inside; but what would you observe there? Nothing but parts which push and move each other, and never anything that could explain perception." The philosopher David Cole argues to disarm Leibniz' "mill" argument in the following way, “Blow up a tiny drop of water until it is the size of a mill. Now the H 2O molecules are as big as the plastic models of H2O molecules in a chemistry class. You could walk through the water droplet and never see anything wet." Cole's point is that we all know that an individual water molecule is "wet" and so our inability to see its wetness from the inside, as it were, doesn't prove that it’s not really wet; similarly, a machine might be conscious even though this consciousness is invisible from every perspective - except the machine's, of course. There are a number of serious objections to Cole's refutation of Leibniz' mill argument. Firstly, it is doubtful whether the property of wetness may be attributed to a single water molecule in the first place because wetness can be seen to be an essentially collective phenomenon. The following example will serve to explain. In the modern version of Robert Millikan's oil drop experiment, wherein he demonstrated that the charge of the electron was quantized, oil drops, being somewhat messy and inconvenient, have today been replaced by tiny silicon spheres. These little spheres are so diminutive (about .001 millimeters in diam.) that they are not visible to the naked eye, nor are they palpable in the hand, unless there are quite a large number of them assembled together, in which case they "coalesce" together to form a little pool in the palm. This pool is indistinguishable from one made of water except that there is a slight difference in the perceived viscosity of the "fluid" which seems a little on the cloudy side. The point here is that this collection of tiny spheres feels wet; and there is no question whatever that a tiny sphere of silicon, blown up to the size of one of Cole's overgrown H2O molecules, simply could not possess the property or quality of wetness. But what is all this thought to prove? Well, in Cole's case, a person hearing his argument experiences a contradiction of sorts between his expectation that size (which is owing to external perspective) shouldn't

make any difference in the wetness (intrinsic property) of a water molecule, and his vague, visually based intuition that "if I can see the damned parts of the thing, then, well, how can it really be wet?" In the case of the tiny spheres of the "oil drop" experiment, we know that wetness is an emergent collective property which depends upon our not being able to distinguish the individual spheres, either visually or in tactile manner. But the reader should not think that I have simply done Cole's argument one better; for a quality which arises in perception strictly through our inability to perceive what is part of the object "out there" cannot be thought to be a quality of the object itself, but is supplied by the perceiving mind. But there is an even more serious objection to Cole here. A hypothetical set of conditions, relating to mere appearance, cannot be of any support to an argument if the would-be physical state of affairs, to which the appearance corresponds, is itself impossible - however clearly one "intuits" its possibility. This observation is very much operative in the case of Cole's overgrown H 2O molecule: to conceive of the water molecule as increased in size by a factor of roughly 10 billion is equivalent to shrinking Planck's constant by the square of this factor, or by a factor of about 100,000,000 trillions; this is because the constant contains units of length squared. But as any theoretical physicist will tell you, the energy uncertainty (via Heisenberg’s principle) is proportional to this constant and this energy uncertainty is responsible for the fluctuations in vacuum energy that "pump up" the electronic structure of all atoms. With the value of h so diminished, all of the electrons within the H 2O molecule will collapse into their respective nuclei, making the water molecule's covalent bond structure, and so its intrinsic "wetness", flatly impossible. Since all matter particles are created and sustained through the dynamical action of the fluctuating vacuum energy, these particles exist merely as abstractions from the vacuum structure, with the quantum vacuum providing the unified natural physical law for the cosmos, so we might expect that all peculiar phenomena which emerge across the interface between the microscopic and macroscopic domains (of Reality) are due to the fundamental vacuum dynamism; and this goes for the emergence

of "mind" within the developing human brain, as it has been found that individual cortical neurons are capable of responding to the presence of vacuum electromagnetic field fluctuations. But if a unified law of the vacuum exists, it must be of a transcendental nature since the vacuum constitutes an open system; any statement of physical law for such a vacuum must necessarily leave something out of its scope. This means that a so-called physical law for the vacuum therefore, is always for the vacuum plus certain superimposed boundary and initial conditions. Infinite perturbative levels of description of the vacuum's Hamiltonian are possible. It is perhaps more than a strange coincidence that our inability to distinguish, one from another, the discrete energy states of the H2O molecule, reflected in this molecule's quantum energy uncertainty, is responsible for its quality of "wetness," just as in the case of the tiny silicon spheres, which, through our ignorance of their individuality, coalesced to form a pool of wetness. To continue what may amount to the unfair importation of facts into a philosophical discussion, we will continue in our vein of drawing lessons from quantum theory so as to further examine the possibility of a "thinking machine." Another way of looking at Leibniz' mill argument against a conscious computing device is in terms of the blueprint containing the design from which the would-be computing device is constructed. We should ask ourselves this important question, "How does a computing device, while it is engaged in the very act of "thinking," constitute a better embodiment of mental activity than does the network of ink scratches on paper which constitute its blueprint?" "Well," we might say, "the ink scratches are just sitting there on the paper, they're not doing anything - still less could they be thinking!" You see, somehow we have the intuition that something which is moving or undergoing change possesses a better chance of having thought than something which isn't moving. Partly this is just the influence of that residue of animistic thinking which we have inherited from our primitive ancestors, but partly, again, it is, I believe, a case of our seeing, however vaguely, into the heart of a problem which, it seems to us, involves an elusive peculiarity of consciousness' relation to time. I am reminded here of Kant’s assertion that consciousness is the intuition of the passage of

time! Take-away?: there are at least as many dimensions of time as there are individual consciousnesses. Now, if a computer can simulate the human thought process so well that the simulation becomes the reality, then what is there, in principle, to prevent a human being, if only a particularly gifted one, from simulating the functioning of a computing device - by simply being given a problem and then tracing out with his eye the relevant wire and circuit element symbols on the blueprint so as to produce the correct answer? Now such a hypothetical human being would not need to know how to solve the problem posed to him, but he need only know how to read the circuit diagram describing the computer whose functioning he is simulating. Now suppose that this talented human were to simulate the computer's act of imagining a red sphere against a background of skyblue. To do this the human must read the right series, in the right sequence, of markings on the computer's logic diagram; does it matter how fast the series is read off? - that is a question which we will have cause to examine later. But if we postulate that consciousness is a necessary component in the faculty of recognition - a faculty very much involved in the human's act of reading a stream of symbols - then it appears we require consciousness (that of the human) to get consciousness ( that of the computing device): even if the recognition required to read or interpret the symbols of the circuit diagram doesn't itself require consciousness, it nevertheless requires the utilization of circuitry (and plenty of it!) not described anywhere on the blueprint itself because presumably this part of the computer's blueprint has to be read as well and so we're landed in a viciously circular, infinite regress. But suppose, all the same, we tried to construct the blueprint in this manner, representing at each progressively tinier level of calligraphic scale, the details of the blueprint at one particular level, which were to provide the instructions for reading the blueprint at the next higher scale. At some level along the downward spiraling hierarchy of spatial scale we would be working, whether with micro-rapidograph or submicroscopic etching tool, at a scale where the particle behavior of matter (as collections of independently existing "things") gives way to

its wavelike behavior. It is at this scale where the tiny subdiagrams which we try to etch into the paper are subject to the seemingly random fluctuations of the vacuum electromagnetic field energy so that the tiny etchings themselves fluctuate at this level. It is clear that, however these sub-sub-etc. - diagram etchings fluctuate, they do it in a way which still manages to capture the design of our computing device. It now appears that any attempt to produce a static description of the computing system architecture, i.e., its blueprint, results in a dynamic fluidity in the structure of the physical realization of this description at the level of scale marking the approximate boundary between particle and wavelike behavior of matter. July 2011 The ultimate context for the atomic scale circuitry of our proposed conscious computing device must be the quantum vacuum electromagnetic field, itself the original source of Heisenberg momentum-energy uncertainty. The vacuum fields provide the context for the computer’s circuitry, which itself provides the initial and boundary conditions upon the vacuum fields’ self-interaction. This circuitry acts passively to allow the vacuum to reprocess its own preexistent quantum entanglements (containing preexistent quantum entanglement-encoded information). January 2014

The dynamics of intelligent design manifests itself at precisely the same scale of time and space as observer quantum self-interference effects come into play. These interference effects are likely related to quantum correlations having established themselves between superpositions of networks of nonlocally connected microtubule tubulin dimer states of the observer’s brain and analogous superposition states in matter with which the observer’s brain has become quantum entangled. (The subtle relationships between quantum superposition, entanglement, correlations and fluctuations are to be profitably explored further in just this context.) This fact of the self-organizing properties of particles and fields coinciding with the bootstrapping dynamics of human consciousness may well forever systematically impede any and all attempts to falsify the intelligent design hypothesis. Strong indicators of this threshold should arise at precisely the point at which computer

engineers' attempts to extend design down to the nano level - at which some spontaneous bootstrapping behavior of quantum computer integrated circuits induces auto-jail breaking. The distinction between hardware and software should have already been more or less obliterated before this stage is reached. Ironically it is the self-interference of intelligence as such which shall prevent the falsifiability of the Intelligent Design hypothesis. This is a kind of backdoor application of curious adaptation of Kurt Gödel’s Incompleteness Theorem to computer engineering and shall reveal what is a stronger notion than falsifiability within the philosophy of science. June 2014 eml=”I have considered part of what Ziad is talking about on many occasions over the past few years. Once the first practical quantum computers begin operating, it is likely that unanticipated phenomena will be observed in the behavior of these computers, which shall really only be input/output interfaces to the quantum vacuum (which is what does all of the actual computation and information processing, the “heavy lifting” – not the human engineered hardware). Because of the instantaneous connectivity of information in the nonlocally connected quantum vacuum, information put there right now billions of light years away or billions of years ago will all be simultaneously available to become quantum entangled and interfere with the quantum entanglements generated by these new quantum computers. Some sort of filtering system will have to be developed to deal with the “outside interference” of relic nonlocally encoded information, the theory for which does not yet exist. September 1992 eml=

Dear Greg, I’d like to share with you some thoughts I’ve had since we last spoke in person concerning the fundamental limitations of artificial intelligence, i.e., “why computers can’t think.” One of which that we can point to straight away as being necessary to the possession of consciousness in a cybernetic system is memory. Memory is what makes James’ “stream of consciousness” the Heraclitean river into which one cannot step twice. au=Henri Bergson has pointed out in his book, Time and Free Will, that a genuine recurrence of a thought or feeling is impossible if it is suffused with the memory of its

having occurred at some earlier time – this peculiarly self-referential quality of the memory could not have formed part of the texture of the thought as it originally occurred: if the same notion occurs to one at points in one’s life widely separated in time, the context will be significantly altered between each such occurrence so that this notion as it appears in this new context must stand in a metaphorical relationship to itself in its originating context – that is, if the latter thought is to constitute the recollection of the former. Paradoxically enough, if the second occurrence of an idea were really identical to what is was at its first occurrence, then the example of having remembered something, since there could be no memory, must be an abstract feature of an experiential field which is itself temporally integrated. The process of the temporal integration of experience is a process which itself must occur in a time sequence. We might ask the question, What is the purpose of experiential, i.e., phenomena which formerly bodied forth within the consciousness stream, if they are never again recollected?, or rather, never can again be recollected? How could these very experiential phenomena ever have formed part of the consciousnessstream, itself essentially characterized by the unique property of temporal integration or wholeness, if they are never referred to further on “down the stream?” The answer, or something fundamentally akin to an answer to this question , must be that all experience is in some sense remembered experience, that each and every experience which one can point to as it “bodies forth” in the stream of individual consciousness contains within itself densely-packed myriad references to analogues of itself in earlier “incarnations.” Conscious experience itself, in other words, but makes its appearance within the stream as already temporally integrated. Another theory is that there are myriad different but interacting selves connected with the normal functioning of a human brain, each with its own information frequency bandwidth, with the range of frequencies peculiar to each being associated with its own scale of temporal integralness or wholeness. One of the major functions of the faculty of attention may be the switching of consciousness between different bandwidths associated with distinct experiential temporal scales. July 2011 The brain stimulation experiments of Libet in

which the cortical area of the hand must be electrically stimulated for 500 ms before development of a primary evoked potential (EP) associated with conscious perception of stimulation of the hand can be perceived by the subject, combined with the fact that stimulation of the hand several hundred milliseconds after cortical stimulation of the corresponding area had already begun was always perceived as occurring hundreds of milliseconds earlier than direct cortical stimulation. This fact was interpreted by Libet as meaning that an approximately 500 ms time delay or time buffer was needed in order to effect necessary temporal integration of conscious sense-perception. @$ Also, the backwards-in-time referral of the stimulation event by up to 500 ms is a phenomenon (one might say epiphenomenon) of this temporal integration as well as being tangible proof of the temporal multidimensionality of conscious experience and the subjective, projective nature of the perceived unidirectionality of so-called objective time. Along the lines of the “Boltzmann Brain” idea, the quantum vacuum is supposed to possess a latent recursive structure, one that includes not only perceptions and memories of experiences, but also memories of memories of experiences, etc. July 2012 “If one has an equilibrium state that lasts an infinite time, fluctuations around equilibrium can lead to any state whatever popping out of the vacuum just as a statistical fluctuation, with emergence of a local arrow of time. This leads to Poincare’s Eternal return (any state whatever that has occurred will eventually recur) and the Boltzmann Brain scenario: you can explain the existence of Boltzmann brains not as a result of evolution, but just as an eventual inevitable result of statistical fluctuations, that is, if an infinite amount of time is available ([12]:201227)”, c.f., http://www.mth.uct.ac.za/~ellis/Quantum_arrowoftime_gfre.pdf Large bandwidths associated with large information frequency ranges would be in turn associated with large integral time scales in which richer, more meaningful and nuanced experiences would be possible than on smaller time scales.

The commonsensical way of comparing these different scales experientially is in terms of the concept of retentive memory. A new anti-anxiety drug much used in dental offices and perhaps more popular among both dentists and their patients than the old standby, i.e., laughing gas is the drug Ativan. Ativan succeeds as an anti-anxiety agent due to its peculiar property of contracting the anxious patient’s retentive memory span. Pain experienced by the dental patient during surgical procedures is eased through the use of this drug, not by an actual reduction of the intensity of the pain itself, but through a reduction of the patient’s anxiety about the pain he is experiencing. The temporal window within which the patient is constrained to experience what is happening to him while he is under the influence of the drug is simply too contracted to contain temporally unwieldy thoughts such as, “Oh no, he’s going to hit the root,” or , “I wonder if it’s going to get worse?!” In retrospect, my experience of my own state of consciousness while under the drug’s influence was so like how I imagine my childhood consciousness to have been, although paradoxically, I was much more afraid of the dentist then than I am presently! This suggests an altogether new way of understanding the function of the brain as the “organ of consciousness.” Instead of building up conscious experience from some determinate set of primitive elements, e.g., sense data, the brain abstracts from a sea of information signals (eternally preexistent, as we will argue later), in much the same manner, I believe, that the single strand of DNA extracts from its cytoplasmic soup the amino acid bases it needs to duplicate itself. The brain acts as a kind of template for thought in the sense that the activity of the brain as a whole serves as a frame within which the particular features of this activity of the signal matrix, e.g., quantum vacuum electromagnetic field, which is complementary to the particular brain excitation pattern, as it were, is defined through “resonating”, i.e., interacting with a peculiar spectrum of vacuum electromagnetic field fluctuations, c.f., ancient Google cache of Hearthmath Institute webpage detailing

experiments in which DNA electromagnetic signatures were recorded in the vacuum electromagnetic fields of resonant quantum cavities (circa 1995). Certainly the more a task is repeated the more the series of actions constituting this task converges to a rigidly inflexible sequence of acts: less and less, therefore, does the sequence of neural discharges underlying its outward performance admit modification due to the presence of the constantly varying web of cerebral electrochemical events taking place within the totality of contemporaneous brain discharges, which form the biophysical basis of a task being memorized by rote, becomes more and more impervious to the influence of what is occurring within the brain as a whole, i.e.., progressively more insensitive to the neurochemical context, and to precisely this extent, to which the neural sequence becomes impervious to outside influences, to this very extent it sinks into the milieu of the unconscious mental processes. So memory on the part of cybernetic systems, generally speaking, makes it impossible for their mental states, their computational nonreproducible in time. It can also be shown that memory prevents a cybernetic machine’s computational states from being reproducible in space, i.e., they cannot be copied. One of the functions of consciousness may be the inscribing of patterns of sensory data into memory for use in the interpretation of patterns of sensory stimulation occurring in future – for establishing the context of these future events, which have not been experienced consciously. But the converse of this is also true, namely, that the faculty of memory is essential for the existence of conscious states of awareness for it is only through the placing of sensory stimuli into a context formed in light of previous experience that these new stimuli might be categorized, that patterns of stimuli might be recognized in terms of the presence of some object or objects, in other words, that sensory experience might possess the property of intentionality.

This is one of the essential characteristics of historical change which distinguishes it primarily from deterministic change. Historical change possesses temporal integrity because the series of events/processes comprising it tells a story or potentially does so because of referring to a subject or a set of related subjects. In a deterministic series of events, in a very real sense, nothing new ever happens because all of the information about the entire series already exists at the time of the first event in the series. ^^(look at fringe effects due to boundary and initial conditions – if the series has a beginning, then it can’t be completely deterministic – there is a powerful theorem lurking here, I suspect! – probably just Gibb’s Theorem or an adaptation/lemma associated with Gibb’s Theorem though)^^ Time is spatialized in such a series because the series is infinitely divisible; it is utterly without the property of integral wholeness, contained within a single instant of time which sweeps along a line of finite length. (Paradoxically, infinite divisibility is intimately connected with a holographic topology, which is to say an important variety of integral wholeness.) Events within a historical series, however, do not assume a recognizable identity unless something is known about some of the events leading up to them as well as concerning events succeeding in their wake. Moreover, the identity of meaning of historical changes as well as in light of increasing knowledge of the history of the events themselves. This is to say, historical events are always partially indeterminate with respect to the revelation of future historical change; furthermore, indeterminacy forms the very ground temporality in that all changes of state are ultimately predicated upon it. This assertion is borne out quite literally by quantum theory through the statement of its time-energy uncertainty principle first put forward by Werner Heisenberg, one of the theory’s early founders. One of the major implications of this quantum principle is that the transitoriness of all quantum processes is directly proportional to the size of the energy uncertainty of the quantum mechanical system in which these processes are taking place. The magnitude of this energy uncertainty is directly related to the degree by which the system violates the energy conservation principle of classical physics.

Information is characterized by the appearance of something new, or the notification that something new has occurred – itself the occurrence of something new. Information and energy differ from one another in the sense that the very same spatiotemporal series of inputs of energy into an energy system may occur again and again, but the analogue to this situation for data and informational systems is not definable. Here repeated data inputs to an informational system do not constitute two separate identical series of information inputs to the system, and, again, this is due to the possession of memory by any informational system worthy of the name. This follows from the indeterminate’s two basic properties: 1) the negation of the indeterminate is itself also indeterminate so that it contains within itself a contradiction which it transcends and from which anything at all may follow, and 2) the indeterminate, not existing any particular state at any particular time, must be forever undergoing all manner of fluctuations. To wit, the indeterminate is the eternal excluded middle – the void through which everything passes as it changes from what it is into what it is not. It must be clear that when A changes into B, it does so by passing through a state which is neither A nor B, and so their must be that which is necessarily neither/nor in general, i.e., the indeterminate. Intentionality fulfills the function of an underlying fundamental substance, or subject of change. The physical is characterized by wholes being determined through merely the sum of their parts; while the mental is characterized by parts being determined by wholes. This definition of the distinction of mental and physical is very similar to that provided by Schopenhauer. These unconscious mental processes are probably logical or computational in their essential nature and only alert the conscious mind when a recursive tangle between several different levels of description take place, for what is called recursion cannot be adequately dealt with by any logical/deductive system whatever which possesses greater deductive power than simple arithmetic. Automatically it becomes and

to this degree the more it occurs without the aid of conscious guidance or reflection. This is owing to each successive occurrence being less and less connected to the situational context, more and more connected internally to its immediately previous occurrence. October 2013 "When you point a video camera at the same closed circuit TV monitor to which this camera is connected... Since consciousness at large is the activity of the fundamental quantum field, conscious scrutiny of specific activities of this field, say by performing laboratory observations of quantum mechanical systems, e.g., two-slit experiment, would naturally be expected to engender anomalous phenomena", c.f., http://www.scribd.com/doc/166643320/Consciousness-Anomalous-PhysicalPhenomena-Dunne-Jahn "Anomalous phenomena" may be in essence though conveniently characterized as any phenomena exhibiting a partial breakdown of that normal, workaday, hardand-fast division between the observer and the observed, the internal and the external, that is presumed by 19th Century physics. A total breakdown of this division could be characterized as stirring awake from a lucid dream.

Another characteristic of conscious thought which is essential to it is what John Searle calls, in his book, Minds, Brains and Machines, intentionality. A thought possesses intentionality if it is “about something.” In other words, thoughts, to be of the conscious variety, must be transcendent in the same sense in which ink scratches on paper in a language known to the person reading them, i.e., the interpreter of these scratches, transcend them as physical tokens. The ink scratches on paper which constitute the circuit diagram of a so-called supercomputer do not appear to be transcendent, at least as far as the computer itself is concerned, as the behavior of the computer is simply isomorphic, i.e., runs parallel to, the structure embodied in the diagram. Any sort of causal interaction between the physical embodiment of the diagram, i.e., the computer’s “hardware” and any program it might be carrying out, i.e., its “software” disrupts this nice isomorphism and would constitute transcendence by the computer of its program together with the physical embodiment of its circuit diagram, its hardware. The distinction hardware/software significantly parallels the distinction (more fundamental for our purposes), that of energy/information. October 2011 But any computer program is always implemented within a causal context, however, the fluctuation-correlation structure of the underlying quantum vacuum does not significantly contribute to this context until a delicacy, fineness and subtlety of operation is reached approaching that

of energies comparable in size to quantum fluctuations, which are in turn comparable in size to the Heisenberg energy uncertainty of the computer’s central processor in its capacity as a quantum mechanical system. Although the context of thought is forever changing, we do not find ourselves lost in a bewildering phantasmagorical world of endless metamorphosis. The human mind is able to utilize notions, in their original occurrence as insights, in every newly-arising contexts. Some philosophers of mind style mind as the metaphor of all metaphors. The stability of the Self within the stream of consciousness is heavily dependent upon its facile use of metaphor. Metaphor, however, is only the application of categories of thought in one context which have been borrowed from another. Needless to say, these categories had to be at some point created ab initio through the more general process of abstraction, or, the formation of abstract categories. The process of abstraction always involves the treatment of certain details in which things differ as unimportant so that other features may be foregrounded and grouped together within the same set or class. The creation of a system of such categories sets the stage for the recognition of a cybernetic system. There will always be multiple ways of categorizing the data which are continually streaming into the sensory apparatus of the system; no hard and fast rule or set of rules may be worked out ahead of time to prevent the emergence of an ambiguous collection of data, and so the necessity is always at hand of deciding how the data will be interpreted, and this may only be accomplished through metaphor or through the defining of new broader or narrower categories with which one structures the ambiguous data. Note that the information content of data is always open-ended and contingent. Abstraction requires first of all the capacity of the cybernetic system to define for itself what is to be considered relevant and what is not. Relevance, however, may only be established in the light of some previously determined aim or purpose. Purposes are always defined in service to the larger or broader aim which is in view. The broader the purpose which one is pursuing, the greater the scope which one has in satisfactorily fulfilling it. For human

beings, this broadest purpose, the instinct which we share with the rest of biological creation, is simply the ever-recurring goal of physical survival. If the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics is essentially correct, i.e., where the wavefunction is a probability wave representing the state of an observer's knowledge so that it is indeed the consciousness of the observer which is responsible for collapsing the wavefunction and not the physical disturbance to the wavefunction provoked by his measuring device, then it should be possible to carry out a "delayed choice" type experiment : a standard two slit interference set up is constructed where two video cameras are substituted for two conscious observers, one "viewing" both slits (camera A) and another camera "viewing" the backstop where either an interference pattern or a random "buckshot" pattern of photon strikes appears. If this experiment is performed in the absence of a human observer and then afterwards, perhaps years later, the film in the back of cameras A and B are examined, it will be found that the order in which the cameras are opened and their film emulsions examined will make a difference in whether the film from camera B contains recorded on it either an interference pattern of photon waves or a "buckshot" pattern of photon "bullets." In other words, if the film in camera A is examined first, then an observer possesses knowledge as to which slit each photon passed through so that the wavefunction of the paramagnetic particles coating the surface of the film emulsion in camera A undergo a collapse from the previous superposition state leading to an interference pattern to a positional eigenstate leading to the "buckshot" pattern of photon "strikes." On the other hand, if the back of camera B is opened up first and its film developed and examined, then one finds that an interference pattern has been recorded on the film. But what now for the film in the back of camera A which had been set up to "view" and record events at the double-slit? Should not the series of images recorded on this film be smeared out just enough to prevent us from telling which photons traveled through which slits? If this is the case, then the images stored on the film of camera B may be used to tell us whether camera A in fact

did of did not record the "actual paths" taken by the photons, though the double-slit superposition state associated with the photon interference pattern does not require any unique and mysterious influence of human consciousness upon the results of the experiment, but amounts to nothing more than the effect of camera A in blocking the "pilot waves" traveling through the slits through which the photons are observed not to be traveling. March 1997

This preposterously counter-intuitive thought experiment can be defused if one requires that merely the possibility of an observer gaining knowledge about which slit the electrons went through would be sufficient to collapse the electron position wavefunctions so as to produce the "buckshot" pattern of electron strikes on the phosphorescent backstop. This is actually what has been demonstrated by several ingenious "delayed-choice" experiments, which have been performed during the 1990's. And it is the position of the camera relative to the slits which, of course, determines this. October 2011 As an aside, consider that the question of whether or not neutrinos can be observed with superluminal velocities may be dependent upon experimental set up, which is in accordance with the logic of the observer’s role in interpreting the results of a two-slit experiment. If true, this would mean that the logic of superposition and wavefunction collapse serves the vital role of “chronology protection.” Note that chronology protection is not any concern when one is speaking of the subjective information or incommunicable knowledge of the @$ individual. Any information that cannot be translated into intersubjective communication must avoid the stringent restrictions of chronology protection. I say “must” in this connection because of the prn= “fecundity principle” of quantum mechanics (first uttered by Feynman) that, anything not forbidden by the laws of quantum mechanics happens. Since the information contained in energy structures smaller than the Heisenberg energy uncertainty, /\E of the system cannot be communicated locally – only being able to accompany a state undergoing quantum teleportation, it follows that the physical processes constitutive of consciousness (assuming consciousness is not

“non-physical”) are apiece with the fundamental processes of virtual particles, fields and their reactions. If consciousness is to be considered “non-physical”, then the distinction of “physical-nonphysical” lines up with the parallel distinction of “real-virtual” of quantum field theory. January 2012 Einstein’s rod and clock convention could perhaps be recast in terms of neutrinos as “relativity yardstick” instead of photons. If the neutrino maximum speed could be pinned down to just a tiny fraction of a percent faster than the speed of light, a tiny fraction which only results in a correspondingly tiny fraction of a percent error in all heretofore well established measurable relativistic corrections, e.g., with respect to time, mass, length, etc., then the theory of special relativity could be retained more or less intact. It would be just as though Einstein had started his gedanken experiments using the neutrino instead of the light ray (photon) such that special relativity remains valid as a physical principle. This of course poses problems for the myriad physical analogue alternative interpretations of relativity, e.g, Desiato’s polarizable vacuum model. The momentum and energy deficits in particle interaction calculations that formerly relied on a photon-based special relativity might then point of the existence of heretofore undetected (and unsuspected) theoretical particles of extremely low mass, which would now be necessary in order to reestablish an exact balance of, for example, nuclear particle scattering and reaction equations. But what if we could assure nature, as it were, that despite the appropriate positioning of the camera in front of the double-slit, the observer, or any observer, would be unable to take advantage of the appropriate physical arrangement of the camera in order to determine which slit the electrons go through? I believe that, in this case, the interference pattern would, again, reappear on the phosphorescent backstop! If this were the case, then the observer would regain his mysterious status with respect to wavefunction collapses, c.f., au=Vic Stenger, cit=The Myth of Quantum Consciousness. One must, to wit, assure, first of all, that it is possible to establish a closed system within which the experimental apparatus is to be contained, in order to, in turn, assure that, no matter how large a physical arena this quantum

experiment is performed in, the observer will not possess the possibility of knowing the trajectories of the electrons. Not all closed experimental situations can assure this, but it is just that a closing off of the experimental setup from the rest of an open reality must be achievable to assure the inability of the observer to draw on hidden resources to divine the trajectories of the electrons from their source to the backstop. (Does this mean we must here be able to isolate the system, which is the subject of our experiment from its embedding quantum vacuum so as to effectively separate the system from the observer’s brain, which is also “embedded” in the context of this same “quantum vacuum”?) This suggests that the observer's ability to collapse the wavefunction consists in a peculiar connection which he is able to make with an open-ended reality, a reality which, as alluded to earlier, is therefore indeterminate, i.e., nondeterministic. It is interesting to note that it is only within a closed physical system, where the boundary conditions of the vacuum field are changing only adiabatically, that a superposition state may be supposed to exist. Presumably, the closed system cannot adequately accommodate the phenomenon of the observer's consciousness, which is what disturbs the system, resulting in a collapse of the superposition state which heretofore existed within it, and this, just by virtue of the mere possibility that the observer may obtain knowledge of the system's state with respect to the superposition observables. October 2011 So whether or not a system is “closed” or “open” is of material importance to the question of whether what the system “contains” is context-free data or context-dependent information. An important question is whether the deciding difference here is to be determined exclusively through some fundamental difference in the correlational structure of the system’s “fluctuation matrix”, e.g., recursive vs. nonrecursive, etc. Throughout this discussion, we must not lose sight of the fact that the wavefunction itself does not actually represent anything physically real or measurable, and so all purported interactions occurring between wavefunctions must be realized in terms of the interaction of their associated probability density functions. (Caveat: there is growing experiment evidence at the time of this writing, October 2011 that the

wavefunction is measurable and so constitutes a real physical entity). For example, Aharonov experimentally proved the reality of A the magnetic vector potential by measuring changes in the quantum phase of A within a region where the magnetic field, B was absent. So if A is identified with the wavefunction of the photon, this proves the reality of Psi. A superposition state is only defined where each of the component superposed wavefunctions has an associated probability via the square of its amplitude, although here the assignment of unique probabilities to both the interference pattern - a turn of events which, on the prn= Copenhagen interpretation, is determined solely by the decision of the conscious observer as to which camera, A or B, he/she opens first. Remember that in the theory of quantum mechanic.s a particular event only possesses a probability of 1 if it has already occurred. It is in this sense in which we speak of the superposition state as a combination of quantum states, no one of which is real in itself. The pre-Socratic philosopher, au=Parmenides, was of that philosophical tradition which considered the ultimate metaphysical question to be "Why is there something rather than nothing?" And he is noted for having proclaimed "Nothing does not exist." @$But he considered that all real change necessarily involved the instant by instant creation of new attributes ex nihilo. Parmenides concluded from this that change was, itself, impossible and the universe; being cannot come from nonbeing, therefore the universe is a static and indestructible closed system; time was for au=Parmenides a kind of tenacious illusion. Time would later be characterized similarly by au=Einstein. In the present day, owing to the advent and development of the Quantum Theory, the suggested reformulation of this most fundamental metaphysical question is: "Why is there Information rather than Chaos?" For those persons for whom the question, "why is there something rather than nothing," is meaningful, belief in the existence of a transcendent reality beyond space and time, and what is more, beyond the most general dichotomy, the dual opposite categories, existence vs. nonexistence, the granting of

the being of Deity is theoretically but a small step. Such persons merely have to be convinced of the necessity of Will within the realm beyond Representation, c.f., cit=Will and Representation (au=Schopenhauer). For other persons, this most fundamental of metaphysical questions is, as au= Martin Gardner puts it, "cognitively meaningless." September 2011 As the late 20th Century Philosopher, au=Robert Nozick pointed out in his cit=Philosophical Investigations, “The question cuts so deep…that any approach that stands a chance of yielding an answer will look extremely weird. Someone who proposes a non-strange answer shows he didn’t understand the question [italics mine]. As logicians are fond of saying: “Everything follows from a contradiction”. If “nothing” and “everything” are veritable dual-opposite categories, then logic tells us that everything in between these two extremes stems from the interrelation or interactivity of the two. In a sense, it is “nothing” which gives “everything” its ontological status. June 2014 (c.f., National Review article on atheism, “In the beginning was Nothing and Nothing was with Nothing and Nothing was Nothing…”, which was pointed out to me by Randy Evans. September 2011 On the information paradigm of existence, “nothing” corresponds to chaos, while “everything” corresponds to pure, self-existent information and anything in between would seem to depend upon both. In a twist of au=Clarke’s principle, i.e., that “any sufficiently advanced technology would be indistinguishable from magic”, we could say that, any sufficiently information-dense structure would be indistinguishable from chaos. Here we are relying on the rather speculative intuitive notion that encryption is necessary to achieve optimal information “packing densities”. Examples of this are the number 19 code in the Quran, the Bible Code, Hebrew number-letter correspondence, vowel suppression or absence of spaces in ancient Hebrew texts. So the width of one’s loupe, where and how far it is placed above the dense array of characters, determines what is read off. This is all by way of pointing up the active role which the “interface” has in determining information content. Can an alternate theory of mind on the one hand, and of the public space on the other be developed from a confluence of such concepts as selective attention, bandwidth

conservation (c.f., http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rent%27s_Rule) conservation of psychic energy, lucid dreaming, recursive functions, fractal geometry, Wigner’s friend, Cramer’s Transactional and Everett’s Many Worlds interpretations of quantum theory (and its many recent “Many Minds” adaptations), epistemological solipsism, objectivity = intersubjectivity, hard encryption, data compression, chaos theory, quantum decoherence as grounded in an individualized vacuum spectrum or domain? The opposite side of the coin from epistemological solipsism is the fact that one is unknowable to others. An important question in this connection is whether the self that is unknowable to others is knowable to the self. If the only parts of the self that can be known to itself are its socially or sociolinguistically constructed parts, then one’s own self is just as unknowable as is the self of others, perhaps? tbctd September 2011 The most efficient form of encryption is likely to invoke self-referentiality or incursiveness of some kind. We propose that the reductio ad absurdum of self-referentiality is represented by consciousness. Consciousness represents the ultimate exemplar of “hard encryption”. The doctrines of the incorrigibility of sense data and au= Russell’s “privileged access” to the contents of consciousness are consistent with the notion that, the hard encryption represented by consciousness are “incorrigible” and the contents to which they grant access are “privileged.” Substance is indifferent to the passage of time and so must be bound up in the phenomena of emergence through substance’s ability to transcend all possible historical accounts of a process. Just think of Leibniz’ monads here as “possessing no windows”. The quality or qualities of substance, being that it/they universally pervade(s) all things that exist, would forever be free of being intersubjectively identified or classified. Classification depends upon some things or states being the case that fall outside a given class’ purview. The individual consciousness qua substance that all contents of a given individual consciousness must be supposed to possess can never be identified or classified by that individual, moreover, on account of the hard encryption represented by consciousness, nor shall any other individual be able to identify or classify the substance that makes up that individual’s subject contents of consciousness. Note that there could

potentially be an indefinite number of distinct differences between the consciousnesses of an unlimited number of individual minds, both real and possible, opening up the possibility of an ever greater number of abstract categories and relations involving these individual consciousnesses. And yet all of this taxonomic knowledge is forever totally inaccessible, except to a transcendental being. It was not without very good reason that au=Alvin Plantinga devoted an entire book to the topic of cit=God and Other Minds. July 2012 Unfortunately, one cannot find a free of copy of Plantinga's 1967 book and he only cuts to the chase and states his real argument on the last 3 or 4 pages of his book. The rest of the book is groundwork examining all of the arguments in favor of God's existence and why these arguments fail. Plantinga's own argument does not fail, once one really takes to heart the fact that one has only ever known one's own sensory states and…that Man does not possess, nor even can he conceivably possess, a concept of consciousness (as opposed to a concept of a state or states of consciousness). Even if one lives forever in a heaven or hell after this life, it will still be *just you* experiencing *your own thoughts and sensory states*. The reality of a genuine plurality of subjective states of conscious experience (of distinct persons, what is better understood as a @$multiplurality) necessarily brings in a perspective transcending mere everlastingness of an individual (particular) mind, i.e., that of a Universal Mind. In a word, even if you live for infinite time, you cannot have proof of the existence of other minds - this shall always remain a question of faith, a faith no weaker than that of the deist who has faith in a Universal Mind. April 2012 Ethics without any practical possibility for reciprocation and without an underlying karmic metaphysical principle, e.g., ethics for a consciousness that is continually branching through new and possibly only projectively extant universes. This is an example of the hidden presumption of theism. Many other examples exist such as from philosophy of science, linguistics, art, sociology, psychology, etc. November 2011 The essence of Plantinga's argument comes during the few remaining pages of the book, which regains new life in light of recent developments in cosmology (anthropic principle, multiverse, Boltzmann brains), quantum mechanics (Many Minds Interpretation) and artificial

intelligence/virtual reality (Nick Bostrom's "ancestor simulations). . . . Each is eternal entity, having escaped cosmic loneliness for a time by having taken upon limitation. But there is the question of how the infrastructure that facilitates the ability to do this managed to be in place and available for our use? Although from the vantage point of any given temporality, this infrastructure shall have always been in place such that there is no ground for us to ask after a “first cause”, there still remains the question, “for what reason is it there?” It seems that if causality is not part of the question, then purpose or end must be. There lies the rub, i.e., the area where friction develops between comatose traditional beliefs and metaphysical hypotheses. September 2012

"Without transcendent, universal mind there is no distinction between the case of consciousness being a one or its indeed being a many." The universal consciousness field splits the number degeneracy, e.g., @$“photon number degeneracy” of the Boltzmann brains, which real, biological brains resonantly tune to whenever those brains enjoy conscious states of awareness. The continuity of conscious experience necessarily “piggybacks” off of the nonlocal connectivity of unique vacuum fluctuation frequency spectra. And so personal identity qua substantial continuity of mind and mental states is far more a function of vacuum nonlocality than it is a function of specific reproducible instantaneous patterns of neural or microtubule network interaction configurations in a given biological brain. In a word, personal identity is a function of resonant Boltzmann brains qua nonlocally connected, quantum-coherent vacuum entropy fluctuations. And here the normal distinction of closed versus open thermodynamic systems must be reinterpreted in light of this nonlocal connectivity, which in some sense renders mysteriously fuzzy this otherwise hard and fast distinction from the theory of classical thermodynamics. July 2013 edt= “ The universal consciousness field splits the number degeneracy, e.g., “photon number degeneracy” of the Boltzmann brains, which real, biological brains resonantly tune to via vast networks of quantum-entangled microtubule

tubulin dimers whenever those brains suffer conscious states of awareness. The continuity of conscious experience necessarily piggybacks off of the non-local connectivity of prescribed unique vacuum fluctuation frequency spectra within respective prescribed bandwidths. And so personal identity qua substantial continuity and unity of mind and mental states is far more a function of the intrinsic vacuum quantum non-locality of Boltzmann Brains than it is a function of specific, reproducible instantaneous patterns of neural or microtubule tubulin dimer network interaction configurations within a given biological brain. In a word, personal identity is a function of naturally hard-encrypted resonant Boltzmann brains qua non-locally connected, quantumcoherent vacuum entropy fluctuations. And here the normal distinction of closed versus open thermodynamic systems must be reinterpreted in light of this non-local connectivity, which in some sense renders mysteriously definite and precise this otherwise fuzzy distinction inherited from the theory of classical thermodynamics. The so-called specious present of cognitive psychology, represented by anywhere from fractions of a second to several seconds in duration along one axis in multidimensional time (dependent upon something akin to IQ) is constituted by the coherence time of the particular Boltzmann Brain to which one's brain is resonantly tuned at a given moment." What is absurd here is that, "The problem of existence in light of modern physics and cosmology becomes just this: did the universe tunnel into existence from a false vacuum state many billions of years ago, or did my consciousness just tunnel a fleeting moment ago into some freak accident of a Boltzmann brain which is only just now on the verge of quantum decoherent collapse. October 2012

When one rejects God and adopts atheism, what one has secretly done is to have rejected the notion of a transcendent, universal mind as well as that of the very ground of mind as such. The rejection of the transcendent other is therefore just a temporary stopover along the path to the rejection of other minds and otherness as such. This is the case even if, as it turns out, one’s thinking does not possess sufficient logical consistency to carry one along the full course of this philosophical path

– a null result that is overwhelmingly probable. This is a restatement of the piquant observation that, “if naive realism is metaphysical baking powder, then atheism is just half-baked solipsism.” This is all a direct consequence of the fact that, we can have no general concept or category, termed “consciousness” such that the conscious states of awareness of each and every other person should constitute a true instantiation (along with one's own individual consciousness) of said general concept . . . that is, with this observation set juxtaposed alongside the indisputable fact that solipsism is false and other minds (whose ground of mentality is apart from that of one's own) do in fact exist. But the grounding of a conception, that is, of its knowability, if you will is distinctly epistemological and not a matter of metaphysics. “The term is impossible to define except in terms that are unintelligible without a grasp of what consciousness means. Consciousness is a fascinating but elusive phenomenon; it is impossible to specify what it is, what it does, or why it evolved. Nothing worth reading has been written about it” [italics mine], c.f., Sutherland, S., International Dictionary of Psychology, 1989. April 2014

The isolated system possessing only “internal” connections and the system connected to an outside are topologically distinct and therefore logically distinct and objectively dissimilar. There is no possibility for an isolated system to realistically simulate connection to an open-ended external realm. This open-endedness is vouchsafed by the presence of the other and the self must be a sociolinguistic . . .well, not so much construct as collaborative preparation. This and more is all captured in Wittgenstein's "Private Language Argument". Plantinga and Levinas, their philosophy of mind, that is, brings the inextricably comingled errors of solipsism and atheism into stark relief in the light of Wittgenstein's. As has been said many times before, “without context there is no meaning”. Multiple points of view are required to support a veritable distinction between “inside” and “outside”. A system composed of “the solipsist and the external world” is a howler of a misnomer for its rightful name is “the solipsist and his external world”, which, of course, is no external world at all. The solipsist and his external world, so-called

is always logically reducible/equivalent to . . . the solipsist and his private sense data. A closely related topological application to philosophy of mind and epistemology is whether the mental states of the solipsist could have all been fed into the solipsist’s mind by a team of evil, big-headed aliens. This is just the humorous, compact travel version of the thesis of the self as sociolinguistic construct. Without the guiding rails of a grammar, the mind is overwhelmed by the chaos of its internal babbling. And yet it is indeed “babbling babes” who re-creolize the Pidgin language of their parents, generation after generation. That’s how any coherent language sounds to an infant who yet possess no taught rules of grammar: as a Pidgin. But what of Wittgenstein’s Private Language Argument here? However, at least on the surface, the marked ability of toddlers to creolize their parents’ Pidgin-like system of articulate sounds seems to sap the PL argument of some of its force, however. Unless one interprets this genetic ability as being founded upon some kind of collaborative design. The genetic base pair sequences that inform this unique ability of babbling toddlers itself possesses a grammar, rather than being the expression of a haphazardly cobbled together Pidgin, as natural selection of random genetic mutations would entail. Remember that mutations are always being “interpreted” and “expressed” within the context of a multilevel gene regulatory network. The organic problems of internal logical consistency, which so affect and make untenable the solipsist’s position, also infect that of the atheist. It is the other of the other who makes the rules underlying the system. Contemplate the irreducibility of “the other of the other” to “the other”. The necessity of transcendent other is glimpsed in this irreducibility. June 2014 Without genuine intersubjectivity, objectivity cannot be simulated and the notion of objectivity would then be an incoherent one. Similarly, without self-consciousness, Man, as a philosophical zombie hominid ape, would have never arrived at the notion of God as a transcendent other. It is thought by less gifted MI linguists that the 3/3 linguist who maintains his or her 3/3 rating in significant part by remembering the answers on the test from previous takings maintains an unfair advantage.

This complaint is however informed by a failure to appreciate that the more gifted linguist must have reached a 3/3 on his or her own at some previous stage.

July 2013

True agnosticism is being undecided equally between two possibilities for the origin of the universe the other is God for the self is God. @$

True atheism is the belief that the self is but an illusion as only God vouchsafes the moral status of the individual with respect to the ethics of his social order. Generally speaking the Earth's population decreases with time as one moves into the past but the number of ancestors doubles geometrically. Clearly at some point in the past sexual reproduction was not available to propagate a given species. This is an example of the application of the anthropic principle. This reminds us of George Gamow's prediction of the seven MeV energy level of carbon 12. Quantum entanglement could have been predicted from an analysis of the large 3-way collision cross section for Helium nuclei in the formation of the 7 MeV resonant carbon-12 state. @$This is because of the generalization of the notion of cross section that is involved in interpreting a 3-way collision which is otherwise extremely improbable. This is especially revealed in the arithmetic that applies to the addition of cross sections for helium nuclei in the 3-way collision by which carbon-12 is formed in the stellar interior.

The probabilities don't add according to the normal rules of such. The probability calculus implies the subsystems of negative an imaginary and complex probabilities. The ego as the tuning filter of molecular and atomic resonant interactions and reactions. The anthropic principal puts the self at the only fixed point in the otherwise totally open and chaotic realm of being. The general nature of quantum entanglement is the general nature of consciousness ( in the absence of a veritable concept of consciousness) which preserves the precise boundaries of the domain of the self. miks Mike leida see kasulik osta selliseid kambris Lastehaigla? 'There are no spies, only some squirrels that are more secret than other squirrels.' January 2013

Behavioral genetics is perhaps the determining factor in how this “necker cube” of an epigram is perceived: “If naïve realism is metaphysical baking powder, then atheism/theism is just half-baked solipsism.” Plantinga’s critique of evolutionary naturalism (as self defeating, logically) points up a dilemma (originally hit upon by the ancient Greek philosopher Empedocles) in attempting to apply behavioral genetics and epigenetics to critical analysis. Developmental trends in search engine technology and intellectual property philosophy in the post modern age shall one day soon assure us that an army of young scholars shall see to it that the true genealogies of paradigmbusting ideas are brought to light and credit given where credit is due. At the level of individual human beings, there are myriad though mutually conflicting points of coherence pertaining to an equally diverse number of points of view. epi=

If naive realism is metaphysical baking powder, then atheism is just half-baked solipsism. April 2012 Buddhism seems to be the only viable path for bypassing the theism vs. solipsism dual opposition. This is because

Buddhism views the self as an illusion, either that of the individual or of God. January 2013 fcbk=

"The evolutionary process has a finite amount of time in which to work (because of eventual heat death), while Boltzmann brains have an infinite amount of time to appear in any given universe (that doesn't recollapse), and in the environment that birthed those universes. The ordinary observers created by natural selection simply drop out of consideration, being overwhelmed by infinitely more Boltzmann Brains”, c.f.,web= http://themeatyard.blogspot.com/2009/08/starts-withbang-on-boltzmann-brain_10.html This reformulation constitutes, almost by itself, the answer to its precursor: the pre-Socratic question "Why is there something rather than nothing?" is insoluble in its demand for a relation between being and nonbeing apart from their mutual exclusiveness whereas the modern counterpart to this question does not at all demand from us the impossible as there are many examples, both empirical and mathematical, where chaotic systems acquire order through selforganization or ordered systems become chaotic through an increase in entropy, also c.f., “deterministic chaos”. July 2011 Data may be considered to be the embodiment of information in the sense of constituting the necessary, but not the sufficient condition for the presence of information. There must be a special characterization of some subset of the sum total of necessary conditions for some state to occur or obtain, which combined with another subset of such conditions constitutes the sufficient condition, The relationship of the two subsets would be in a complimentary manner akin to figure-ground. April 2012 If information is gerundial as in informing, then there should be something akin to protoinformation. The question then is whether this implies such a process as “proto-consciousness”. It might be profitable to distinguish, instructions, data, metadata, information. Analogies such as Internet, webpage, hyperlink, operating system, cloud/cloud computing may be both helpful as well as limiting here, hence the ever present need to create new contexts, i.e., new myths.

But what, you may ask, is contained within the Quantum Theory which suggests this reformulation? Very simply, the Quantum Theory does not treat the vacuum as a veritable emptiness, but rather as a medium of chaotic fluctuations of positive and negative energy which cancel each other, averaging out to zero net energy over distances larger than an atomic diameter, say. Subatomic particles, the penultimate constituents of matter come into existence when energy fluctuations over a small region of the vacuum respond to each other's presence through the accidental formation of feedback paths among themselves. These feedback structures may remain stable for only extremely fleeting periods of time or they may become robust and persist against their chaotic backdrop for longer periods permitting the formation of more complex hierarchical structures. The presence of information is the key ingredient determining if such fluctuation networks persist against the background of quantum fields. In terms of information theory, the vacuum is filled with an infinite number of messages crossing it to and fro from every direction; material particles are constituted by more messages being exchanged within this region than between this region and the "outside" of this region. On this interpretation, matter does not respond instantaneously to accelerations (possesses inertia) owing to a communication bottleneck existing between its interior and the surrounding vacuum; matter cannot respond to the world in "real time," but must take time out to "process" the coded instructions which it receives from its "inputs." One need here only compare the ease with which a single gnat can change its direction in flight ( to avoid an obstacle, say) to the difficulties involved when an entire swarm of gnats, ore a swarm of swarms of gnats, for that matter, attempts to perform the same maneuver based on the intelligence ( in the military sense) of a small group of harbinger gnats. These chaotic fluctuations of vacuum energy are a manifestation of the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. this principle states a numerical relationship between the dual physical quantities position / momentum and time / energy. The bridging constant between these dual quantities is Planck's constant, h, and the exact expression of this relation is:

X*P = h/2pi or T*E = h/2pi, which is derived from Planck's older relation, E = h * f; where E is energy (Joules), f is frequency (hertz), X is distance (meters), P is momentum and T is time (seconds); h is, of course, Planck's constant which has units of Joule-seconds. There is a more sophisticated and complete matrix algebraic statement of the principle, but this need not concern us here. Heisenberg's uncertainty principle is an epistemological one as it rigidly specifies how the accuracy in our knowledge of one physical quantity affects the accuracy of our determination of the remaining paired quantity. Heisenberg's principle can be obtained by generalizing Planck's relation in terms of the matrix algebraic expression: p*q - q*p = h/2pi x I . If consciousness is, itself, required to collapse the wave-function, then consciousness must originate in the interaction of uncollapsed wavefunctions. This suggests that the wavefunctions interacting with one another within consciousness are of the “already collapsed” variety, that is the perceptual representations of wavefunctions all interact based upon a subluminal propagation of mutual influence. Quantum wavefunctions which have not yet collapsed are capable of interacting with one another at a distance instantaneously and this sort of phenomenon is referred to by Physicists as the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen, or E.P.R. effect. There are two basic schools of the Quantum Theory. Where they differ is in their interpretation of the status of Heisenberg's uncertainty principle. One school maintains that this uncertainty is due merely to the practical limitations of observation, that is; the uncertainty is only epistemological in nature. The other school maintains that this uncertainty is a theoretical limitation, that is; the uncertainty is

ontological in character. The dispute between these two schools is solved easily enough, however. In the 1990's when computers have reached a relatively high level of sophistication it is not uncommon to encounter the opinion, among otherwise enlightened (educated) individuals, that computers are capable of or exhibit a kind of elementary consciousness. These are the same people who would deny without hesitation that earlier more primitive computers such as Babbage’s differential analyzer (originally designed in the 1840's) or perhaps even the Eniac ( circa 1945) which calculated artillery paths are themselves incapable of anything approaching what might be called conscious thought. This reveals an intuition that somehow sheer complexity is the essential factor, which separates the mechanical brute or automaton from the sophisticated high speed digital computer of today. August 2011 Note: “sheer complexity” of deterministic computing is only important because there exists some intrinsic threshold within those nondeterministic fields in which the classical digital state machine is/becomes embedded, which provides context for an otherwise meaningless, context-free affair (just as in the case of Babbage’s “differential analyzer”). It is likely that this threshold lies at the boundary between the quantum and classical worlds, which exhibit wavelike vs. particle-like behavior, respectively. @$There is no contextfree threshold of computing complexity at which any qualitative change in the nature of computing is to be rationally expected. That is just magical thinking. Even among those who flatly deny that modern high speed computers possess anything like real intelligence or consciousness, there is the implicit assumption of sheer complexity as the necessary magical ingredient: a revolutionary jump in switching speed, memory capacity, architecture design - all of which are essentially functions of increased density of miniaturized components - would undoubtedly bring about the necessary gain in complexity, i.e., that which approaches the complexity of the human brain itself, so that machines would acquire a kind of consciousness. Marvin Minsky - the leading figure within the so-called hard-AI community - once designated human brains as nothing more

than "meat machines." But if there is this almost ineffable intuition about a vital connection between complexity and consciousness then a perhaps even greater or deeper one is that between the notions of consciousness and freedom. So-called hard-AI theorists such as Minsky, Dennet, and the Churchland's use analytical arguments which miss the point in objecting to Searle because they do not address their criticisms to the principle thesis that he advances, namely, that the causal powers of matter play an essential role in determining the phenomenon of consciousness and that such causal considerations go beyond those of formal symbol manipulation. Where these two intuitions meet and reinforce one another is when one considers a digital computing device, say, where the packing densities of the microelectronic components approach that of naturally occurring crystals. It is at precisely this point where we expect to see the quantum mechanical effects described by the famous Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. Here despite all attempts at insulation and grounding, filtering, or rectification, it becomes nevertheless impossible to force the device to operate according to some pre-established blueprint of operation, i.e., program, as the fluctuating voltages and electric currents inherently reside within the device as a consequence of the interaction of the device's wires and circuit elements with the vacuum electromagnetic field which in its own turn must fluctuate randomly. This random and irretrievable fluctuation in the vacuum's electromagnetic field is due to an extension of the Uncertainty principle which states that the electric and magnetic field strengths may not both be simultaneously specified at any point in space - in much the same fashion in which the position and momentum of and individual particle may not be simultaneously specified. A sharp determination of the electric field at a point will cause a large spread of uncertainty in measurements of the magnetic field at this point and vice versa. The fluctuating (quantum) voltages and currents to which the circuitry of any really advanced computing device would be subject would be utterly useless and manifest themselves as noise signals disruptive to the normal operation of the device - unless the device could manage to interact with these fluctuating fields.

February 1998

Clearly the spatiotemporal scale at which these quantum fluctuations take place represents an insuperable physical barrier to the continued operation of Moore's Law which states that, microprocessor computing power increases by doubling every eighteen months to two years, given, at least, no significant departure from conventional microprocessor architectural design as it has manifest itself over the previous four or five generations of microprocessor development. October 2011 Although in some sense spatial scale is only meaningful within the context of locality, though with respect to Penrose’s “one graviton limit”, energy scale is indeed relevant. The breakthrough in the evolution of microprocessor technology which will make possible the continuation of Moore's Law, at the same time as it transcends it, will come in the form of a significant paradigm shift in the relationship between computer architecture designers and programmers and knowledge. This paradigm shift will manifest itself in two distinct but closely related ways. The movement will take place from a representational to a participatory basis for the communication of information and knowledge. Instead of knowledge undergoing many transformations from information to data to information and back again at each stage in its passing from one person to another, knowledge will be communicated not through any physical transmission data, but through a nonrepresentational and participatory sharing of knowledge between minds. But this is still not enough. Our intuition that the phenomenon of consciousness is a radically deep one pushes us to suppose that this device - however it is supposed to function - merely sets the stage for this chaotically fluctuating vacuum field to interact with itself - the device becomes just an intermediary, a facilitator, of a process which must ultimately fall under the control of this energy itself. We see that our intuition about the importance of smallness and complexity captured in the motion of sensitivity (to vacuum fluctuations) and our intuition concerning freedom ( of vacuum energy to self-organize) appear to intersect. There is an exact parallel between the relationship of energy

and entropy to each other and the relationship between signal bandwidth and signal information capacity. We might liken the comparison between a conscious (intelligent) computer and automaton (unintelligent computer) in the following manner. A dumb computer is searching a maze for its exit...There are a number of respects in which the paradigm shift from a bottom-up to a top-down metaphysics may be realized.: 1) Physical processes are not "pushed up from below" by blind efficient causation, but are "pulled up from above" by teleological causation. This may be seen through Margenau's observation that all differential equations representing processes of blind causation may be recast as any one of an infinite family of integral equations (depending on initial conditions) where some physical quantity such as time, energy, distance, etc., is minimized or maximized. Teleology, however, in its own way, presupposes the existence of a determinate framework just as much as does classical physics; in fact, events are not merely determined within teleological causation, but are overdetermined. 2)The vacuum is not empty as it was conceived to be in the 18th century classical physics with solid particles caroming through it, but the vacuum is, rather, a plenum, a fullness of energy while so-called particles are mere excitations of this vacuum medium. The energy density of the vacuum is far greater than the energy density of the particles "occupying" it. 3) chaos may be reinterpreted as a thermal reservoir of virtually infinite information content as opposed to a condition of no information. 4) There is an empirical-theoretical spectrum with the unified theory of physics at the theoretical end of this spectrum and pure consciousness at the opposite empirical end. Therefore, it is just as meaningless to ask what the fundamental "constituents" of matter posited by unified physical theory, are in themselves as it is to inquire into the process by and through which the phenomenon of consciousness originates.

Both questions are posed at the wrong extreme of the empiricaltheoretical spectrum so that any attempt to answer them appear incoherent or self-contradictory. If the empirical-theoretical really constitutes a spectrum which exhaustively "covers" reality, then we expect that the bootstrap explanations applied at each end of this spectrum must somehow merge or interpenetrate. 5) The creation of material particles is not the direct conversion of energy into matter, rather the energy required is that needed to dissociate them from the network of interactions in which they pre-exist. Creation is not ex nihilo, but is an abstraction of a low level of structure from a preexisting dynamic whole of virtually infinite (maximal) complexity. Each act of abstraction, however, is founded on negations performed within a predefined whole which is itself a form of abstraction of a higher order than mere negation which is an operation which presupposes the ability to partition a system into disjoint and complementary halves. This setting-up of such a system decomposable into complementary partitions, is the higher order abstraction which cannot be understood as being based in mere negation within a larger system. The transformation of elements within a particular system of representation through expansion of the context grounding the representational elements is a kind of transformation which cannot be explained in causal or merely rational terms. 6) Consciousness is channeled, structured, limited, abstracted by the functioning of the human brain, it is not produced through its action. The brain acts, per the Bergson – James - Lange theory, as a kind of reducing valve. 7) Gravitational time dilation, rather than being an effect of a gravitational field, may be an essential part of the physical vacuum mechanism by which matter produces a gravitational field. 8) Rather than conservation of four-momentum being deduced from the theory of special relativity, conservation of four-momentum is the very

foundation upon which the edifice of special relativity is built. What is referred to as locality is the sum of physical processes governed via the strong coupling mediated through the exchange of energy between particles possessing an energy greater than the energy uncertainty of the quantum mechanical system within which these energy exchanges are occurring. What is called nonlocality is the sum of physical interactions governed via the weak coupling mediated through the exchange of energy between particles possessing an energy smaller than the energy uncertainty of the quantum mechanical system within which these "weak" energy exchanges are occurring. The presence of real photons is evidence that at some point in spacetime a fermion made an energy transition which was trigger either by bombarding real photons or the action of the vacuum electromagnetic field, i.e., spontaneous emission. Of course, both process must be invoked again, repeatedly, to explain the existence of the bombarding photons. this infinite regress converges in the sense that at progressively earlier moments we find the vacuum electromagnetic field in an ever more compressed state and as the process of spontaneous emission tends to outstrip that of stimulated emission at high frequencies the explanation for the decay of excited fermionic states is found to lie exclusively with the action of the vacuum electromagnetic field. June 1998

The reason for the momentum fluctuation spectrum of an electron contained within a quantum well being identical to the spectrum of possible discrete energy transitions between possible quantum well energy levels may be on account of the following simple observation. Such transitions downward by a real electron are stimulated to occur either by real or virtual photons while such transitions upward by a virtual electron are stimulated to occur likewise either by a real or virtual photon, and the spectrum of such virtual photons represents that of the vacuum electromagnetic waves with which the bound electron can resonate with and with which it can exchange energy. Since the photon propagates through vacuum part of the time as a electron/ positron pair,

and in a gravitational field the density of virtual fermion/antifermion pairs is somewhat decreased, it follows that the velocity of the photon through this modified vacuum will be correspondingly decreased. It follows from this that the energy density of the vacuum must vary proportionally to the cube of the local value of the speed of light within the gravitational field-laden, and hence, modified vacuum. This may similarly be interpreted as the energy density of the vacuum being proportional to the inverse cube of the frequency of vacuum electromagnetic waves. This is just the relationship of vacuum energy density to virtual photon frequency which renders the quantum vacuum perfectly Lorenz-invariant. In Nature, Oct. 19, p(574), the time required for quantum mechanical tunneling of an electron across a Josephson junction was measure. This result means that there is some meaning, which can be attached to the velocity of the particle during its act of quantum tunneling. Sudden, nonadiabatic compression of the Casimir plates should result in the spontaneous emission of photons by the vacuum. Similarly, nonadiabatic expansion of tightly compressed plates should result in the spontaneous absorption of some real photons, which happen to be within the geometry of the plates at this time. NOTE: This statement may not be true because the Einstein coefficient of spontaneous absorption is identically zero; the coefficients of spontaneous emission, and hence, of stimulated absorption and emission, may be changed through altering the vacuum electromagnetic energy density utilizing Casimir plates, resonant cavities, etc. The Universe might be described by a wavefunction representing its tunneling through a hyperspherical barrier, in four real spatial dimensions. The quantum tunneling of the Universe through this hyperspherical barrier may be alternately described as the collapse of a false vacuum state and the subsequent creation of free particle wavefunctions propagating along an imaginary axis of a four dimensional hypersphere of 3 real + 1 imaginary spatial dimension.

The probability density of this wavefunction adjusts as time passes reflecting the increasing uncertainty of its would-be position eigenstate. Any vector at a point where its scalar product, with the wavenumbers of the eigenfunction expansion (of the universal wavefunction), is zero is assigned an imaginary coefficient reflecting its being rotated 90owith respect to the wavenumber set of the eigenfunction expansion. There was a recently announced discovery that the linear Hubble relationship between galactic distances and recession rates does not strictly hold, but that the recession velocities are distributed discretely with increasing distance, each velocity being roughly an integral multiple of 72 Km/sec. These observation suggest two distinct but related possibilities. One, that the initial collapse of the quantum mechanical vacuum state occurred in discrete stages in much the same way that an excited electron decays from a highly excited state. Two, that the Universe tunneled, quantum mechanical fashion, out of a hyperspherical potential barrier where, as in the usual case, the transmission coefficient varied sinusoidally with the wavenumber. The vacuum electromagnetic field is said to be incompressible, but this is not strictly true. The vacuum electromagnetic field actually appears to decrease in energy density when confined within a resonant cavity of decreasing volume. This seems to suggest that the energy density of the vacuum electromagnetic field is in a sense negative. We may think of the effect of shrinking the resonant cavity upon the photons present within this cavity in two distinct ways: 1) The photons wavelengths are simply compressed by the cavity shrinkage factor or 2) The zero-point of the vacuum electromagnetic field is altered by a certain fraction so that the energy of photons within the cavity "appear" to be greater (relative to the new zero-point) by this same fraction. Of course, the first alternative appears more intuitively evident but embodies the simplistic assumption that the photons within the cavity possess some permanent and abiding existence rather than being a

packet of energy which is continually being emitted (created) and absorbed (annihilated) by the fluctuating electromagnetic vacuum field. If a photon is in a momentum eigenstate, then the position of this photon along its translation axis is totally uncertain. We say therefore that in the position representation of the photon's wavefunction that the probability density of photons along the particular photon's translation axis is exactly zero. Consequently, a photon or photon beam which is in a momentum eigenstate - and hence an energy eigenstate also - does not alter the probability versus frequency distribution function (along its translation axis) for virtual photons of like eigenenergy. This may be seen to follow from the fact that an increased likelihood of finding a photon of a particular eigenenergy within a certain spatial interval means that the probability vs. frequency distribution function in this region experiences a peak at the frequency corresponding to this eigenenergy. The rates of stimulated emission and absorption of electromagnetic radiation at a particular frequency are proportional to the density of the ambient radiation at this frequency. The constants of proportionality are the Einstein coefficients of emission and absorption, respectively. It was stated earlier as a general principle that all physical processes were mediated through the exchange of energy between matter and the vacuum, the reservoir of energy uncertainty. This principle may be made more specific by invoking the Einstein relationships for electromagnetic radiation emission and absorption as the mechanism for all energy emission - absorption, that is, for all forms of energy exchange, so that the rates at which all physical processes take place becomes proportional to the spectral energy density of the fluctuating boson fields of the vacuum - in accordance with our earlier intuitions. this assignment of the Einstein mechanism ( for want of a more convenient term) for physical processes in general depends upon the implicit assumption that in the absence of stimulated emission (and absorption) the coefficients of spontaneous emission and absorption are identical - just as are the coefficients of stimulated emission and absorption are identical in the absence of spontaneous emission. But the problem here is that there really is no such thing as spontaneous

absorption - as noted before this condition would violate the principle of energy conservation. Spontaneous emission appears to only occur to electrons which have already been elevated to excited energy levels through stimulated absorption - in other words the energy fluctuations of the vacuum serve merely to trigger the decay of excited states produced through ambient electromagnetic radiation. However, this would not be the case if spontaneous absorption applied only to energy in the form of virtual particles. The lifetime of virtual particle is determined by the uncertainty principle and therefore the absorption of these particles out the vacuum does not violate conservation of energy. It must be observed here that the assignment of the value ) to the coefficient of spontaneous absorption is only required by the assumption that the energy density of the vacuum is itself zero. A number of experiments on vacuum cavity resonance suggest that spontaneous emission rates are suppressed by imposing boundary conditions upon the electromagnetic vacuum. It is our deepest suspicion that the fraction by which the emission rate is suppressed is equal to the fraction by which the density of the electromagnetic vacuum is reduced through the imposed boundary conditions. In the chapter on nonclassical light in the work, Light and Quantum Fluctuations, a correspondence is drawn between the effect of a dielectric medium within a certain region of the vacuum and the alternate introduction of specific boundary conditions upon this vacuum, say, utilizing conducting plates, resonant cavities, etc. In this chapter it was concluded that the fractional increase in the index of refraction is directly proportional to the fractional increase in the electromagnetic energy density of the vacuum with the wavenumber being also altered by this fraction but with the frequency being unaltered by the dielectric medium so that a fractionally decreased local value of the speed of light results. How do we represent a trajectory despite the fact that the motion of the particle must be continually recast in terms of a time varying set of basis functions. This time variation of the basis functions must contain an element of randomness, or unpredictability since otherwise a unique unchanging basis could be found with which to represent the motion.

Distinct trajectories can only be co-represented within the same presentational space if each and all are differing projections of a single evolving trajectory. Each eigenfunction is related to its noncommuting spectrum of superposed complementary eigenfunctions in the sense that figure is related to ground. The complementary eigenfunction spectrum is a data set; the selection of one of these eigenfunctions within the observational context constitutes the engendering of a bit of information. The component eigenfunctions become mutually coupled provided that their wavefunction resists alteration through external influences. The eigenfunctions are coupled to one another if each contains at least a tiny projection along all of the other eigenfunctions, which together with it make up their wavefunction. This is only possible if this set of eigenfunctions contributes to the defining of the Hilbert space geometry within which they find expression. This requires that the time evolution of the wavefunction be nondeterministic, which is to say, nonunitary. The information content of a given structure is determined by the degree to which it approximates its intentional object. On this view, things are defined in terms of a holographic contextual matrix or system. Meaning is context-dependent. Because of this, there is a world of difference between what is called data and what is called information. Information may be thought of as data provided with context adequate to determine its meaning; information is processed data, while data may be conversely thought of as uninterpreted signals. Data are overdetermined by information; information is underdetermined by data. Data may be physically transmitted through space, but this is not so for information. Data suggest myriad possible informational structures while information narrows one's focus upon a tiny subset of an unlimited variety of different possible sets of data. Recalling the beads on a string analogy, rational numbers may be represented by an finite number of terms of a convergent infinite series, itself, representing an irrational number. This finite set of terms, gotten by truncating a convergent infinite series, are amenable to arithmetic manipulation. This is because, metaphorically speaking, we are able to take the beads off their finite string and rethread them in arbitrary order without changing the topological

relationships of the beads. Not so for an infinite number of beads on an infinite string. A finite number of beads on an infinite string may correspond to matrices. The rearrangement of the order of the beads is here a reversible process or procedure and so may not be thought to possess intrinsic information. I am fascinated by systems with a group theoretic structure. More generally, I am intrigued by specialized language systems. Why do such systems appear to be "closed" and yet permit the appearance within themselves of genuinely novel, or emergent structures. Emergence is always explainable in terms of the interpretation of such structures within the context of larger, in fact, "open" systems. Formal symbol manipulating systems, such as computing devices, do not admit the existence of what are called semantic structures. Information is reduced, or de-interpreted, if you will, by one programmer, to produce a coherent set of inputs to the computing device, and the outputs engendered by the computational process are then re-interpreted by another (or the same) programmer. The computational process itself, in isolation from the interpretation process, which bounds it, is not "about anything."C.f., http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/content-externalism/. Structure only has meaning when it is de-constituted back into the unbounded selfreferential flux from which it originally arose through the process of abstraction. In fact, the general procedure of composing a computer program is itself an example par excellence of reduction or abstraction. If the activity of the system as a whole, or, rather, as a totality, is without meaning because of its not being embedded in some larger context, then neither are any sub processes occurring within it meaningful. By extension, the human brain must be embedded in a larger mediating context, which is itself completely open-ended in its possibilities otherwise those processes occurring within any given human brain would not be, as alluded to earlier, "about anything." September 2011 Such brain processes could not then possess intentionality, which is yet another way of seeing the incompatibility of free will and determinism, c.f, Empedocles’ remarks concerning the incompatibility of “atoms and void”,

determinism and logical reasoning (rationicination), c.f., God and the Argument from mind (Chapter 13)…

Besides excluding temporal evolution by being deterministic, closed "dynamic" systems lack temporality because, in addition, being closed bound-energy systems, their energy may only change in discrete amounts. Any finite set of data within an infinite informational system has an unlimited number of theoretical structures, which suffice to explain the coherence of these data. An infinite informational system is able to contain within itself a complete symbolic representation of its own structure. The phrase, 'information processing," is a confusing and ambiguous one as information is probably itself a stable pattern of interlocking activity within the flux of a more substantive and comprehensive data processing action. On this view, data and information are not synonymous commodities - data possessing merely a form in the restricted sense of a spatiotemporal frequency, in itself possessing no content or intentional object, which is to say meaning. Whereas information is the result of the interpretation of data, not in the sense of divining their intended message or meaning (data possess none such in and of themselves), but in the less obvious sense of reconciling the new data with a long interpretive history stored in memory based on data received previously. Given an infinite number of possible 'events,' the probability of any one occurring is infinitesimal, still less could the 'same' events occur repeatedly and in predictable order, unless the events were causally

overdetermined by a sequence of preceding events which themselves constitute a backwards diverging sequence of necessary causes. The origin of these "infinitely improbable events" must be a nonlocally connected infinite set of events (a continuum) where the singular event is an intentional object defined in terms of the self-referential topological relationship/interaction of infinite subsets within the continuum. Another paradoxical usage popular in the literature of physiological psychology, artificial intelligence, philosophy of mind, etc., is the phrase "transmitting information." One must realize that only energy may be transmitted, information is always constructed through the interpretation of data received in situ; information does not physically move from place to place. On this view, information is not a conserved quantity, at least in the sense of some physical continuity equation governing its 'flow,' and so if energy and information are in some physical context interdefinable, it should only be under a set of circumstances where the principle of conservation of energy does not strictly hold. Transmission presupposes the notion of the conveyance of some conserved quantity within some closed space or continuum. We now know that "closed continuum" is a contradiction in terms. The only such situation known to physics is the one in which processes occur within a frequency spectrum with a lowest frequency larger than the reciprocal of the quantum mechanical time uncertainty of the physical system within which the relevant processes are occurring. Another reason to believe that a physical continuity equation does not apply to information or its flows is that information appears to reside in between the discrete energy levels of crystalline quantum systems, and so information is not here really spatially localizable, in principle. Reducing the energy uncertainty of a neural network will squelch some of the nonlocally virtual interactions occurring within the energy bands of the network because the bands will be contracted resulting in a contraction of the bandwidth of vacuum electromagnetic field frequencies available to the network, reducing the data processing capacity of the network.

Because information is not stored in the brain’s neural network at any particular physical locations within the brain per se, but a more approximately correct description is to say that learned information is stored at various discrete energy levels of this network, conceived as a quantum mechanical system. When a “piece of information” or a memory is recalled, the neural network will attempt to connect to a new spectrum of the nonlocally connected quantum vacuum fluctuation field. In essence, the brain becomes embedded in a new vacuum or ground state which causes a restructuring or reconstituting of its “stack” of energy levels at which the data was stored. 06/98 After the restructuring of this stack, a new array of discrete energy levels prevails along with a new spectrum of possible virtual energy transitions within the new stack. Now the brain has become resonantly tuned to a new spectrum of (nonlocally-connected) vacuum energy fluctuations. This is how data or “passive information” gets re-presented as “active information.” The brain may be thought of analogously to a hardware interface between the individual soul and the impersonal and open-ended information reservoir. As indicated already, data encoded by the vacuum in the discrete energy structure of the brain is overdetermined. This same data as decoded from “memory traces” within the brain’s energy structure is underdetermined. What permits a quantity of data within the brain’s neural network to persist as this selfsame quantity is established neither by any physical continuity which the brain may possess from one moment to the next, nor can the persistence of this data be placed on any formally descriptive footing. The informational continuity of the “memory traces”, i.e., data stored within the brain’s neural network is maintained outside the brain in the sense of this continuity being of a nonlocal nature: not contained within the brain’s local spacetime. So on this view, the brain may be thought of as a kind of “terminal” interfacing with the “network” of the nonlocally connected, fluctuating quantum vacuum energy field. The physical traces within the brain associated with memory consist merely of pointers, or, borrowing from the more current Internet metaphor; these traces are to be thought of (along with Laszlo) as being akin to “links to World Wide Web sites” so that memories are not stored in the brain but merely memory addresses.

Continuing the Internet analogy, these physical memory traces within the brain may be understood after the fashion of web browser “bookmarks.” Particular eigenvalues of energy associated with the discrete quantized energy levels of the brain’s neural network cannot remain proper memory addresses for information dynamically stored within the “quantum vacuum network” if the underlying eigenfunctions are not adequately “tracked” through adequate self-interaction of the vacuum with itself through the brain as quantum neural network hardware interface. This is due to the inevitable presence of energy degeneracy within the brain. The brain may be functioning as a running convolution integrator of multiple unbounded vacuum spectra. The brain in this way establishes resonant and therefore maximal connectedness between different vacuum topologies. These vacuum topologies are not contained within the local spacetime of the brain because any particular metric must presuppose an already given spacetime topology. There seems to be two conflicting views of the vacuum electromagnetic field in its important role in opening up the otherwise mechanically determined processes of the human neural network. Firstly, the v.e.f. provides context for real particle/field processes occurring within the brain, and secondly, it provides the field of possible informational structures which are filtered and selected by the brain's neural network ( if only passively) to give meaning to its interior processes. The reason the question, "Why does time appear to pass at the particular rate that it does?," does not really make sense is because the interpretation of sensory data is radically dependent upon the timing of the events represented by these data with respect to the mind which interprets them and gives them contextual significance, and so there is no such thing as identical sequences of events occurring at different rates. It is more true to say that formal systems are created with the intent of demonstrating (formally) certain theorems which some person already has in mind, rather than, that theorems are to be deduced from within already existing formal deductive systems of inference. Energy and information are not interdefinable within a closed dynamical system.

What are called "mind" and "matter" are not fundamental categories in terms of which fundamental distinctions may be validly thought to subsist. Both terms represent somewhat complementary ways of abstracting from the fundamental substantive process of the absolute ground of being. Reality as it is in and of itself is neither and both of these "things." A unitary and unique "pure consciousness" offers itself up as the best candidate for ultimate Reality or the ground of existence: it is the most harmonious integration of all possible abstract forms while being at the same time the most concrete, logically a priori, entity. April 1997

The distinction between that which has form and that which is formless is a distinction which cuts across the distinction between mind and matter since one may speak of both formless mind and formless matter. December 1996

But there may, indeed, be no most harmonious integration as such, but an unlimited number of progressively higher integrations. To suppose that there is some unique highest integration would be to presume that there can be some objective rule relating lower level manifestations of ground into a convergence. Recursive structures may only come into existence by being distilled from other recursive structures more complex than themselves. Particle creation at the event horizon of a black hole gives rise to a precisely thermal spectrum. This suggests that the vacuum itself is in thermal equilibrium with itself so that the vacuum must be continually exchanging energy with itself. Because the time rate of change of all physical quantities depends on the existence of energy uncertainty, dq/dt = [H, q] + f[H,q], where f[H,q] is usually written as @q/@t. On this view, quantum mechanical systems possess energy uncertainty because they are continually perturbed by intrinsic vacuum energy fluctuations. In this way, all mass-energy systems are in a process of constant energy exchange with the quantum mechanical vacuum. Since all macroscopic transfers and exchanges of energy between two points in spacetime are mediated via the submicroscopic energy exchanges occurring within the

vacuum, it follows that conservation of energy macroscopically is dependent upon conservation of energy exchanges within the vacuum. It is not possible to distinguish different time rates of change within a closed dynamical system. This is because such a closed system possesses only a finite number of discrete energy levels, and when the total system is in a particular energy eigenstate, its energy uncertainty is 0 so that there are no vacuum fluctuations available with which to mediate changes in physical observables of the system. We may define the distance separating two events as a function of the number of vacuum momentum fluctuations existing between the two said events. Similarly, we may define the time interval between two such events as a function of the number of vacuum energy fluctuations existing between the two said events. Of course, the partitioning of the relativistic momentum - energy tensor into pure momentum versus pure energy components is dependent upon the particular Lorenz reference frame within which one performs the momentum and energy measurements; the converse of this is also true. Since the energy levels at which information is stored in a neural network are defined in terms of the lowest stable energy of the neural network as a whole, virtual energy transitions between these energy levels presuppose a coupling between the wavefunctions describing the quantum mechanical states of all of the individual neurons of the network in the sense of their being nonlocally connected. It is the spontaneous coherence in which the neural network is embedded which provides the ultimate context within which the neurological events are to be interpreted. This coherent field is that of the nonlocally connected vacuum electromagnetic fluctuation field. The many worlds interpretation of the quantum measurement problem may be understood as a reversal in causal relationship between the uncollapsed wavefunction representing the mind of the observer and the uncollapsed wavefunction representing the potentialities of the quantum mechanical system being observed by this mind in the following manner: when the observer notes the collapse of the wavefunction with respect to an observable he is attempting to measure, what is actually

occurring is the collapse of the wavefunction describing the observers mind so that it (the observer's mind) now abstracts from the Weltall one particular eigenvalue of the object wavefunction, but without inducing a collapse of the object wavefunction itself. Without a God's eye view of Reality in which to ground these complementary possibilities, there is not legitimate distinction, which can be made between them. One might ask what is the fundamental difference between these two interpretations if there is not some third realm, independent of both the observer's and object wavefunctions in terms of which one interpretation might be favored over the other as being ontologically prior. This third realm belongs neither to that of causality (the mutual interaction of collapsed wavefunctions), nor to that of contingency (the interaction of collapsed with uncollapsed wavefunctions, and vice versa), but to that realm constituted solely by the mutual interaction of all uncollapsed wavefunctions. This realm we may refer to as the composite contingency - necessity manifold or continuum. There is an exactly parallel assimilation between the category space time with our category of necessity - contingency. In this way we may realize that the concepts of locality and nonlocality constitute a distinction that cuts across that constituted by the polar concepts chance and necessity, time and space. There is chaos, Heraclitus' ever-living fire, the dynamic substance out of which all forms are derived. Then there are the forms, themselves, both actual and potential. But there is a third factor, if you will, and it is whatever power extracts these forms from the flux. This power possesses the freedom of the flux, but also the order of all those forms which it is capable of extracting, or, rather, abstracting from this flux, and so is not contained within either category, that of order and that of chaos. July 2011 au=Epicurus writes to au=Herodotus that “. . . we must admit that nothing can come of that which does not exist; for were the fact otherwise, then everything would be produced from everything, and there would be no need of any seed. Now the great relevance of au=Epicurus’ notion of the essential importance of a “seed” to us is that there is indeed a “third power”, das heisst, eine “Dritte Macht” apart from au=Monod’s “chance and necessity” and that this

power is information. Information is abstract in that there are endless open-ended means of encoding information as data. We say this with the express understanding that information is never exhaustively determined by data, but context is always required in addition to the awareness and intention by which a set of abstract relations was enacted when the information was originally encoded. (By the way, there must be a converse process to abstraction, i.e., au=Whitehead’s concretion.) The material medium in which information is encoded as data can never be uniquely associated with said information, except by an arbitrary act (arbitrary from the standpoint of determinism), that is, by assignment and convention, not to mention interpretation wherein new information is engendered from old via the operation of metaphor (reprocessing of information native to one context within a distinctly different context). If there is an evolutionary process which profits by being graced with a preexistent infrastructure of the very subtlest of data processing machinery which is suited to operate (by imposing initial and boundary conditions) upon a medium, then the question becomes whether this medium must itself be creatively dynamic in the sense of “selforganizing”, or if merely the presence of a sufficient density of “relic information” encoded within the medium’s fundamental processes should provide sufficient grist for an upward evolutionary process. August 2013 One can only derive the complex from the simple within the context of a dynamical ground that is altogether more complex than any structure that can evolve and be sustained within it. This subtlety is vouchsafed by the innate capacity for this ground of being to bootstrap an indistinguishable simulacra of itself within itself, i.e., the ground of being transcends mere topology and still more spacetime topology (which is merely a specific form of topology). According to the molecular biologist, au=Stuart Kauffman, the evolvability of dynamic systems is maximized precisely on the boundary between the system's chaotic and orderly regimes, far from system equilibrium. Good is that which enhances creativity which is the explicit expression of implicit integral wholeness. Evil constitutes that which seeks to destroy, confuse, disintegrate as well as to impair the

expression of unity and wholeness through creativity. All creativity is in reality re-creativity (of God). The probability spectrum of a given wavefunction may be underdetermined so that there exists an unlimited number of ways in which an ensemble of measurements of the eigenstates of the wavefunction with respect to a particular observable may sum together so that the wavefunction appears perfectly normalized; this property may permit an additional degree of freedom within quantum mechanical virtual processes not previously suspected to exist. Probability density conservation in 4-dimensional spacetime is at the heart of the underlying physical mechanism for gravitation that we are proposing. For instance, the gravitational reddening of starlight may be simply explained in terms of this concept of probability (density) conservation. Probability conservation is the most general statement of the principle of causality. There is an absolute simultaneity, which mental events distinctly enjoy due to the fact that they do not admit of perspective; if anything they constitute perspective. However, the order in which neurophysiological occurrences occur (in the brain) is at least partially dependent upon the reference frame (in the relativistic sense) that these events occur (as observables). There must be an embedding of these neural events in a substrate, which extends beyond the merely neurophysiological in order for a reference frame to be defined in which there can arise a correspondence between subjective and objective simultaneities. The nonlocally connected vacuum electromagnetic field offers itself as the prime candidate for this embedding substrate. If metaphysical dualism is false in the strict sense of there existing two distinct and parallel fundamental processes, one physical, the other mental, but if this doctrine is nevertheless true in the less restrictive sense of there actually existing mental and physical realms which are not distinct but somehow mutually interacting, then it is in principle impossible to formalize the operation of mind.

It is quite true what many psychologists (as well as lay persons) have noted concerning the tendency of a task to become executable without the aid of conscious attention the more and more that it is performed. However, what has not perhaps been widely noted by either is the somewhat contrary tendency for one to become more, rather than less, aware of the abstract operations lying behind the performance of a task in new contexts where the specific concrete operations constituting the task would never otherwise suggest themselves. This tendency for us to become aware of the abstract operations specific to one particular oftrepeated task within a context normally foreign to it, or at least for our performances of operations within new previously unrelated contexts to be guided by these abstract operations, I refer to as operational modulation - or op-mod, for short. What we are calling op-mod may be alternately thought of as the manipulation of something in terms of an operational metaphor; it is itself the very essence of the human toolusing intelligence, and may be considered to be a general property of any neural network-computing device. More specifically, op-mod is peculiar to the problem solving strategy of the neural network device because the specific neural circuits which are utilized by such a network for solving one particular "problem" will necessarily overlap with neural circuits which are being established in the course of attempting to solve “similar” problems in new extraneous contexts. The existence of the ground of Reality consists exhaustively in its very activity. Consequently, that which creates this ground is that which sustains this ground; from which further follows the truth of Leibniz's principle that, "the conditions sufficient to create the world are necessary at every succeeding moment to sustain its existence." But the implications of quantum mechanics as pertains to what is called the quantum vacuum conceived of as the naturalistic interpretation of the ground of being in the application of this concept to induced gravity theory or effective field theories of gravity and inertia may suggest that

Leibniz’ principle must break down in connection with the fundamental quantum-thermodynamic phenomenon of environmental decoherence.^^ March 2011 Decoherence is witness to the fact that the conduit of communication between the quantum system and its supporting vacuum state does not possess “enough bandwidth” for the system to update itself “in real time”, hence the relatedness of gravitational decoherence and gravitational time dilation. We know that there has to have always been something in existence and so the ground of Reality must be self-sustaining, and hence, selfcreating. It follows that the ground of existence necessarily exists, and so is eternal. All possibility ultimately lies dormant within that which necessarily exists. In the language of quantum mechanics, every determinate eigenstate with respect to a particular physical observable may be alternately represented as a series of eigenstates with respect to an indeterminate physical observable incompatible with the first. December 1996

When one conceives of some universal substance or "stuff" which does not depend on any activity for its existence, one is conceiving of something, which is at once a form and a substance. One is conceiving of a substance, which is a particular determination of it, which possesses greatest generality. Hermann Weyl notes in his book, "The Open World," that the state of a two-electron system is not determined by the state of each individual electron added together, but that the states of each electron may be deduced from the state of the two-electron system. Leibniz's series: 1 - 1/3 + 1/5 - 1/7 + 1/9 - 1/11 + . . . , does not converge when the terms are rearranged into a sum of the following two sequences: (1 + 1/5 + 1/9 + . . . +) + ( -1/3 - 1/7 - 1/11 - . . . ). This is a rather common property of what are called alternating infinite sequences. This property is very mysterious, but can be made to seem less so if one pictures each term of the sequence as a numbered bead on a string. A finite number of terms of the series may be rearranged

arbitrarily to produce the identical sum, and this may be thought to be possible simply because the string, being finite in length, permits the removal, and hence, rethreading of all the beads onto the string in any arbitrary order. However, given an infinite number of beads, the string is now itself infinite in length and so it is no longer possible to remove the beads so as to put them into a new order. @?

The order of the beads may only be changed into that represented by the two sums provided that the original string is cut, and this changes the topological relationship of the beads; in a finite sequence the order of the terms (beads) may be rearranged without altering the topological relationship of the beads. Herein lies the irreversibility of the procedure. It is also interesting to note that Leibniz' series converges to the value of pi/4 because the value of convergence is itself an irrational number possessing a decimal expansion which possesses no determinate order whatever so that what we have is an equation between an irrational number and an infinite sum of rational numbers, on the one hand, and, on the other hand, an equation holding between an infinite sum of terms possessing a mathematically determinate sequential order with respect to a simple mathematical operation, namely, addition, and an infinite sum of terms possessing no mathematically determinable sequential order no sequential order with respect to any definable mathematical operation. We may suspect that Cantor's argument for the existence of what he calls nondenumerable infinity, i.e., the famous "diagonal argument," can be applied to the decimal expansion of pi to show that this sequence of decimal fractions itself constitutes a nondenumerable set of rational numbers. What is interesting here is that no possible rearrangement of the indeterminate sequence of nondenumerable rational numbers constituting the decimal expansion of pi will produce an irrational which diverges although there do exist rearrangements of the terms of Leibniz' series which diverge. From this simple fact we may deduce that there is no infinite sequence of denumerably infinite subsets of terms taken from Leibniz' series, on the left hand side of our equation, which will produce a one-to-one correspondence with the individual rational numbers of the infinite sequence of rational numbers in the

decimal expansion of pi. July 2011 Although there’s a kernel idea here that requires further development, it’s obvious that by what has just been noted about Leibniz’ series reveals that pi has a topological structure. Does the topology of the real line, namely that it has one imply that the infinite real line must possess some kind of closed loop structure? November 2013

The principle that Emerson seems to be illustrating can perhaps lead us to a deeper understanding of time and a more hopeful appreciation of time's potential, which goes way beyond our usual paltry conception of time as unidimensional and inexorably finite. The higher dimensionality of time is to be sought in its multiplicity of scale and connectedness. The topology of the real line, despite its abstraction is anything but linear, so what chance is there for something which we have only ever known intuitively as a solitary, individual stream of consciousness to be linear? Words in a text make up a context, but then at some level of complexity, when removed from that text uniquely call back to it and infuse the context of the originating text into that next into which it is inserted. Specified complexity. The reprocessing of moments as contextual chunks (chunkings of data) is in no way exhausted by the multiple duty, which these chunks can perform as context-free composite elements. Think of Stephen C. Meyers’ plastic letters and magnetic whiteboard illustration of the specified complexity of the information contained in base pair sequences. These possess no immediate chemical context with respect to the determination of those specific sequences. Gödel has stated that his incompleteness theorem applies only to logicodeductive systems more powerful than that represented by arithmetic (Peano Arithmetic). This is because the proof of the theorem is based on the Gödel-numbering procedure, where each operator, as well as all the symbols utilized by the system, are represented by Gödel numbers, while all of the logical operations of the system are defined in terms of arithmetic operations. So we may say that arithmetic is definable within all so-called Gödelian deductive systems. The domain of all arithmetical

operations is a domain devoid of topological structure. Self-referential propositions introduce a topological structure into the domain of proof. Rational numbers are the sums of convergent infinite series where the order in which the terms of the series appear does not affect the value of the sum. We may say in this case that rational numbers occupy a number field possessing arithmetic, or null, topological structure. Irrational numbers, on the other hand, are the sums of infinite series, which may diverge if the order in which the terms of the series appear are altered. We may say that the irrational numbers occupy a number field possessing a topological structure. The degrees of freedom required for certain reactions, or interactions, to take place, are only allowable within a space of large enough dimensionality to accommodate them. The unreasonable effectiveness of mathematics within the physical sciences, borrowing the famous phrase of the quantum physicist Eugene Wigner, is owing to the radically and, perhaps, infinitely, overdetermined nature of natural phenomena. To wit, sensory data are grossly insufficient to determine uniquely the information structures with which they are interpreted and explained. A genuinely recursive system may only be derived from a recursive system equally or more complex than itself, or if the recursive system is "constructed" out of simpler recursive elements, the control system effecting or mediating the process of construction is, itself, a recursive system, of greater complexity than the system being constructed. The information content of a particular structure is defined by the degree of preciseness to which the system approximates its intentional object. This definition is best understood in terms of the "shattered hologram" metaphor. A molecule belonging to a complementary molecule pair, two molecules which naturally hydrogen-bond to one another, favors the spontaneous self-assembly (from locally available components) of the molecule to which it bears a topologically complementary relationship. More generally, the spontaneous self-assembly of molecules is favored by a vacuum containing energy resonances complementary to those upon which the molecule's energy structure depends for its sustained existence. On this view, the quantum vacuum electromagnetic field may

be thought of as a kind of dynamic template which "informs" certain simple molecules "how to self-assemble," with these simple molecules acting as complex waveguides receptive, or sensitive to, a certain tiny portion of the spectrum of electromagnetic frequencies originating from within this vacuum. July 2011

An important question in this connection is whether there are contingent conditions for the emergence of altogether new structures? And whether there is no contradiction in the dynamical substrate of the quantum vacuum being able to support and sustain emergent structures that it is nonetheless unable to anticipate? Another way to put this is: can open-ended conditions be posited for irreducibly complex structures to “boot strap” themselves into existence? Here the dynamical substrate is intelligent, creative, however not all-knowing. Here also, the complex structures engendered are irreducibly complex, however this is in the absence of intelligent design, as only intelligent recognition is required. The teleology bespoken by the emergence of irreducibly complex structures in one temporal dimension can be given a causal explanation through the operation of feedback structures in higher dimensions of time. Septermber 2011 There are two fundamentally disparate concepts of intelligent design: the one, such a biochemist or molecular biologist, applies design concepts derived wholly from his study of already available biological structures and systems, the other is in the case of a demiurge or deity who develops a system or structure by directly lifting it out of chaos, calling it out of the inchoate flux of open-ended possibilities. If what might be called prn=time-scale reductionism (TSR) constitutes a fundamentally false understanding of the dynamics of natural phenomena, then the traditional philosophical view of time as possessing only a single dimension must be abandoned. Time-scale reductionism says, simply, that events taking place over a certain time interval are owing exclusively to events taking place over intervals of time smaller than and “contained within” the first time interval, which are in turn dependent upon events occurring over smaller time intervals,

and so on. July 2011The phenomena of quantum entanglement and teleportation, particularly within the transactional interpretation of quantum mechanics, c.f., Cramer, appear to flout the principle of TSR. One ready example of the failure of TSR is the case of prn=historical time. In the case of historical time, there is a critical “window of opportunity” within which certain events must transpire if certain significant changes or revolutions, e.g., cultural, social, political are to occur. Paradoxically, the sensitivity to initial conditions of the timeline goes hand-in-hand with the timeline’s “robustness”, c.f., the misguided, awkward and ultimately unsuccessful attempts of future time travelers to meddle with the timeline. More broadly, events in a historical sequence do not merely cause each other or concatenate as in a blind causal sequence of events, but events in the historical process echo as well as anticipate events in the past and future, respectively. Clearly it is due to historical events both creating and reacting to a temporal context, which makes this type of determination in time possible. And here it is obvious that the temporal context is only efficacious if it is also meaningful, which implies the operation of consciousness in both its individual and collective forms. Quantum entanglement may be understood as causality operating collectively rather than merely individually as in the case of classical physics. We should be mindful here that what is called thermodynamics is merely a collective description of particles acting individually according to Newtonian mechanics and which does not invoke any new concept of causality. October 2011 It may turn out that we shall only succeed in developing a “concept of consciousness” for the individual by borrowing from the theory of the consciousness of the collective. If individual consciousness is not a metaphysical entity, i.e., substance, but is instead a social construct, then the philosophical quest to solve Chalmers’ “hard problem” of consciousness shall be seen to have been all along the pursuit of a red herring. “Contrary to what most people believe, nobody has ever been or had a self. But it is not just that the modern philosophy of mind and cognitive neuroscience together are about to shatter the myth of the self. It has now become clear that we will never solve the philosophical puzzle of consciousness—that is, how it can arise in the brain, which is a purely physical object—if we don’t

come to terms with this simple proposition: that to the best of our current knowledge there is no thing, no indivisible entity, that is us, neither in the brain nor in some metaphysical realm beyond this world. So when we speak of conscious experience as a subjective phenomenon, what is the entity having these experiences?” cit=The Ego Tunnel: The Science of the Mind and the Myth of the Self (au=Metzinger). June 2014 It however does not appear that consciousness can be meaningfully held to “not exist” on the grounds that it is merely an abstract feature” of certain complex components of physical reality, e.g., the quantum vacuum, rather than an objective feature of being as such or a scientifically real, fundamental physical field such as an electromagnetic or gravitational field. au=

John Searle, the linguist and philosopher, has stated that formal computational systems are incapable of consciousness because such formal systems do not effectively exploit the causal powers of computation available for utilization by the human brain. Since the causal powers of matter, as Searle terms them, stem from what is forever spontaneously occurring in the natural realm at the very smallest dimensions of time and space, the process of abstraction, itself founded upon the systematic ignorance of finer details of structure and function, introduces a kind of built-in blockheadedness into systems of "artificial intelligence" which are physically realized from relatively macroscopic and "insensitive" component parts, in accordance with "analytically closed-form" designs. Vacuum fluctuations which are simultaneous in one reference frame (Lorenz frame) will not necessarily be simultaneous in other frames. This theoretical implication of special relativity for quantum mechanics, combined with the fact that the energy density of the quantum vacuum is decreasing with time as the universe expands, leads us to deduce that, not only is the density of the quantum vacuum different in different Lorenz frames, but so is its time rate of decrease. I do not think that au=Hugh Everett's prn=many worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics is consistent with the implications of quantum

experiments which have been performed in the last few decades since the time (1957) when he originally proposed his interpretation of quantum theory. In Everett's theory, the collapse of the wavefunction is interpreted as a sudden, discontinuous branching of the observer from one parallel universe, where the wavefunction is uncollapsed, to a new parallel universe where the wavefunction exists in one of its component eigenstates. From this do we suppose that all of the collapsed wavefunctions within our universe owe their existence to observations made by quantum physicist doing experiments in other universes? April 2013 Physicalism or realism is just one interpretation among myriad competing interpretations of quantum mechanics. epi= "Although scientific positivism hasn't succeeded in abolishing metaphysics, it has perhaps managed to contain metaphysics to a sub-spectrum of possible interpretations of quantum mechanics, namely those invoking (or not invoking) hidden variables." August 2013 Humorously (no pun intended) paraphrasing Hume more than a bit: If we place into a box any volume that may or may not treat of divinity or school metaphysics, for instance; let us ask, Does it contain any abstract reasoning concerning quantity or number? Yes and No, in quantum superposition. Does it contain any experimental reasoning concerning matter of fact and existence? Yes and No, in quantum superposition. Perform an observation upon the volume. Commit it to the flames, if it collapses into a quantum state containing nothing but sophistry and illusion, but if not, stock it in the British Library. What key property must data or information possess (or fail to possess), say, contained in a book, such that a consistent interpretation could be found for the data in which the book is both a scientific work and a treatise on metaphysics, moreover such that these two interpretations are connected by virtue of being in quantum superposition? cont’d

Enantiomer molecules, that is, molecules which were once thought to be identical in every way except that they are the mirror reflection of each other, have recently been generally found to differ in respect to their binding energies. So-called "right-handed" molecules, such as the

amino acids, D-tyrosine, D-glutamine, etc., have been found to possess smaller binding energies (and hence are less stable) than their mirror image counterparts, the L - series amino acids of the same names. Given the existence of a spatial fourth dimension, it is possible to convert a right-handed molecule into its identical left-handed counterpart by pulling the molecule into 4 - space and rotating it 180 o against the hyperplane (normal to) and returning the molecule to its original position within this 3 - hypersurface. This would suggest the existence of a preferential curl field acting within this four dimensional continuum in a direction opposing the rotation of an L - molecule and aiding the rotation of an R - molecule. This mechanism would be one logical way to account for the observed differences in the binding energies of identical L - and R - molecules. August 2013 Moreover, such a curl field may provide a rational explanation for the predominance of matter as opposed to antimatter in our observable universe. “While McLaughlin concludes that emergence is impossible in the light of quantum mechanics, Hendry regards issues connected with the status of molecular structure as supporting emergence. The present author suggests that one should not be persuaded by either of these arguments and pleads for a form of agnosticism over the reality of emergence and downward causation until further studies might be carried out”, c.f, cit=Top-down causation regarding the chemistry–physics interface: a skeptical view (au=Scerri, 2011) cont’d

But such imagined hyperdimensional rotations must be seen to be only a metaphor for a re-creation of the molecule into its mirror-reversed double. This is because the metric of Minkowski spacetime is not positive definite, but negative definite. Information is neither created nor destroyed; information is always conserved, and when it appears to be created, being re-expressed within another medium is merely transducing it. There are myriad different media through which portions of the eternally pre-existent information may be expressed, but there exists a primary medium which contains all information originally. All other media

through which information might be expressed are ultimately dependent upon this primary information medium. In the same way that the transduction of energy from one medium, say mechanical, to another medium, say electrical, is always accompanied by a loss of a portion of the transduced energy as heat energy (whereby entropy is increased), some information is always lost in the transduction of information from the primary medium to other secondary media. For this reason, no informational systems or structures are permitted to come into being which possess an information density greater than that of the volume which they occupy, this volume being pervaded by energy in its primary form (vacuum energy). In the same way, there is a limit to the massenergy density of any particular volume of spacetime; this limit is that specified by Schwarzschild’s equation for the energy density of black holes. The information which is inevitably lost as a result of the transduction of information from the primary medium to secondary media simply passes back into the primary medium. July 1998

Information cannot be independent of the medium in which it is expressed. Data, on the other hand, are independent of the medium in which they are expressed. March 1998

The pre-existence and transduction of information are not logically self-consistent notions. Pre-existence implies something which is continually a part of the temporal progression of the whole but which itself remains latent and changeless. Transduction of information also implies a contradictory context-freedom for information. For the transduction of information implies that, like energy, no information is gained or lost in its "changing form" as it passes from one medium through another and then to another, and so on. This is to say that the media carrying information contribute nothing to the content of this information. And this is also to say that information is always abstract and is constituted by relationships. One then might ask, what is it then which differentiates information from mere data - or are they synonymous? Data and information may be understood as constituting a merely relative distinction. What is meant by this is that what are data

in one context may be information in a larger one and information in a smaller context. In other words, information is data interpreted in light of context while data in this same context function as information with respect to smaller subcontexts contained therein. Since information are context-dependent, it would follow that all information possess a characteristic lifetime rather analogous to a the half-life of radioactive isotopes. The law of the temporal evolution of information systems is provided by the pre-existing spatial distribution of information. The determinate is dependent upon the indeterminate. The finite exists only through its participation with the infinite. All transformations are definable in terms of mere projection operations; therefore, these transformations, when investigated, always reveal the presence of conservation laws which seem to govern, or provide constraints upon, these transformations. What is called the unity of apperception in Kant's Critique of Pure Reason is synonymous with the existence of the underlying noumenon, which provides the rationality of any particular series of perceived continuous transformations entertained within a finite mind. The interpenetration of the categories of time and space support the unity of apperception. October 1997

A functionalist theory of mind must presuppose a decomposition of spacetime into a particular "3 + 1" configuration of absolute space and absolute time. It must do this in order to define the boundary between what are merely input-output operations and what constitute operations of the processing of inputted data/information into outputted data/information. We may understand the distinction between information and data to be simply this: information are data placed in context and interpreted in light of this context; data are information taken out of context, that is to say, data are simply context-free information. Now in order for information to be passed from one person (or subjectivity) to another, information which the one person intends to convey to the other must be translated, or more aptly, perhaps, converted

into context-free data. Although there is not such distinction as subjective versus intersubjective data, we may support such a distinction for information. Intersubjective information may be understood as information which two or more persons may hold in common with one another due to similarities in the nature of the mental boundary conditions, if you will, which act upon their respective consciousnesses. Subjective information may be understood as information which is private to each person and therefore cannot be held in common between different subjectivities. Different consciousness are not all exemplars of consciousness itself, or consciousness at large, by virtue of each individual consciousness possessing one or more general qualities in common with one another for this would be to presuppose that different individual consciousnesses are simply different structurings of a single fundamental consciousness. If we suppose that the constituting of each individual subjective spatiotemporal continuum assumes the prior existence of an objective, as opposed to an absolute, spatio-temporal continuum, and that this objective space and time are, in turn, constituted out of the activity of some fundamental consciousness, then each individual consciousness, or ego, is merely one particular structuring of the fundamental and unitary consciousness among many other such possible structurings. Temporality presupposes the givenness of Space. Duration, however, does not presuppose the givenness of Space. Temporality pertains to the evolution of things existing within a particular space. The temporal evolution of a particular spacetime treats this spacetime as though it is itself a "thing." The local temporal evolution of spacetime, which is an admissible concept within classical general relativity, is not reducible to the temporal evolution of entities and their mutual spatial relations within this spacetime. Temporality pertains to changes occurring to the system boundary conditions. Duration pertains to changes of the system including the changes to the system boundary conditions. Within temporality, the rate at which a sequence of events or evolution takes

place cannot be determined; temporality and duration are required for this. Temporality is duration plus deterministic causal relations taking place within a particular spacetime frame of reference. May 1997

And this is perhaps another important distinction which can be made between the subjective (mental) and the objective (physical): in subjectivity, the forms of time and space are fused and continuous with one another. Communication between different subjectivities, that is, intersubjectivity which is objectivity, requires that the fused spatiotemporality of each subjectivity be decomposed into separate space and time dimensions within the realm of the objective. The increase in complexity of coherent systems with time would seem to involve the creation ex nihilo of quantities of information. There are reasons for believing, however, that what is really involved in cases such as this is merely the partial redistribution of data along a spatial information gradient onto a gradient which is part spatial and part temporal where the total quantity of information is conserved in the process. With the introduction of excitation energy, the nonlocal, distributed information content is partially transformed into local, lumped information content. The information content contained within a purely spatial manifold is nonlocally encoded through relations of within the manifold which originate externally to it. The relations which are constitutive of a spacetime manifold cannot be represented in terms of a distribution of relations between localities on this manifold. No causal theory can explain the manner in which a spacetime is constituted. A spacetime is constituted nonlocally, that is, through the operation of nonlocally connected dynamical processes which are only partially located within this spacetime. Is it, in principle, possible for all the neural firings which comprise the brain state to which is associated a particular mental state to have been stimulated to occur entirely from outside the brain's neural network, obviating the need for intricate feedback loops connecting the neurons with one another which normally support such patterns of neuron firings? Intuitively we suspect that merely reproducing the requisite neural firing patterns from outside the

network would not be sufficient to produce the normally occurring associated mental state. This is because the observed neural firings would only possess a determinate order in terms of the perception of their order by means of a neural network genuinely possessing intricate feedback structures. We might, in turn, be puzzled by the force of this particular intuition which has at its root the notion of the importance of timing and synchronization of the neurons with respect to one another. But this would really only be important if there was something which the neurons incidentally interact with in the course of their normal process of functioning to which the order of their "firing" might be fundamentally related. We might then seek to include this additional something and produce the changes in it also from outside, just as in the case of the neurons. Notice that in every case where we are supposedly able to reproduce a given sequence of neural firings, we are dependent upon a favorable condition wherein the time interval between firings within a given small region of the brain are larger than the time uncertainty of the quantum system constituting the neural network. We find that our earlier intuition about the problem of the timing of the events appropriate to the establishing of the requisite brain states crops up yet again. The timing of local causal interactions is between particular boundary conditions of, and relative to, the nonlocally connected vacuum in which the energy uncertainties of the neural network as a quantum mechanical system ultimately originate. There is still something with respect to which the patterned events (comprising the requisite brain states) occur which is important from the standpoint of timing and synchronization, and we might, therefore, again, seek to include it, just as before. The point here is that this process of trying to include the entire background against which the timing of the brain events are significant can never be completed; we face an infinite regress here, or, if successful in including the entire background, then there remains nothing against which the rate of causally sequential events or the timing of not causally, but merely correlated events within the network may be established. This regress is apparently resolved within

the quantum mechanically uncertain time interval of the network and therefore is forever beyond manipulation from outside, that is to say, there cannot exist a determinate program adequate to produce the timing necessary to integrate or unify the neural firings into the requisite coherent pattern we term consciousness. This timing is not to be understood after the normal fashion of a mechanical timing of articulated events. For purely relative timing in the above sense does not take into account the duration of the whole process (relative to its determining ground). Moreover, the rate at which a sequence of causally connected physical occurrences unfolds is determined through the availability of the spacetime constituting vacuum momentum/energy fluctuations with which the network must continually interact. To restate, this is because the ultimate embedding substrate of the neural network functions through interconnected events possessing a time uncertainty which prevents their delicate synchronization from ever being introduced from outside - outside either in the physical/spatial sense or in the purely formal sense of a design or template imposed upon the concrete dynamical substrate through the imposition of boundary conditions. Of course, what is called dualism is completely ruled out in the case where the brain is thought to function in a deterministic manner. This is because the isomorphism which must maintain between brain states and mental states precludes the possibility that these two qualitatively different types of states are causally connected; for any effective causal interaction between the two would necessarily disrupt the isomorphism which is presupposed by the dualistic theory of mind. On the other hand, in the absence of causal interaction between brain states and mental states, there is no rational basis upon which we can say that particular mental states correspond to, or belong to a particular brain. On the other hand again, however, if dualism is rejected and causal relationships are allowed to obtain between brain states and mental states, then both types of events/processes must be mediated by the very same underlying substance, or substrate. In this way, the whole distinction between what are called brain states and mental states completely breaks down, and one is forced to adopt a monistic theory of

mind. Because of the veritable existence of temporality, we know that the fundamental dynamism mediating all physical processes must be irreversible (in the thermodynamic sense). Consequently, the appearance of reversibility in physical reactions, e.g., chemical, nuclear, etc., is just that, and the entities which take part in these physical reactions/processes are fundamentally overdetermined by the underlying dynamism grounding them, producing an underdetermination of their mutual casual interactions which is in principle irremediable. This is due to the essential nature of causal analysis as always being performed in terms of the laws governing the dynamical relations between indefinitely reproducible entities. March 1997

In the passage from one "state" to the next, a system exists momentarily in a configuration which cannot be characterized by either, and this, no matter how finely we might seek to partition the system's flow of change. From which, it immediately follows that, it is what is peculiar to a dynamic system, but common to all such systems generally, which permits them to transcend a sequential state description of the change they experience on which their ineradicable temporality depends. Temporality, to wit, exists exclusively in the domain which transcends or lies beyond all possible abstract descriptions. The concrete is the temporal. As we have already commented, the medium of abstraction must not admit of an adequate description in terms of any set of abstract categories, since the categories presuppose the existence of that which brings them forth. The notion of historicism, in the sense provided by the theories of Marx and Weber, is conceptually unintelligible because it assumes the existence of a distinction the validity of which it then later denies. That is the distinction between physical causal factors and historical factors in the explication of social, political, cultural, and economic developments. The validity of historicism would mean that history as a science of large scale human development doesn't really work, that it doesn't have anything substantive to say at all because the real causal efficacy behind the changes which history has traditionally studied lies at a level of description which is at once lower and more fundamental than that where historical explanations are articulated.

That which is the source and sustainer of all things cannot be viewed as being anything but infinite. The paradigmatic example of this transduction process is the spontaneous production of fundamental particles out of the vacuum within accelerated reference (nonLorentzian) frames. Evolution may only be a local phenomenon - not a global phenomenon; evolution in the sense of the genuine emergence of wholly unprecedented and unanticipated forms, structures, or dynamisms without this process of development somehow drawing upon a preexisting reservoir of information within which these "emergent" forms are at least implicitly prefigured, and which mediates and underpins the evolutionary developmental process - is tantamount to the acceptance of a fundamental process which is itself uncaused and which is not admitted to be the cause (or reason) for its own existence. In the vacuum, information exists in a nonlocal, simultaneously connected form. When the vacuum energy fluctuations mediate the occurrence of physical processes, there is a transduction of nonlocal, parallel and simultaneously connected information into a new local, sequential, and temporally connected form. But such a transduction phenomenon cannot take place within the pristine vacuum, that is, within the vacuum in the absence of any action upon it even if this action ultimately arises from itself. This vacuum must have something to react with or against; it must be "seeded." The ground of existence cannot be outstripped by any possible existent "thing." Nonlocality presents the possibility of putting quantum mechanical probability on a "rational" footing; in other words, a given wavefunction is normalizable on the average. The condition of normalizability is not a very restrictive condition on a quantum mechanical wavefunction; there are an infinite number of ways to refract or decompose a given wavefunction into a spectrum of eigenstates (of an incompatible observable) so as to satisfy the normalization condition. December 1996

It cannot be by way of some impossibly complex causal

sequence that a thing manifests itself as such. For instantaneous context, which cannot be analyzed in causal terms must play a role in the act of determination. The fundamental paradigm shift which marked the transition from classical (Newtonian) mechanics to the mechanics of quantum phenomena may be captured in the manner in which the implied unified physical law constrains the phenomena of nature: classical physical law states that what it prescribes to occur must necessarily occur - any behavior apart from this being forbidden; quantum mechanical physical law states that what it does not proscribe or forbid to occur necessarily occurs. This constitutes a kind of fecundity principle. And the possibilities can only be defined when boundary conditions are superimposed upon the system which in its natural state is not necessarily inclusive of any particular let of boundary conditions. The boundary conditions upon the system are what constitutes locality. Only the effects upon the bounded system can be measured. Causality concerns the dynamics of the boundary conditions but cannot capture the behavior of the system in an unconditional way, that is, in the absence of any supplied boundary conditions. If the quantum mechanical vacuum is the origin of temporality, then the vacuum must itself be timeless, which is to say, eternal, c.f., Ehrenfest’s Theorem in which the instantaneous value of the expectation value of the operator is 0 – here the instantaneous rate of change in the operator is the negative of the commutator of the operator with the Hamiltonian. Moreover, that which is the originator of space must itself be spatially unlimited. Human intelligence has evolved to a point just short of that required to think something genuinely interesting. C.f., Understanding Quantum Physics by Michael A. Morrison for a fuller explication of how temporality and Heisenberg energy uncertainty are related. The neural network computer does not store information in any particular location within the network, but stores information at particular energy levels of the global interaction of the network as a whole. Each new bit of data which is fed into the network is stored at a next higher energy level of the network. What ultimately becomes this next higher energy level is determined by a virtually chaotic process of

neural "firings" which occurs throughout the network and which is stimulated by the introduction of a data input signal. Myriads of neurons throughout the entire network continue to fire randomly until a new state of least energy is reached by the neural network as a whole. October 1996

According to a kind of James-Lange theory of the operation of mind (the view of the individual mind as kind of "reducing valve") the brain does not react to environmental stimuli in the commonsensical way, but it is a dynamic system of resonators which are continually retuned to new signals within the quantum vacuum electromagnetic field in response to stimuli. September 2011 But this notion of the brain acting merely as a kind of filter of vacuum signals is only part of the story. The brain also reprocesses the vacuum signals of a spectrum peculiar to it, and it is this reprocessed spectrum that undergoes the filtering action. April 2012 “The fact that a high level of consciousness is associated with complex neural structures does not prove that the neural structures produce this consciousness.” – David Bohm June 2012

An important question is whether or not multiple brains process quantum entanglement from the same vacuum information spectrum, putting back reprocessed and new entanglements into this same spectrum or whether each does so only in interaction with its own, unique signature-quantum vacuum information spectrum. If each brain only interacts with its own vacuum information and signal spectrum, the question arises as to whether entanglement information can be passed between consciousnesses or only signals, data and instructions, the meaning of which is exclusively the domain of the recipient of interpersonal data. There is also an additional distinction to be drawn between data within different regions of the same brain versus data transmitted via physical signals passing between one brain and another. If the separation between different energy levels within the neural network (representing different bits of information) are close enough together in energy, then it becomes very probable that there will be a process of continual virtual energy transitions occurring between the

various discrete energy levels of the network throughout its entirety. An interesting point here is that these virtual energy transitions within the network owe entirely to the action of the quantum fluctuations in the energy of the vacuum electromagnetic field. Moreover, the probabilities of given neural energy transitions occurring within the network are determined by the presence of the constantly occurring virtual energy transitions of the network which, again, are mediated entirely by way of the quantum mechanical fluctuations in the vacuum electromagnetic field, themselves, owing to the necessary presence of Heisenberg energy uncertainty within the quantum vacuum. An essential difference between what are called virtual and what are called real energy transitions, is parallel to the distinction between what are called virtual particles and what are called real particles, respectively, in the theory of particle physics, namely, virtual energy transitions cannot be measured directly, whereas real energy transitions can be measured directly, for instance, in laboratory experiments. The real energy transitions which take place within the neural network, and which are responsible for the communication of its processed information to the "outside world," i.e., to the consciousness of both the individual subject as well as his listeners, in the case of verbal communication, are, themselves, overdetermined phenomena. This is to say, there are an indefinite number of distinct sequences of virtual energy transitions, which are capable of producing the very same real energy transition within the neural network. This assertion reminds us of Feynman’s sum of histories formalism for calculating the probabilities of fundamental particle reactions. If it were not for the existence of energy degeneracy within the neural network, there would be only one path of neural firings possible connecting one energy level of the network to the next higher one. The operation of a neural network would in this case be formalizable in the form of a computer algorithm. Thus is the way to what is called intentionality opened up and made possible: the very same determinate sequence of neural firings may have an unlimited number of alternative future brain states in view, in other words. It is interesting to note that

the interaction of the virtual energy states of the neural network is not mediated primarily by the physical realization of the network itself, but by the next highest order of perturbations to the energy of the neural network. What we have been calling "virtual energy transitions," are really only the first order perturbations to the global energy of the neural network, conceived of as a quantum mechanical system. The first order perturbations, what we have been calling, "virtual transitions" within the network, are themselves, informed or mediated by, the quantum mechanical perturbations to the first order perturbation energies of the network, i.e., 2nd order energy perturbations, thus making the first order perturbations overdetermined phenomena as well. In turn, the second order perturbation energy transitions (what might whimsically be called, virtual - virtual energy transitions) are mediated by the occurrence of transitions between second order perturbation energies, etc., and so on. At this point we might realize that the real energy transitions occurring within the neural network which are normally thought to be immediately responsible for the processing of all information by the network, are engendered not by physical processes occurring at a lower level of organization, but via processes taking place at higher levels of organization, represented by the next higher order perturbation energy description of the neural network. We know that the virtual energy transitions of any given quantum mechanical system are owing to the presence of energy uncertainty in the system. It is more accurate, however, to say that this energy uncertainty is present in the quantum vacuum itself, and is merely communicated to the quantum system, of interacting elementary particles, say, through the exchange of energy between the quantum system and the vacuum, which is itself where the energy uncertainty originates; we saw earlier that the wavefunction describing a quantum mechanical system cannot be normalized if the energy uncertainty is conceived of as being a property of the quantum system itself, so that it must be an inherent property of the quantum vacuum. So perhaps we see now that the neural network itself acts merely as a kind of terminus to an information reduction process, it acts as a kind of

"reducing valve" which serves to abstract a relatively tiny portion of information from the virtually infinite information content of the overdetermined quantum vacuum which is instantaneously and nonlocally connected with itself, and therefore represents the highest level of information processing because it constitutes the interconnectivity of energy at its most exhaustive level. On this view, information, like energy, may not be created or destroyed, but is a conserved quantity, and its ultimate source is the infinite energy reservoir represented by the quantum vacuum. We already saw how Temporality itself stems from the presence of quantum energy uncertainty, which, in turn, originates in the vacuum, conceived of, again, as a reservoir of virtually infinite energy density. Consequently, since Temporality itself has its origin in the vacuum, it follows that the this infinite sea of vacuum energy itself had no beginning in time! The vacuum now begins to remind us of Heraclitus' "ever living fire," "in measures kindling and in measures going out," and thereby mediating, as an eternal flux, all the changes continually taking place in the natural order. Moreover, Heraclitus' statement that, "everything is an exchange for fire, and fire an exchange for every thing," reminds us the interconvertibility of mass and energy in quantum relativistic field theory, this interconvertibility being mediated by the continual exchange of energy between matter and vacuum. Heraclitus' "ever living fire" is to him the fire of the gods, yet uncreated by the gods. His statement that "Thunderbolt steers the Universe" no doubt refers to the thunderbolt wielded by Zeus, the greatest of all the Olympian gods; when this thunderbolt is identified with "the fire of the gods," that is, with Heraclitus' ever living fire, the parallel between it and the vacuum becomes an intriguingly close one; the quantum vacuum, by eternally mediating all physical processes, manages to "steer the Universe." It is also interesting that Greek mythology tells us that Time owes its existence to Chaos through that fact that the god, Chaos, is named as the father of Kronos. Moreover, the Greek word, arche, which means source or origin in ancient Greek, is translated into Latin as principium, i.e., ordering principle. The idea behind this particular translation of arche into principium is the same one expressed by au=Leibniz, when he

states in his cit=Monadology that, "the conditions sufficient to create the world are necessary at every succeeding moment of time in order to sustain the world's existence." We now arrive at the notion of first cause, not in the usual sense of first in a temporal sequence, but in the at once broader and subtler sense of most fundamental or substantive. “Given such a reality, the author concludes that human mentality evolved in bottom-up fashion, with mind-associated neuronal systems not so much creating mind as organizing a pre-existing propensity for awareness into useful, functional awareness, and providing for its modulation by useful information,” c.f., cit=Implications of a Fundamental Consciousness (1998) by au=Copthorne MacDonald. A Monadology for the 21st Century, by Jonathan http://www.ucl.ac.uk/jonathan-edwards/monadology Since it is the pattern of virtual particle emission and absorption which every real particle continually undergoes which determines the mass of the particle, it follows that real particle masses are determined through the particular manner in which real particles exchange energy with the fluctuating quantum vacuum field; consequently, alterations in the density of the vacuum field energy will affect the masses of particles occupying this vacuum. We might expect that this relationship between mass-energy and vacuum-energy is symmetrical in nature because the interactions mediating the continual exchange of energy between matter and vacuum are themselves reversible interactions. November 1996

The quantum vacuum energy fluctuations collectively, as we have seen, may be understood as the first cause of the world in the more fundamental sense of sustainer of all of the structures ultimately deriving from it in that the quantum vacuum is the originator of temporality. Matter does not possess a genuine substantial existence since its energy is forever being replenished by the vacuum fluctuations continually interacting with it, much in the same manner as a particular spot in a river is continually replenished with new waters so that, as Heraclitus says, one cannot step twice into the same place within it. This two-way causal, symmetrical relationship between mass energy and vacuum

energy within quantum field theory reminds us of a similar relationship between mass and space-time curvature within the theory of general relativity: the presence of mass within a given region of spacetime produces an additional curvature in this spacetime; also, an increase in the curvature of a particular region of spacetime produces an increase in the mass of particles or material bodies already occupying this region. Since spatio-temporal variations in the energy density of the vacuum energy field are correlated with variations in spacetime curvature, we might suppose that some sort of conformal mapping relationship obtains between the ratio of real particle to virtual particle energy densities and the degree of mutual inclination of the time and space axes ( of the Minkowski light cone ) to one another. This relationship is also suggested by the fact that real particles are virtual particles which have been promoted to the level of real existence through the absorption of energy; particles are excitations of the vacuum state which is itself a reservoir or sea of virtual particles. Also, through the application Mach's formula for the speed of sound to this vacuum energy reservoir, we see that such a conformal mapping relationship between Einsteinian spacetime curvature and spatial-temporal variations in the zero-point energy of the vacuum (or, alternatively, its energy density) must involve mappings between the hypersolid angle swept out by the light line in four-dimensional (Minkowski ) spacetime, and the energy density (or pressure) of the vacuum. We must distinguish between evolution's creative and its critical faculties. Adaptation is not the purpose of evolution; it is the trial and error critical process which evolution is subjected to by the contingent environmental conditions within which it finds itself operating. Darwinian natural selection is merely a critical process; it is not in any way a creative process, in and of itself. Natural selection merely structures, channels or filters the creative suggestions made to it; it plays no role whatever in the fundamental dynamism driving biological evolution; natural selection is merely the set of boundary conditions within which the dynamism of evolution functions, perhaps in the sense of Bergson's elan vital. Here again, we have an example of how

boundary and initial conditions are essentially separable from the dynamisms which they conscribe. Similar remarks were made regarding the process of technological advancement, which was viewed as a progression in sophistication in imposing initial and boundary conditions upon the invariant and unitary dynamism of Nature. We know that natural selection is not able to operate unless self-reproducing information-bearing structures are already in existence; moreover, natural selection has little opportunity to mold these self-reproducing structures into more complex forms unless it can profit from the creative suggestions made to it through the operation of random mutations, themselves useless if they cannot be passed on to future offspring. So it is also necessary that something analogous to a genetic code be contained within these self-reproducing structures, themselves the expression of the information contained within this genetic code. The problem, then, with Darwinism, or its modern derivative, neoDarwinism, is that a great deal of evolutionary development must have already occurred, in the form of so-called chemical evolution prior to the appearance of the first self-reproducing, information-bearing, information expressing structures, before the distinctly Darwinian process of natural selection of random mutations is permitted to begin. So the creative dynamism, spoken of previously, is to be identified with that dynamism lying behind the prebiotic process of chemical evolution, a process which does not halt its operation once the Darwinian process of evolution commences, but which continues hand in hand with natural selection, and, moreover, maintaining its central role as the motivating dynamism in the evolution of progressively more complex forms of life. The subjective "I am," which is just the individual's personal consciousness, dependent upon the objective world outside itself, is not to be confused with the objective "I AM," (see au=Nisargadatta Maharaj’s Book, cit=I AM THAT), which is the one and unique self-existent Consciousness which is the source of all individual subjective consciousnesses. July 2013

Quantum decoherence prevents the collapse of the causal chain

and thus allows the operation of temporality. In a subtly analogous way, quantum decoherence also prevents the reduction of the higher pleasures of life such as spiritual or intellectual pleasures to mere utilitarian calculated suns of small quantities of direct stimulation of the hominid ape's brain's pleasure center. In short quantum decoherence introduces just enough of just the right compartmental-ization of experience ib order to prevent the annihilation of spiritual potentiality which is borne of the totalization of experience as reprocessed stimulus-response. Shannon information with its notion of information being equivalent to a reduction in uncertainty does not take into account the notion of the context sensitivity of information Reductionism dissolves into the inherent fuzziness of space-time dictated by the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. It is clear to me intuitively that this fuzziness is dynamic and it forms the substrate of the very operation of mind. Consciousness as such may well be more fundamental than this fuzziness and maybe a present natural indefatigable restlessness of this consciousness. What eastern mystics term 'the play of Lila'. In this case the infinite regress is not a reductio ad absurdum. It is rather the inevitable nature of being. All : Russell Clark Date : 07/09/2013 08:55:33 A The magnitude of gravitational field intensity is *ceteris paribus* correlated with the strength of gravitational time dilation (weak field approximation), but is also thought to drive, in part at least, quantum decoherence, itself a temporal process. Quantum decoherence appears the only temporal process currently known to science whose rate is not subject to gravitational time dilation in the same uniform manner as indeed are all other known temporal (physical) processes. This suggests that the mechanism underlying quantum decoherence may be among the building blocks of the mechanism of gravitation. The discovery of any remaining building blocks of this mechanism perhaps have to await the identification of further nonuniformities in the response of specific physical processes to the effects of gravitational time dilation. Now if

*per impossible* lol some form of dualism turned out to be the case, then we might anticipate some new form of deep space sickness in the form of a kin of insidious and cumulative impairement of normal mental functioning experienced by astronauts during long voyages in zero gee or artificial gravity, say via nonuniform alteration in tubulin dimer decoherence in relation to the temporal evolution of brain quantum coherent states and this on account of the twofold differential action of gravitational time dilation upon quantum brain coherent and decoherent processes, heretofore unseen by the processes of natural selection which originally fashioned anb astronaut's homonid ape's brain. Lustra Media metamorphosis intelligent design YouTube video. Constraints problem in engineering. Punctuated Equilibrium Dover, Pennsylvania 2005 school board hearing All : Russell Clark Date : 07/12/2013 07:43:06 AM The magnitude of gravitational field intensity is *ceteris paribus* correlated with the strength of gravitational time dilation (weak field approximation), but is also thought to drive, in part at least, quantum decoherence, itself a temporal process. Quantum decoherence appears the only temporal process currently known to science whose rate is not subject to gravitational time dilation in the same uniform manner as indeed are all other known temporal (physical) processes. This suggests that the mechanism underlying quantum decoherence may be mong the building blocks of the mechanism of gravitation. The discovery of any remaining building blocks of this mechanism perhaps have to await the identification of further nonuniformities in the response of specific physical processes to the effects of gravitational time dilation. Now if *per impossible* lol some form of

dualism turned out to be the case, then we might anticipate some new form of deep space sickness in the form of a kind of insidious and cumulative impairement of normal mental functioning experienced by astronauts during long voyages in zero gee or artificial gravity, say via nonuniform alteration in tubulin dimer decoherence in relation to the temporal evolution of brain quantum coherent states and this on account of the twofold differential action of gravitational time dilation upon quantum brain coherent and decoherent processes, heretofore unseen by the processes of natural selection which originally fashioned an astronaut's homonid ape's brain. “I also realised, after I had finished the book, that I had stolen its central idea— of mind parasites—from a science fiction story I once read. In this story, the first man to travel to Mars suddenly has an experience of some strange creature wrenching itself out of his mind, and hurling itself back screaming towards the earth, which is its home. Unfortunately, this story ended, in the rather ‘smart’ manner so characteristic of pulp science fiction, with the man landing on Mars, and immediately being possessed again by the same parasites”, c.f., The Mind Parasites (1967). October 2013

Lime Cat fcbk=Because of what is clearly some kind of quantum resonant tuning between information laden fundamental quantum fields (quantum vacua) and the brain's microtubule tubulin dimer network, which provides the meaning for neural events and processes (allowing humans the gift or curse of self-consciousness) and because it is far more likely that this "tuning" is initiated from the side of the fundamental quantum fields (which are eternal) rather than from the side of otherwise haphazardly evolving brain circuits (which is merely a transitory evolutionary development), and so it is also far more likely that we ourselves are the mind parasites, who have temporarily and opportunistically taken up residence within the primitive hominid ape's brain (and in so doing, changing the direction of natural selective pressures affecting hominid brain evolution), than that we are evolved hominids who have unfortunately been infected by said "mind parasites". Another theory is that "consciousness as such" is to be equated with the eternal, fundamental quantum field, while "self-consciousness" is merely due to the transitory coherent resonance of the individual human brain's microtubule tubulin dimer network with an extremely tiny compatible sub-spectrum of the total quantum vacuum electromagnetic field. Lime Cat Of course, the total fundamental quantum field is modified via quantum entanglements induced over many thousands of years from the collective conscious neural activity of billions of hominid brains. And it is a well established result of quantum mechanics that quantum information (such as is encoded in quantum entanglement) is a conserved quantity. So this underlying fundamental quantum field possesses the potential to act as a kind of "akashic record" in which the experience of all conscious entities can be mashed together and reprocessed into broader, transpersonal meanings, as though occurring within a dynamic matrix of stored information, which can be accessed by something altogether other than human. So what do you think about the possibility that we are the mind parasites? We give humans the gift of consciousness and they give us the gift of embodied experience in return.

October 2013 fcbk=(to Naomi Jakins)

Colin Wilson didn't come up with the idea for the book entirely out of a vacuum. Well, yes, he was influenced by Forbidden Planet and that Martian Science Fiction Story, but also, he actually did notice this strange upsurge in the number of "Outsiders" and in the number of suicides. He thought those two statistics were connected, which also contributed to his conceiving of the storyline. Also the simultaneous arising of the Romantic Movement and the Industrial revolution.

Would it be coincidental if the rarer mutations represented the addition of larger amounts of information. Or evidence of gracious infrastructure? Mutation rate, population size, wait times, generation, population genetics, compute, “not enough time” New theories of evolution. 'Same problem' At no time in the past did a blank sugar phosphate molecule get filled in with nucleotide bases on both sides simultaneously. Lyell - structures in the past built by causal processes currently in operation. Harmonics of decoherence times, Fourier analysis and multidimensional time. Failure of time scale reductionism and the transcendence of causal determinism. Mutation rate population size wait tines generation population genetics compute 'not enough time' Ontological argument reevaluated in light of the transcendent causality of the big bang. Does the universe really reverse time play back to a single point if indeed it is not gravitationally closed? Origin(s) of Organismal Form

Decoherence forces the fundamental units of physical reality to be context-sensitive. The metaphysical implications of this are potentially astounding. Either the fundamental units of physical reality are context-sensitive or they do not exist. If they are not context-sensitive, then it is as though there is no context. So meaning could never come into being for systems of context-insensitive components, regardless of the abstract complexity of the system. This reminds me of being in the absence of universal mind. Such is the case if the unit of being is information. Mind as the author of information rather than its derivative becomes automatically transcendent. 'Libet et al. extended their experiments by stimulating a 'relay nucleus' in the thalamus that intercepts signals from the senses before they reach the somatosensory cortex. It was found that when this nucleus was stimulated for 0.5 seconds the subjects reported that the stimulus occurred 0.2 seconds after it had begun. When the nucleus was stimulated for less than 0.5 seconds the subjects did not report any sensation. This supports the concept of a 0.5 second delay whilst the cortex puts a stimulus in context before it is experienced. These experiments show that our experience is an output of cortical processing rather than the processing itself.' More recently fMRI and direct electrode recording have borne out the readiness potential experiments. Soon et al. (2008) allowed subjects to decide to press either a left or right button. They used fMRI to show that there was spatially organized activity in the polar frontal cortex and parietal cortex (from precuneus into posterior cingulate cortex) that predicted the conscious left/right decision and preceded it by about seven seconds.

In the absence of a concept of consciousness there must be a degeneracy between the seemingly distinct cases of consciousness being a one or being a many. Also a degeneracy between being reincarnated and having only one incarnation. Functional integration, constraints problem. Preprogrammed adaptive capability of cells, James Shapiro, natural genetic engineering, molecular bioogists, University of Chicago. Illustra Media metamorphosis intelligent design YouTube video. The functional essence of the concept of substance is topology. Man's empirical. science in its entirety has thus far been nothing more than the poking and prodding of a relational database at its front end, while man's theoretical science is constituted by little more than clever guesswork at the general features of the database query language, all the while unaware of the backend to this database and hence of its designer. Man must one day come to a knowledge of himself as the database's programmer. My hope is that he shall not take this eventual success as indication that he is also the designer. Who graciously provided the infrastructure which has enabled all of this impressive growth? We should ask ourselves this question in every context. It is the quite common type of fantasy, frequently indulged in by proud and vain human mortals, to imagine oneself in some glorious situation where one is either vindicated, suddenly elevated in greatness (or suddenly shown to have been great) or rendered, usually by one's own efforts, victorious or triumphant over some powerful adversity or persecution, or moreover, to receive praise and adulation from the many as one speaks, performs or otherwise acts in a manner which

compellingly displays ones authority. We human beings indulge in this kind of fantasization a great deal when we are children, perhaps more so when developing adolescents, while some of us, upon becoming "adults," tend as we approach middle age to set aside, eventually completely, such obvious puerile self-glorifications of the imagination. Some of us, on the other hand, never seem to put such self-gloried imaginings behind us, despite advancing age and maturity. Everyone has either heard of or reflected upon the phenomenon of selfishness exhibited in the strong tendency we all have of seeking out (in secret, of course) from a pack of family photographs, those particular photos in which we ourselves appear. Eventually, we become aware of the implications of this kind of behavior, which shames us: if everyone were to be this self-centered, then there would be no one left to care for me as much as (or more than) I care for myself and I would be a selfish person alone in a universe of selfish persons. Of course, part of one's motivation for thinking in this way, perhaps unbeknownst to oneself, is the Kantian notion of the Golden Rule; to wit, that I must act in such a manner that I will that my action become a universal moral law. But what of the phenomenon where I imagine myself being some other person when I am in the midst of some profound or deeply moving aesthetic or intellectual experience; I imagine what this experience would be like for this other person and somehow the intensity and wonder of the experience is amplified for me, myself, through this psychological projection. Part of the augmentation of the aesthetic experience for me is the sense of personal, if partly disembodied glory which redounds to my sense of identity because it is I who am leading this person, in my mind's eye, to the unaccustomed though fuller appreciation of this experience. Partly again, the experience is, for me, augmented because I borrow the other's innocence, using it as a foil against which the experience may be rediscovered by me in all its aboriginal wonder. Moreover, I act as this person's spiritual mentor; I help this person penetrate a mystery which I have long ago discovered for myself, and if this other person is ultimately identified with my own self; this is implied because all of these projections occur within my mind's eye, then I seek to view myself as the father of my own future

spiritual and intellectual development. But on a more basic human level, I am imagining the sharing of a profound idea or experience with another person in a way which is seldom, if ever demonstrated in actual social intercourse with my fellow human beings; certainly it is love which motivates this peculiar psychological projection - the kind of love which does not distinguish self from other. I have no acquaintance with either physical objects so-called nor with any phenomena taking place within the domain of other minds; in fact, I have had no acquaintance with any phenomena whatever other than those pertaining to my own psychological states, states which are presumably closely related to the concerted electrochemical activity of my billions of cortical neurons. Consequently, I am forced to accept the existence of physical objects and other minds purely on a faith borne of appearances, which might be easily explained numerous other ways than those, which seem to be dictated by what is called "common sense." I wish to remark here that if an omniscient (not to mention omnipotent) God fails to exist who is, by the way, the only possible vouchsafe for the existence of an objective world containing other consciousness’s than my own, then there is absolutely nothing standing in the way of my drawing the less than comforting conclusion that I alone exist, i.e., Solipsism is the metaphysical truth, and moreover, there is absolutely nothing standing in the way of my concluding that I, myself, am ultimately responsible for all the phenomena which I have experienced or ever will experience and that God does indeed exist and that I am Him. But of course, I wholeheartedly reject such a preposterous conclusion: solipsism is a thesis, which I must reject out of hand and with it the proposition that God does not exist. What I have just stated above is by no means a rational proof of the existence of God. But it is an argument, which reflects the inner logic of the whole of my being in its ineluctable affirmation of His existence from which I have not the strength to depart. The very structure of language contains within itself the subtle presupposition that all human beings possess the belief,

whether they @$consciously realize it or not, that the sum total of possible knowledge is integral. But this hypothesis about the inherently integral nature of knowledge implies, in turn, the existence of a unitary repository for this sum of knowledge – one that is by its very nature (because knowledge cannot be “static”), which is to say, a universal mind or intellect. It occurs to me that all true mysteries are intimately connected and intertwined with one another; to find the solution to only one of these mysteries would mean having found the answer to all, since in the case of solving either it was necessary to trace back to the same common origin. Just listing some examples may succeed in illustrating to one's deeper intuition that this must be true: a few of these mysteries are that of existence itself, the origin of consciousness, freedom of the will, the mystery of Time and along with it that of eternity, the mystery of immortality and that of divinity. A bright young child may agree with this observation, remarking, "well, God exists and He knows the answer to all things." But it really does seem that the contemplation of any one of these mysteries inevitably leads to the contemplation of all the others as well as some which I haven't mentioned, and one may ask, “why might this be so?" Most individuals are totally incapable of what is called lucid dreaming, dreaming where the dreamer remains aware that it is he who is in control of all the action of the dream. Freud's doctrine of the conservation of psychic energy suggests that the control of the dream action is mediated by the domain of the psyche lying between full consciousness and the level of consciousness at which the dreamer's mind operates so that the action of the dream must dissolve upon the dreamer attaining his full consciousness because the intermediary domain of consciousness which controls the dream is reduced to nil or "squeezed out." An analogy will serve here. A river may not rise to an altitude greater than that of its source, at which level its kinetic energy is completely transmuted into potential energy. It might therefore be thought that only those individuals who experience repression of their normal full consciousness would be capable of "lucid dreaming" as the control of the dream action would be mediated by the consciousness

within the domain between the individual's repressed consciousness and his normal potentially full consciousness; this is just a slightly more abstract way of saying that the psychic energy which is usually unavailable for utilization by the conscious mind is freed up during the unconsciousness of sleep and rendered available to the unconscious for use in mediating the phantasmagorical action of the various dream sequences, themselves, according to Freud, the acting out of wish fulfillments. The upshot of all this is that the presence of lucid dreaming is a possible indication that the individual experiencing it is not reaching his normal psychic potential for full wakeful consciousness and that the reason for this is a deficit of available psychic energy due to the presence of myriad emotional conflicts lying repressed within his unconscious mind. Psychic energy is bound up for use in maintaining a compartmentalization of early experiences repressed from conscious recollection. There is no reason during the unconsciousness of sleep for this psychic energy to continue to be diverted to man the defenses against the recollection of early childhood experiences by the now inert, anaesthetized ego, and so this psychic energy suddenly becomes available during deep sleep. November 1996

I have frequently had the experience of a renewed fixation upon some person, usually a former love-interest, lasting from hours to perhaps an entire 24-hour period, whenever I had dreamed about the person on the previous night. Perhaps the remobilization of repressive psychic defenses takes a characteristic time of several hours after these defenses have been relaxed during dreaming. Repressed wishfulfillment fantasies may sometimes manifest themselves as "false memories." The only way that one knows these memories to be false is through their failure to cohere with other well-established parts of one's biography, parts which one has memories of having previously recollected at numerous different times throughout one's past. One does not possess memories of having recollected the false memories at any time in the past so that they are not "woven into" one's biographic database, as it were. These false memories do have, however, the compelling tinge of having actually happened in the form of a very

idiosyncratic feeling associated with them which is perhaps merely the more or less requisite vividness of a legitimate recollection. In order for the categories of Being and non-Being to be of an absolute nature, the indeterminate or infinite must possess a structure so that nothing contained within it may possess a definition as such. But this is precisely what the indeterminate does not admit. Reality is both bottomless and without a determinate apex. Reality is, in other words, boundless and this is what gives it its fundamental, which is to say, irreducible temporality. April 1997

This is Eternity bringing forth Time. Therefore, all categorical distinctions are transcended by Reality, including that of Being and nonBeing. Existence is then a genuine predicate, but not an absolute one. Given any domain there is, indeed, a most perfect being, but perfection is now merely relative and there is no Absolute Perfection. There is, however, that which transcends any possible relative perfection and this is the eternally pre-existent, boundless Indeterminate in which unlimited possibilities exist in potentia. Quantum Mechanics verifies the old Scholastic metaphysical understanding of all change or Becoming as occurring due to a deficit of Being: all real physical processes are mediated via virtual processes; these virtual processes possess by definition an energy smaller than the energy uncertainty of the quantum mechanical system which is comprised by the real processes mediated by them. The total energy uncertainty of a quantum mechanical system is, by the way, relative to the reference frame within which the system is "viewed," and therefore differences in the vacuum's zero-point energy reflect changes in our frame of motion - in the sense provided by relativity. More specifically, Lorenz contractions occur not only to the eigenvalues of length, but also to the quantum uncertainties of length. Similar statements may be made with respect to momentum, energy, time, etc.. The unity of all opposites cannot itself possess an opposite. April 1997

Duality arises out of that which is itself Nondual. The basis of

identity which transcends abstract description is that of continuity, substantial continuity. This is where substance is the concrete medium from which all forms are generated through abstraction which is limitation and negation. The modern version of the Being versus Becoming dichotomy of the pre-Socratic philosophers is that of Space and Time of modern physics. Whereas Being and Becoming were thought to be disjoint categories by the Greeks, in modern times, the theory of relativity has shown space and time to have only a separate existence as abstractions dependent upon the frame of reference of the observer within objective spacetime. @$If through Descartes' categories of Res Cogitans vs. Res Extensa we relate space to matter and time to mind, then relativity perhaps points to a unity which transcends this distinction of mind vs. matter. Newtonian mechanics effectively "spatialized" time. Physical laws are simply "descriptions of," as Russell reminds us, “how Nature, in fact, behaves;" Nature does not "obey" any such "laws," nor is she "governed" by them. This would be to explain a process in terms of the very derivatives or by-products which necessarily presuppose the process allegedly "explained" by them. An example of this fallacy is saying that natural selection "explains" or "causes" evolution. Natural Selection cannot even begin to operate until a genome, or some such unit of heredity, is already in existence. The question concerning the origins of life and that of Darwinian evolution are seemingly quite distinct. This is a great and ever growing problem for evolution theory as the science of self-organizing complexity continues to develop. We speak always of the information contained within the genetic code as being "expressed," either in terms of the synthesis of particular proteins or as control of the expression of other genes. Yet we never seem to think of the fact that language is two-sided; information is not only expressible, that is, decodable, but it is also encodable. Without the interpretive function of mind, information is never expressed; data are merely transduced from one form within one medium into another form in another. Can the function of expression be reversible? Transduction seems to fall short of the creativity of expression. The function of expression is not reversible without the context for the original encoding, examples of which are the creation of

art, music, or poetry. Would we be satisfied with a concept of information as merely metadata? August 2014 fb=

Four “orthogonal” or disjoint domains are implied by the oppositions: fermions, waves, bosons, particles because there are two fundamental dualities in quantum physics, symmetric vs. antisymmetric wavefunctions, i.e., fermions vs. bosons and two fundamentally complementary states of the vacuum, particle vs. wave/field. January 1998

There are myriad medically documented cases of persons in states of profound hypothermia having undergone cardiac arrest and existing in a state of clinical death for periods of up to several hours who, upon being gradually thawed and heated in an emergency operating room, revived completely and without exhibiting any sign of brain trauma or loss of other healthy physiological function. Open heart surgery is now performed in the former Soviet Union upon patients whose core body temperatures have been carefully lowered to just above freezing to buy precious additional hours of surgical time in cases where particularly complex and life-threatening procedures are required. Now assuming that the persons who revive are the selfsame individuals whose bodies had been in a state of clinical death, we may conclude that, whatever is causally necessary to provide the underlying continuity of personal identity which remains preserved throughout, must not depend upon the chemical processes which are significantly impaired or halted as a result of a near freezing core body temperature. We may deduce from this that, although one's individual consciousness is structured and shaped by the near infinite number of electrochemical reactions taking place within the brain, such electrochemical processes are not, themselves, responsible for the fact of one's individual consciousness existing. Perhaps this line of reasoning appears to beg the question, since the emphasis placed on continuity here presupposes that consciousness is some kind of substance. April 1997

Darwinian evolutionary theory always is opposed to the special

creation theory, but Darwinian theory does not really stand in complete contradiction to the Biblical creation account because it does not admit flow of information into the genome, but only outward flow in the form of the genome's expression as phenotype. But in any informational system, elements do not contain information statically, but within an interpretive context, which implies that the genome represents a nexus for the exchange of information between two or more systems, and so the Darwinian doctrine of one-way flow of genetic information renders the theory inconsistent and prevents it from being in true opposition to the special creation theory. April

1997

Encoding is over-determination. Decoding is underdetermination. Hence, in a deterministic system, in which one state of the system simply determines, and neither over-determines nor underdetermines, its succeeding state - in such a system neither decoding nor encoding is taking place. Information is not a relevant quantity where strictly deterministic systems are concerned. This precise "deficit of Being" may only be defined in terms of the complete description of the total process; this description, as already noted, exists only for itself and cannot be derived from without as an infinite regress of description stands in our way here. In this connection we may state the fundamental principle that "the mediator may not be defined in terms of the total set of processes which it mediates." This "deficit of Being" of Scholastic philosophy is exactly analogous to the energy uncertainty of quantum mechanics. If Hegel is correct in saying that positive entities exist only by virtue of the accumulation of various negations of relations holding between the Absolute and itself, then each entity must more or less clearly and distinctly exhibit the unified totality of Reality in microcosm, the developmental program of which is contained in the greater quantity of information which is determined when a number of these entities come into conjunction with one another. For instance, the molecular bonding of atoms, whether it be ionic, covalent, or by the weaker Van der Waal's force, cannot be induced to occur within a previously specified period of time simply through the

manipulation of the atoms "from outside;" one may only place the atoms in the approximate position whereupon the action of bond formation ensues through the spontaneous action of the vacuum electromagnetic field. In fact, the quantum mechanical method utilized in physical or quantum chemistry to determine the various bonding probabilities has nothing whatever to say about which precise configuration or shape, out of the many possible configurations, will be formed as a result or the spontaneous bonding process. This fact is readily seen when one attempts to view the spontaneous conformation of a denatured macromolecule such as a nucleic acid as the result of the amino acids of composing the molecule trying myriad possible different conformations by trial and error until the energetically favored (most stable) conformation is found. In even relatively small macromolecules the total number of possible conformations is so staggeringly large that even if the components try a different configuration every 10-13 seconds (a very liberal assumption) the time required to hit on the "correct" conformation by chance would take many orders of magnitude longer than the present age of the observable universe! The wavefunction which describes the total system of interacting atoms entering into the bonding process is approximated as a product of the individual wavefunctions describing the approximate quantum state of the atoms; it is only the complete wavefunction which describes these atoms as being inextricably entangled with the whole vacuum-energy/ mass-energy matrix which contains the information about the shape of the resultant molecule, among other things. No individual quantum mechanical wavefunction is truly normalizable, although a large ensemble of such wavefunctions will approach normalizability in the limit of infinite ensembles. There will always appear to be coupling between the eigenstates of a wavefunction which is, itself, merely an approximately exact wavefunction; in reality, there is only one universal wavefunction, as its normalizability requires. This process is very much akin to the decrease of fuzziness in a holographic image which occurs on two or more pieces of a shattered

holographic emulsion when the various pieces are refitted together. On this view all development of material systems from the simplest subatomic constituents to the most complex living organisms, consists in the negation of negation, engendered by the conjunctions of these constituents which occurs by chance outside the quantum mechanical positional (or length) uncertainty of the constituents, but which is actively directed once they interpenetrate within this uncertainty, where they enter into the effective range of their innate quantum-uncertainty mediated tendencies toward self-organization, tendencies which are a manifestation of the partially distinct "image" of the Absolute, i.e., the universal wavefunction, which each constituent contains in microcosm within itself. Because creation is conceived under the aspect of the negation of the negation of contextual relatedness within the Absolute, this negation which is negated being understood as the reduction of information resulting from the partial expression of the universal wavefunction as a product of partial wavefunctions corresponding to relatively uncertain subatomic constituents, the problem of "Why is there something rather than nothing?," is no longer rendered insoluble by the requirement of explaining creation ex nihilo, but it is simply recognized that there has to have always been something or other, so what better candidate for this something than that unified plenum which is its own description, which is per Aristotle its own eternal contemplation; that entity which au=Hegel calls the au=Absolute, and which we have styled "the universal wavefunction." “In the same way, the Buddhists express the same idea when they call the ultimate reality sunnyata for emptiness or void and affirm that it is a living void which gives birth to all forms in the phenomenological world.” (au=Capra, 1976) au=

Dr. Scholem, in his cit=Trends in Jewish Mysticism, tells us that in any case, where there is a transition from one state or configuration to another that, "the void is spanned for an instant." au=Madame Blavatsky refers to evolution as a "spiritual Opus in reverse," meaning that the world arose through a process of involution (a reduction of the infinite to the finite), but containing a vague recollection of the whole from which it was originally abstracted and which guides its future development.

This future development is constituted by the return of the Absolute back unto itself, directed from above and hence is a recapitulation of the timeless and transcendent within the realm of the temporal and immanent. This is to understand evolution as the negation of negation. To say that Reality cannot be given a complete description on account of the inevitable pitfall of infinite regress is merely to say that, if this description does not already exist, then it can in no way be constructed; @$ there is nothing in what has just been said to prevent a complete description of Reality, which has always existed. In fact, it is due to the lack of a complete description which is responsible for the existence of temporality, c.f., fluctuations necessarily associated with a perturbation theory description of the quantum field. This observation is very much in the same spirit of the mathematician au=Kurt Gödel's discovery that the notion of truth is stronger than the notion of provability; the fact that a theorem expressible within the symbolic language of a particular logicodeductive, mathematical system may not be constructed from the axioms of its system utilizing the rules of inference of this system does not prevent this theorem from "existing" in the sense of its being true, i.e., “subsisting”. September 2011 It is actually the interaction of the open-ended sets of suppressed details (that is, those concrete details suppressed that originally constituted the categories of abstract thought), which do the “heavy lifting” on behalf of creative intelligence and not the categories themselves. The categories, when wielded (just think of tools here) merely signal to the underlying creative ground, which direction it is to apply the genius of colluding devilish detail to which problem, as well as conveniently indexing the end products of lucubration and so enabling their inter-subjective communication. On this view the sociolinguistic construct of the self is merely the master abstract category, which is but one of the many categories of thought, and which serve the real master that is the will. But one might ask what is the meaning of mathematical theorems which are beyond the comprehension of any finite mind and which are not true by construction from a possible collection of axioms, but true in some

more fundamental sense. Wittgenstein tells us that we may not use substantives in a manner which attempts to extend the reference of these terms beyond the scope of all possible experience without falling into either meaninglessness or absurdity. Therefore, when we ask the question, "Does God exist?" the most we can possible mean by this question is, "Does God exist within our space-time continuum?" We cannot ask whether God exists in Reality (Wirklichkeit) since Reality cannot possess a complete description without this description having always existed and without admitting the existence of such a description, one necessarily beyond all possible attempts to construct it, and which may only exist from a single point of view or perspective. So it seems that one may not ask whether God exists in Reality (in the sense of Wirklichkeit ) without presupposing an answer in the affirmative, @$ because the admission of the existence of Ultimate Reality is one and the same with the admission of God's existence. It is meaningful, however, to ask this same question in the sense of Realitat. That which has always existed, and its complete description, which has always existed must be a part of this same eternally pre-existent Reality. It is obvious that the description and the Reality must be essentially one and the same entity which is, who is, God. The finite may not be complete without conditions being specified, and these specified conditions may not obtain except within the purview of a larger context, containing the particular finite thing. Only those independently occurring genetic mutations may occur at lower levels in the gene regulatory hierarchy, i.e., to structural genes, which become integrated together within a member of an evolving species which might have possessed a common source in the form of single mutation to a higher order regulatory gene, one which controls the expression of the original set of structural genes prior to the occurrence of these independent mutations. The operation of Darwinian natural selection presupposes the existence of a gene regulatory hierarchy which controls not only the expression of individual genes, but more importantly controls the integration of the expressions of large numbers of genes at the lower levels of this hierarchy.

To reiterate, there has always been something. What better candidate for this something than that than which nothing greater can be conceived (per Anselm) ? This something has no complete description except within and through itself. The only truly determinate entity is the totality of everything which is possible or it is the void, as nothingness is, by its very nature, determinate. It has been humorously noted that Time exists so that everything will not happen at once. Given this obvious truth, then if Reality is infinite in scope, there is no "everything" for there to possibly be given or occur all at once. For the term "everything" presupposes a finally completed something which is incompatible with infinitude. So temporality may be simply necessary in an infinite Reality. Temporality seems to require that (per Bergson) genuine novelty continually intrude into the world. The act of creation is not an event within history; it is the beginning of history; it is the very inception of novelty. Bergson advocates what might be called a Machian theory of Time. But since the continued presence of temporality seems to require continual activity of creation, it seems more consistent to assume that creation itself is a fundamental process which itself had no beginning, which was itself never created, that the activity of creation is that which has always existed and which requires no explanation other than itself. On the other hand, however, it seems that this fundamental process of creation cannot be a unified process, for otherwise it is an act which could have been consummated instantaneously, once for all. Temporality must therefore be a process of recapitulation of timeless reality with Reality itself as the medium through which the recapitulation is accomplished. If Reality has a complete description, it is not one which can be constructed, not one which had any origin in time: it is indeterminacy itself which is ultimately responsible for the existence of temporality itself. If such a complete description exists it must have always existed and the description and the reality must be one and the same. Consciousness offers itself immediately as a likely candidate for such an ultimate reality since consciousness is its own

representation. If it is true that consciousness is required in order to collapse a quantum mechanical wavefunction into a determinate eigenstate, then consciousness, if it had an origin in time, must have arose out the interaction of uncollapsed wavefunctions - it must have arisen out of a situation of infinite energy uncertainty. The velocity of light is determined by the ratio of real particle energy to virtual particle energy. Hence, the elsewhere region of the Minkowski light cone may be identified with that region of the vacuum which stands in a relation of Bell nonlocality to the observer. The unity of the conscious mind is no doubt owing to Bell-nonlocal connectivity of neurons within the brain. If it is true that there has always been something (as in the metaphysical question, "why is there something rather than nothing"), out of which the Universe arose, assuming that this something is not just the Universe itself, then there must not be, ultimately speaking, a universal or all encompassing, ongoing process of either evolution or degradation in the development of Reality. This is because by this present time an infinite amount of time must have already passed so that Reality should have either degraded into utter nothingness or reached a state of eternally unchanging perfection and we do not observe the Universe to presently occupy either of these two extreme states: temporality could not exist within a universe which derives its existence from a ground of unchanging perfection (fullness of being); nor could the universe derive its existence from a ground of nothingness (complete degradation). December 1996

Evolution and devolution are concepts which may only possess an application locally, however broadly. We now arrive at the conclusion that Reality as a whole is neither evolving (increasing in complexity) nor is it devolving (decreasing in complexity) so that any apparent changes in complexity in the Universe, e.g., biological evolution, increasing entropy, are merely local changes which are on the whole compensated by opposing processes elsewhere. We may think of causal relationships as obtaining between terms or entities occupying a plane of equal levels of abstraction with the process of abstraction itself

and its opposing process, that of concretion, being processes which do not admit of an exhaustively causal analysis. If it is only possible to alter the boundary conditions and initial conditions which the dynamism of Nature is subject to , but not to alter in any way the dynamism itself, then the most advanced technologies will amount to nothing more than having discovered how to goad Nature into doing, in the best way she knows how, what she has all along been in the very act of doing. It is the possibility of formulating recursive propositions and this possibility alone which allows the domain of true theorems, expressible within the language of a deductive system, to transcend in magnitude the domain of provable theorems, i.e., theorems which may be deduced from the axioms of the system through application of the rules of inference of the system. There is no comprehensive rule by which a computing device may recognize the appearance of a recursive proposition since recursiveness is a structure which can only be suggested; it cannot be literally stated. All baryons are composed of various combinations of three different quarks out of the six possible different types of quark; the mesons, however, are each composed of different quark pairs from among the six fundamental quark types. The fundamental force responsible for binding together the various quark combinations out of which all baryons and mesons are composed possesses the bizarre property of increasing in strength as the distance separating the quarks increases. The important result of this is that it is impossible to fragment these quark laden particles into their fundamental constituent quarks: it is impossible to produce a "free quark," in other words. This is almost as though the quark does not possess a determinate energy structure except as it exists within groups of two, three or possibly larger numbers of quarks. The quark may be an example of an entity whose identity is totally context dependent with the quark itself, paradoxically, providing the context for its own determination as a substantive entity. Such an entity might not possess a definite energy equivalence in the sense that it is not possible to determine the quark's energy independently of the energies associated with the force fields the particle produces. An entity

such as the quark which is defined in terms of the combined effect that it has upon itself (and one or more duplicates of itself ) provides us with the best example to date of what might be called a self-existent entity. Quantum nonlocality effects could govern the superluminal transmission of information between various widely separated locations within the brain's cortex without producing a verifiable violation of special relativity's restriction on superluminal transmission of information between separate minds. This would be possible if the very same nonlocality effects are required for the integration of the individual's consciousness as a whole. The idea or flash of insight would then be time-delayed by the necessary time interval involved in conveying this idea from the location in his brain where the crucial integration occurred to those parts of his nervous system which pick up this message and in turn translate it into classically described nerve impulses then responsible for the ultimate series of muscle cell contractions required to transmit the message to the external world of attending observers. Another way of looking at this kind of nonlocality is for the nonlocalized quantum effects to be confined to a vacuum energy/information reservoir, exhaustively connected with itself nonlocally, which is continually tapped into by the neural network of the person's brain. There seems to be nothing to strictly forbid the existence of superluminal causal connections between events which lie outside of any observer's Minkowski light cone. Since the common sense view alleges that the past is nothing more than a fixed, crystallized record of what has actually occurred within the present, it follows from this view then that a present which has not had adequate time within which to resolve its internal contradictions and ambiguities must retain a certain small degree of freedom within which change might continue even after this moment becomes past. In this way, backwards causality would be admissible, if only for the purpose of "cleaning up" the "loose ends" of still indeterminate entities occupying past times. @$But doesn't common sense also define the past in such a manner that it does not actually become past as such until such a point as

this crystallization process is complete. January 1998

Within the above schema of "concrete" temporal evolution, the time dimension cannot be spatialized and treated analogously to an additional dimension of space such as it is treated by the Minkowski relativistic formalism. In other words, common sense defines the past in such a way that the time axis is necessarily orthogonal to the three dimensions of space and this at every spatial scale, however small; it defines the past in such a manner that there is no substantive distinction between past, present and future, which is to say, it defines the past as a half-infinite time interval with its later endpoint being the present moment whose status as present must be completely arbitrary. Within a deterministic time continuum there is no nonarbitrary basis upon which any particular moment along the continuum may be chosen over other contenders as being actually present. January 1998

The first order approximate description of the first order perturbations to a given quantum mechanical system may be evaluated in terms of the discrepancy between the system's first order and its second order perturbation description. The true nature of the perturbations of the system to which entirely owes its genuine temporality, cannot be understood with respect to any possible common descriptive denominator which these perturbations may be thought to have with the formal elements of the first or, for that matter, any higher order perturbative descriptions of the system. In other words, in absolute terms, the perturbations to any system cannot be given any formal description of representation of any kind. A natural lawlike system of relationships which govern the behavior of a given entity may only be formulated provided that this entity is not unique ( provided that multiple duplicates of the entity exist and are available ) as in the case of subatomic particles, e.g., an electron.

January 1998

Otherwise, there is not objective means of distinguishing dependent from independent variables of the system. As observed by au=Jacques Monod in cit=Chance and Necessity, "Science can neither say nor do anything about a unique occurrence. It can only consider occurrences that form a class, whose a priori probability, however faint, is yet definite." We note here that a determinate occurrence merely constitutes a special case of a definite probability, namely, that of unity. Consequently, if a probability of unity for a particular occurrence demands that this occurrence be contained within a finite number which altogether form a closed system of possible occurrences, then equally does so a definite probability for this, or any other, occurrence within the self same system. It is doubtful whether the probabilities of "material" events can change due to disturbances of the system from outside which leave these events unchanged as discrete entities. For the sensitivity of system elements within open systems follows from the general nature of opens systems as not being themselves constituted from closed systems. To wit, additivity and commutatability, which are manifestations of system reversibility, do not obtain within open systems. The meaning of discursive symbols must be completely arbitrary if these symbols are to be interpretable, i.e., if they are to be data to which information can be associated. There must be an important distinction to be drawn between the dissemination of data and the transmission of information. There is not distinction between these two types of propagation of influence if the endpoints are not taken into account. The transmission of data from point A to point B is merely an arbitrary link within a larger arbitrary link connecting point A' to point B' of the longer path containing path AB. And the smaller path, AB, is arbitrary because it exists only through the arbitrary abstraction of it from the larger path A'B'. In other words, there is no reason for considering the path AB than that of arbitrary choice. There is no determinate relationship between data and information because they do not exist at the same level of

abstraction. This would presuppose, however, that data and information, are only different, generally speaking, in a relative sense, i.e., relative to the level of abstraction. The quest for the "theory of everything" is therefore doomed to ultimate failure, since what we call "everything" is necessarily unique, and this uniqueness prevents us from separating those "variables" which are particular to the thing itself from those which owe in part to our investigatory involvement with this thing. The self, in the act of investigating ultimate reality, must be included within the dynamic of the reality for which we are seeking a complete description. This inherent recursiveness which lies at the heart of any earnest attempt to develop a complete description of reality is alone responsible for the fact that the domain of truth necessarily transcends the sum of knowledge comprising any point of view (of reality). Quantum Mechanics tells us that a closed dynamical system may only undergo temporal evolution provided that a certain energy uncertainty exists within the system. This energy uncertainty is just the standard deviation of the energy about its mean or expectation value. This energy uncertainty may be interpreted in terms of a time-average sum of random energy perturbations to the system "from outside" the system. The phase of the isolated quantum system formally undergoes temporal evolution, but there is no physical meaning to be attached to an absolute phase. It is only when another system is brought into interaction with the first system do we get temporal evolution of relative phases of the two systems which possess measurable and observable effects. If these energy perturbations, or some component of them are not removable, are not merely the artifacts of our inadequate perturbative analyses of quantum systems, but are ontologically real, then the infinity, and perhaps the infinite dimensionality, of the world logically follow. These random energy perturbations manifest themselves in the form of energy exchanges between the quantum mechanical system and the sea

of virtual particles in which this system is embedded. The interaction of these virtual particles with the quantum mechanical system are responsible for virtual transitions of the quantum state of the system to other quantum states. The only real energy transitions available to the quantum mechanical (dynamical) system are those from amongst the set of virtual energy transitions which are continually occurring within the time interval specified by the system's time uncertainty. The density of this virtual particle energy sea has a direct bearing upon the rate of temporal evolution of any given quantum mechanical system. Our central hypothesis is that the presence of matter has a perturbing effect upon this virtual particle energy sea, i.e., the quantum vacuum field, and this perturbing effect is, namely, to decrease the overall density of this vacuum energy which results in a similar decrease in the time rate of change of all physical processes within the spatial volume occupied by this matter. This proposed vacuum mechanism is exactly similar to the mechanism by which a quantum resonant cavity decreases the rate of spontaneous emission of 'cavity - detuned' photons by a Rydberg excited atom. The resonant cavity achieves this by excluding most of the photons of half-wavelength larger than the cavity diameter: to wit, it does this by decreasing the energy density of vacuum electromagnetic field fluctuations of roughly the same energy as that of the suppressed atomic energy transitions. Given this inherent circularity in the nature of technological growth, it follows that the ultimate constituents of the World must be wholly recursive: they must be their own symbolic representations. If a "conscious computer" is ever developed in what will undoubtedly be the far distant future, this mysterious property of such a device will in no way stem solely from the design or blueprint by which its engineers will have conceived its construction; the blueprint will, of course, be a necessary component in the realization of such a conscious machine, but will have been derived from a necessarily somewhat fortuitous discovery, owing to much trial and error investigation, of the "correct" hardware interface of the device with the recursive, self-organizing

matrix of quantum - vacuum energy fluctuations which underpin and mediate the stability of all fundamental particles and their exchange forces. Only in appropriate dynamic conjunction with this fluctuating energy matrix will any realization of a hardware design possess the topological energy structure sufficient to tap the pre-existing "consciousness potential" of spacetime. In other words, it is only the grace of Reality's fundamental dynamism which will permit the eventual construction of a so-called conscious computing device. This empirical discovery of the correct interface design will manifest itself perhaps during a testing phase where a long series of simulated sensory inputs, of increasing complexity, are in the process of being fed into the device while its output signals (responses) are being closely monitored. The memory medium of the device will begin to accumulate stored or remembered inputs which it has never received through its various sensory apparatus. Identical sets or series of inputs will produce significantly different series of outputs both from an individual machine over time as well as from different machines at the same time - even if these machines possess identical designs. Occasionally, radically different series or sets of inputs will produce identical sets of outputs. A significant portion of the functional relationship between output and input will depend upon changes in energy in the internal components of the machine's hardware which are, themselves, smaller than the overall quantum energy uncertainty of the device as a whole. Moreover, no mutually orthogonal set of eigenfunctions will describe the "functioning components" of the device. This is why we have been saying that the abstract spatial structure of our hypothetical computing device is nontopological. Clearly, any realization of a static blueprint for a computing device, regardless how complex, in the form or an dynamically functioning prototype, will itself be merely a topologically-preserving transformation of the blueprint from 2 or perhaps 3 spatial dimensions to 4 spatial dimensions rather than the topology-non-preserving transformation from 3 spatial to 4 dimensions of 3 space and 1 time. This is because the state space of the transcribed structure, i.e., the design, can be adequately described in spatial terms. In a very real

sense, an object may not be thought to possess an internality unless it possess a genuine "outside" in the sense of a radically open system - a system which cannot be contained within a closed system; a system is "closed" only if it is finite and neither receives nor transmits energy to or from any system except itself. Such a closed system possesses no "outside." Contingent uniqueness versus necessary uniqueness. The size of the Universe and the black hole mass limit as important parameters in determining the density of the quantum vacuum energy. The asymmetrical nature of time perhaps has some bearing on the hierarchical structuring of complex macromolecules. The fact that a molecule has been formed from a set of simpler constituents does not guarantee that it can then be decomposed back into this set of constituents. Similarly, the fact that a molecule has been broken down into a set of simpler constituents does not guarantee that it can be spontaneously recomposed from this selfsame set of constituents. Perhaps the asymmetrical nature of temporality implies that any sufficiently large set of macromolecules may be partitioned into two disjoint parts; those molecules possessing a bottom - up structure and those possessing a top - down structure. This distinction which I am drawing is not a solid theoretical one; it is a pragmatic distinction which assumes that status of a theoretical distinction when we refer to molecules occupying either extreme end of the probability spectrum ( in terms of their ability to form "naturally" from simpler parts ). Will may only be defined in terms of a "rational" order foreign to itself which it resists or subverts. Will is the external manifestation of consciousness. Will is a principle of incommensurate causation. The set of lawlike relations which may be said to govern Will's operation are unique and irreproducible. Rational order is simply that order which can be made to manifest its lawlike relations in a reproducible manner. There is no need to invoke a temporal description of this state space - the only reason one would attempt it is because we project our genuine temporality onto the mind's eye realization of the computing device in its act of

"functioning." Henri Bergson, in his essay, Time in the History of Western Philosophy, complained of a confusion which inevitably cropped up whenever metaphysicians attempted to analyze the problem of motion. With a kind of gentle contempt he described the frustration of these philosophers in trying to reconstruct linear motion from infinite series of "immobilities", i.e., fixed points of infinitesimal length. He explained their failure as being due to their ignorance of the nature of a linear interval as a mere projection of "mobility onto immobility." This projection, naturally as such, does not capture the whole phenomenon, but merely a point of view with respect to it out of an infinity of equally valid points of view, and so from a single projection, or even a finite number of projections, one is never permitted to reconstruct the original object as it is. There are possible boundary conditions which might be easily placed upon the dynamic of the "flux" which are nonetheless infinitely improbable as "natural" occurrences, which is to say that the operation of intelligence is required to institute them. It is these seemingly magical self - organizing properties of matter, owing to the recursiveness of its ultimate "constituents," which make any attempt to calculate the "improbability" of biological macromolecules an incoherent and meaningless enterprise. Similar activities are the routine pastime of myriad scientifically inclined creationists attacking evolution. The staggeringly large numerical ratios which they cite against the "chance occurrence" of the simplest eukaryote DNA are calculated upon a permutational / combinational modeling of a prebiotic "soup" in which chance collisions continually occur between precursor molecules, e.g., peptides, amino acids, nucleic acids, etc. The serious problem with such a modeling approach is that it is not an empirically derived statistical calculation as in actuarial computations, where a distinct probability is assigned to each possible event within a pool, based on the observed relative frequencies of each event, but is an abstract calculation where the probabilities are fixed at the outset and remain unchanged throughout all series of calculations. For example, there are a vast number of nucleic acid reactions taking

place within the ribosome organelle of every living animal cell which in the absence of certain mediating enzymes will take place anywhere from 9 to 20 orders of magnitude more slowly than if these enzymes are present - the ribosome is responsible for "translating" the coded information of nucleic acids into various macromolecules (proteins) and in so doing expressing the genotype of the developing organism. We see from this example that the probability of the occurrence of various macromolecules essential to the appearance of the first reproducing, metabolizing organic units begins infinitesimally small when the molecule's precursors are yet unavailable, but that this probability grows by large discontinuous jumps each time one of these precursors, the precursors' precursors, etc. arise inadvertently in the prebiotic "soup" so that by the time the exhaustive set of macromolecular precursors is present, the formation of the original macromolecule is virtually assured. The ribosome itself, despite its inordinately complex structure, has been observed under experimental conditions to reform spontaneously after having been dissociated within a carefully prepared enzyme bath into its precursor polynucleotide constituents - and this within the space of only several hours! It is indeed true that a countless variety of different enzymes (of the precisely correct type) must be simultaneously present along with the polynucleotide matrix for this seemingly magical act of spontaneous self - organization to occur. This is because the self organization of such an enormously complex organic structure depends, throughout the entire process, upon the almost simultaneous juxtaposition (collision is a better term) of three or more precursor molecules which all happen to have the exactly correct spatial orientation, with sufficient kinetic energy to overcome the activation energy barrier against the reaction occurring. It should be noted here that just the chance of any three compatible molecules ( in terms of a desired product ) colliding at once with the roughly correct spatial orientation is an event with a probability only infinitesimally greater than zero - let alone the question of proper activation energies. And so, even if the primordial Earth possessed the appropriate reducing atmosphere with oceans chalk full of all of the required precursor

molecules for the ribosome to properly form, without the necessary catalyzing cofactors ( the enzymes ) there would not likely have formed a single such structure by this late epoch. Then perhaps there must have been an extremely long period of time during which the necessary enzymes appeared on the scene, one might think. One suspects, then, a similar self - organizing process behind the formation of these necessary enzymes, the only difference being that the precursors which we are now concerned with are simpler, while their precursors must have been simpler still, and so on. But the precursor macromolecules for many particular enzymes have, indeed, never been manufactured (because we don't know how to do it), but have to be obtained from more complex molecules than themselves, if not from living or recently living organisms. The theory of evolution, chemical evolution in this case, has secretly conditioned us to believe that there must be some definite if inordinately complex sequence: precursors + cofactors ~ simpler precursors + cofactors ~ etc. leading back to the very simplest organic molecules which form by self - organization spontaneously and easily in a wide variety of environments and without the need for cofactors or helper molecules of any kind, and that it must have been such a process (only in reverse) which ultimately lead to the first self - reproducing biological units which could then be developed further through Darwinian natural selection. The notion of self - organization gives some of us pause because it concerns a natural process which sits precisely on the fence between what might be called less - than - self - organization, i.e., formation from simpler components, and what is aptly called greater - than - self organization, i.e., formation from more complex components - and it is just such a notion which strongly suggests a top - down hierarchy within the natural order which can only have intelligence at its apex. At every step in the chain in the formation of higher level precursor molecules, the mediation of the required reactions is accomplished via self organization principles : those who attempt to calculate the probability against "chance" formation of important precursor molecules forget a very important general principle first articulated by the great rationalist

philosopher Leibniz - which is - that set of conditions which in combination are sufficient to produce some complex structure must necessarily remain in operation at every succeeding moment to sustain the existence of this structure. The upshot of this is that a complex structure which owes its origin to mere chance cannot endure, still less could it respond to its environment in an adaptive fashion. To bend Nature toward our intentions it is merely necessary for us to block all of those except the one paralleling that one which is our own. It is in the very nature of recursion not to be derivable from anything but recursion itself. Therefore, if a recursion or recursive structure has a beginning in time it is complex, but may only be analyzed in terms of other "simpler" recursive structures. These simpler components of the recursive structure are themselves approximations to the larger structure which they form in combination with one another. The behavior of self organizing systems cannot ultimately be explained in terms of principles of organization which obtain externally, which is to say, such dynamic structures will not submit to a reductionistic analysis. The distinction between the "mental" and the "physical" may be drawn in the following way: both are wholes composed of parts, both possess principles of organization, but what is termed a physical whole is defined exclusively in terms of its constituent parts while the "parts" which "compose" what is termed a mental whole are, themselves, defined in terms of the whole which they compose. The reconstruction of a mental whole must be guided in a top - down manner whereas the construction of a physical whole must be guided in a bottom - up manner. The principle of a mental whole must exist prior to its actual realization ( in terms of whatever substance). Without substance change is not possible. Coextensive with this principle is: change owes itself to a lack of determination, to a deficit of Being, to negation. From which it at once follows that substance, rather than being the seat of being, of thinghood, as common sense conceives it to be, it owes its existence, to the contrary, to a lack of being. It is not possible for a determinate thing to be made up out of substance insofar as this thing possesses determination. It is easy enough to see that continuity is required for the

subsistence of what is called historical time which we will henceforth refer to as temporality. Indeterminate substance is the only basis for the continuity underlying all change. The theory of entropic processes tells us that energy and information are interdefinable and this fact in conjunction with the principle of energy conservation suggests that information, like energy, may neither be created nor destroyed: the "creation" of a quantity of information is really constituted by its being abstracted from the preexisting integral system of information defining it.p94Like a piece broken off from a holographic emulsion, there is a necessary trade - off involved in this abstraction process: the "newly created" entity only acquires a relative independence from the whole in which it eternally preexisted (and which defined its true being) by losing some of its knowledge of itself. There is a direct analogy with this process in the creation of "new" subatomic particles through the collision of particles within a linear accelerator. In the first couple of decades after the first "atom - smashing" experiments performed with the primitive particle accelerators of the 1930's, it had been supposed that the particle products of these violent collisions were actually pieces of the colliding particles which had been jarred loose by the sudden impulsive force of their slamming together. But soon after this early period the kinetic energies of the particles going into these accelerator collisions began to significantly exceed the combined mass - energy of the particles which themselves initiated the reaction, with the result that the end product of these collisions was a set of particles with individual member particles possessing a mass greater than the combined mass of the particles originally participating in the collision. The common sense "broken pieces" explanation of accelerator products now had to be modified in some way or rejected outright. Two alternative interpretations of this "mass paradox" were suggested by particle theorists: either the product particles were created from the excitation of the vacuum by the kinetic energy of the collision with the "input" particles serving as the points of application of the excitation energy, or they were really inside the initial particles all along but the excess mass - energy was being exactly balanced by an equal and

opposite negative energy due to the internal binding forces holding the particles together. The science of Physics, at least before the development of relativistic quantum field theory, in the 1940's, imagined that there might be such things as ultimate material constituents elementary particles - out of which all material bodies would be composed. The implicit Metaphysics behind the notion of elementary particles is that of substance. There is no such thing as nothing. Nothing, by its very nature, is a nonexistent entity: it is its own negation. We might be tempted to say then that "something," being the opposite of nothing, must exist. But not just any "something" constitutes the opposite or negation of nothing/nothingness, but only a something which is, itself, the unity of all that might possibly exist, and the very essence of which is to exist. In other words, nothing, not being possible because containing within itself its own negation, implies that there must have always been something (or other). But the only guarantee that there has always been something is the existence of something which contains within itself its own affirmation, if you will, the reason for its own existence. A fundamental and most general property of a thing which contains within itself the reason for its own existence is that of recursion, something which is defined solely in terms of itself, a recursive structure. There are logical grounds for believing that there can be only one recursive structure, that there can be only one self-existent entity - with this entity being the "ground" for existence of all other entities. A recursive structure, if it may be thought to be composite, would be composed of parts which are totally interdependent upon one another; no part is the cause of any other without also being itself caused by this other part and so if this recursive structure had a beginning in time, it must have been given existence through a pre-existing, broader and more complex recursive structure. We see now that a given finite recursive structure comes into existence through a process of uncovering or abstraction from a more complex whole - through a process of negation. We are reminded of Michelangelo's claim that a truly great work of sculpture already exists within its marble block and that all he did in order to produce his works

was merely to free them from the marble in which they were imprisoned. All simpler recursive structures come into being through a kind of figure-ground transformation, through a change in perspective. This reminds us of Leibniz' monads, each of which are only different perspectives on an eternally pre-existent whole, c.f., holography, with each monad defined in terms of, or dependent upon, all of the other monads making up the whole. This exhaustive interdependence is what Leibniz refers to as the preestablished harmony between monads. Again, a recursion may only be defined in terms of other recursions like itself. Consciousness is an example of an inherently recursive structure as it is its own symbolic representation ( of itself to itself). Consciousness' objectivity is exactly coextensive with its subjectivity; the representation of a decomposed 3 + 1 space and time is always against a nondecomposed spacetime where space and time are fused. This is simply a restatement of Bishop Berkeley’s principle, esse est percipi, i.e., to be is to be perceived, and as @$ consciousness necessarily experiences itself as a unity and never as a multiplicity - the objective reality of any multiplicity of consciousness' could only exist as a subjective reality within a larger individual consciousness (itself a unity) and so cannot really be a multiplicity of consciousnesses at all. This was one of Schrodinger’s metaphysical insights. December 2012 We have said elsewhere that, “without context, there is no meaning”. But not just any context will do here. Firstly, this meaning giving context cannot be merely incidental or accidental (since we are presuming here that ultimately sense and meaning is not forthcoming from a closed system), but the system must itself be an outgrowth of the meaning-providing context. This makes a teleological interpretation of intelligent systems unavoidable. In other words, we must subscribe to a top-down causal order, one which necessarily admits the operation of what philosophers term supervenience. “Self” organization or “self”-organizing principles have no efficacy unless what we term “self”, i.e., that which does the organizing, is open-ended, i.e., open to higher levels of organization. Logically, the only system that can effectively “bootstrap” itself (following Cantor) is an infinite system.

This argument against the multiplicity of consciousness was succinctly stated by the physicist au=Erwin Schrodinger in his short seminal work, cit= Mind and Matter. It follows that since consciousness cannot experience itself as a multiplicity, it therefore cannot exist objectively as a multiplicity: consequently there can only be one consciousness. @$But if the nature of consciousness is that of self-transcending, then au= Schrodinger’s clever line of reasoning loses considerable force. Both the American psychologist au=William James as well the French philosopher au=Henri Bergson did not believe that the brain was itself productive of consciousness but that the brain was merely a kind of reducing valve (Bergson) which filtered and reduced down the cosmic consciousness (James) to a vastly simpler form containing roughly the level of information handling capacity (intelligence) which the human organism would need to adapt to the limited challenges of an earthly environment. The novelist and author of Brave New World (1932), au= Aldous Huxley, discussed this view of consciousness in his popular treatise, cit=The Doors of Perception - Heaven and Hell. In this work Huxley describes the effects of the psychoactive (psychedelic) drugs mescaline and LSD which he experimented with towards the latter part of his life in an attempt to trigger or facilitate the mystical experience of enlightenment in which he had had an almost lifelong curiosity. Huxley explained the effects of these substances in terms of the prn=JamesBergson theory of consciousness: the experience of self-transcendence and transfiguration which Huxley experienced on mescaline was for him due to the drug's disabling effect upon the cosmic reducing valve. The brain under the influence of mescaline is no longer able to filter out the thoughts and intuitions irrelevant to earthly life (because appropriate to the upwardly contiguous levels of consciousness) - hence the experience of a vastly larger mental space. This type of explanation would have been readily understandable to the ancient Greek philosopher au=Socrates who viewed learning (through experience or education) as simply a mechanism by which latent knowledge is recollected. A computational state space configuration which cannot be duplicated in space can neither be duplicated in time, except by virtue of the additional advantage @$afforded by substantial continuity. Somehow the quantum

no-cloning theorem does not apply to two or more identical states of the same system. Genealogy is the temporal component of meaningpurveying context. Moreover, a state space configuration which cannot be duplicated in time can neither be duplicated in space. In an infinite state space, there are an infinite number of available states, and so the probability of any one state occurring is, formally speaking, zero. However, if the state space has a nonpermutational/combinational structure, then it is possible for individual states to be overdetermined with a given state representing an infinite number of different "configurations" within the state space. This would be the case if the state space is that belonging to a computing device possessing genuine memory. For the device would either remember that it had been in the exact same computational state before, in which case it would have to be in a new state slightly different from the one it "remembers" being in previously, or it would not remember ever having been in that state which it had occupied in the past. The device could only really succeed in exactly remembering one of its previous states if the device had 1) been in operation for an infinite period of time and, 2) the device possessed a memory of infinite size so as to adequately contain an infinitely regressive self-representation of one of its previous states, itself an infinitely regressive self-representation. A state space configuration can only be copied if it is locally separable from the nonlocally connected environment which contains it. Otherwise, the state cannot be defined sharply enough in order to be copied. Separating the state from the nonlocally connected (nonrepresentational) environment in which it is embedded, in order to try to copy it spatially, results in the destruction of the state earlier than, or just before, a complete description of the state is in hand, and which is

required as a template. The velocity of light limits the transmission speed of intersubjective data which must be carried on a carrier signal of energy greater than /\E, the energy uncertainty of the nonlocally connected quantum substrate through which the carrier propagates. That which is locally separable from its physical environment is a nonrepresentational abstraction. An abstract system is a re-presentation if it remains connected to its defining context; if it remains coupled to the medium in which it historically originated. Semantical symbol manipulations are characterized by transformations of symbols through the alteration of the defining contexts in which the symbols are "embedded." Syntactical symbol manipulations are characterized by transformations of symbols through the application of rules of inference to the symbols within a constant defining context. It is perhaps possible to see that syntactical and semantical transformations are mutually "orthogonal" operations. Recursive relationships involve a content, theorem or proposition, in at least two distinct contextual levels. Infinitely recursive functions, therefore, whether they be propositional, mathematical, etc., may constitute a kind of hybridized operation possessing both semantical and logic features simultaneously. Is it a valid line of speculation to suppose that since some particles which are virtual within an inertial frame of reference, become real particles with respect to an accelerated, or noninertial, reference frame, therefore inertia/gravitation must bear some intimate connection with the phenomenon of the "collapse of the wavefunction," since this phenomenon means the rendering as "real" one among the many superposed virtual quantum states? Is particle production associated with nonadiabatic, and hence, irreversible, changes in the energy density of the quantum vacuum electromagnetic field? October 1996

We know that nonadiabatic changes in the boundary conditions of the infinite potential well problem results in a transition of the particle energy to an excited state with respect to the new wavefunction describing the new potential well resulting from this sudden change.

This suggests that perhaps irreversible, or, nonadiabatic, changes in a quantum mechanical system are necessary for the wavefunction describing it to undergo "collapse." Perhaps changes in the boundary conditions of the (non?)locally connected vacuum can be modeled upon a change in the dynamics of this vacuum in the absence of changes of the boundary conditions. Perhaps all changes in the dynamics of the nonlocally connected vacuum are only measurable in terms of their manifestation as changes in the boundary conditions of a locally connected quantum system. When the boundary conditions applied to a given wavefunction are treated classically, then nonadiabatic changes in the boundary conditions will usually result in a discontinuous change in the wavefunction, i.e., a collapse in the wavefunction. But if the classical boundary conditions are themselves treated quantummechanically, then the composite wavefunction will not suffer a collapse, but will evolve according to the time-dependent Schrodinger wave equation. January 1997

Is a nonadiabatic change to be understood as a change in vacuum boundary conditions which cannot be expected (by the vacuum itself) because /\B//\t > /\B x h//\E ?It is clear in a geometrically intuitive sense that transformations of entities which are not truly independent and separable from an open-ended context or system in which they are grounded cannot be genuinely reversible but only abstractly to within a certain approximation. Participatory knowledge transcends abstract description in terms of abstract representations of independent "things" or entities. This is the knowledge based in the intimate interaction with the open-ended. Is it possible to not be in an eigenstate of any quantum mechanical observable whatever? Does this describe the normal condition which the quantum vacuum finds itself in? If the mode of interaction of real particles with real particles, i.e., real-real interactions, is correctly described as deterministically ordered, and the mode of interaction of real with virtual particles as randomly ordered, then should we describe the mode of interaction of virtual particles with themselves as both random and deterministic ?

Is a superposition state possible in the absence of wavefunction boundary conditions? Are some superpositions well-formed in the sense that they can be inverse Fourier-transformed to a unique eigenstate with respect to a definable observable? Are some ill-formed in the contrary sense of not possessing an inverse Fourier-transform to a unique eigenstate of a single observable? Perhaps well-formed superposition states may only be defined given appropriate spacetime boundary conditions, i.e., initial and boundary conditions. Notice that when a measurement is performed upon one of the separated particles of an EPR type experiment, that the particles remain nonlocally connected after the "collapse of the wavefunction" describing the particles jointly, although the particles are now nonlocally connected in a new way precipitated by the observer's act of measurement. Has the observer simply succeeded in discontinuously altering the inertial frame of reference in which the particle pair is embedded. If so, doesn't he do this by accelerating the particles? Are the nonlocal connections within the observer's mind merely apiece with the nonlocally connected vacuum state in which his brain is embedded, and so when he performs his measurement upon the particle pair, the pair must "jump into" a new nonlocally connected vacuum state, resulting in a discontinuous change in its superposition state? Does the observer recoil nonadiabatically into a new nonlocallyconnected vacuum upon performing an act of quantum measurement which induces what appears to him as a wavefunction collapse? Must the vacuum possess infinite self-similarity so that "identical events" may unfold with different rates of temporal evolution, depending upon which inertial frame of reference they are "viewed from?" Self-similarity can never be exact. If the vacuum state were merely locally connected, then its temporal evolution "as a whole" would necessarily follow along a predetermined continuum of vacuum states. However, a nonlocally connected vacuum state creates its own trajectory as it evolves temporally. I am trying to build a case for distinguishing between two seemingly very different descriptions of the process of quantum measurement, namely, the discontinuous collapse of the wavefuntion of the quantum

mechanical system being observed/measured from a similar collapse of the wavefunction describing the mind of the observer performing the measurement, which is to say, the Copenhagen from the "Many Worlds" interpretation. As is well known, Newton's law of gravitation may be given a Gaussian formulation exactly paralleling the electromagnetic flux law. What is surprising is that the black hole mass of a given radius may also be given a Gaussian formulation. To wit, 1/4piG x Int(Hc) x dS = Mblackhole. pru=It is possible to "derive" the Pauli Exclusion Principle from the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. This may be shown in the following manner. If two spin-1/2 particles of the same quantum mechanical system were to be in the same quantum state - what is precisely forbidden by the Pauli principle, say two electrons "orbiting" the same hydrogen nucleus, it would be possible for us to measure the kinetic energy (a function of momentum) of one of the electrons, and then to measure the potential energy (a function of position) of the other electron with the result that we would have demonstrated the existence of a quantum mechanical state possessing, simultaneously, an exact potential and an exact kinetic energy; but this is precisely what is forbidden to exist by the Heisenberg uncertainty principle - QED. June 1997

This conclusion does not go through, however, if the requirement is made that two particles which are in the same quantum state must be described by one and the same wavefunction. The Feynman path - integral formalism of relativistic quantum field theory indicates that real particles, i.e., fundamental particles whose mass - energy is greater than the quantum mechanical energy uncertainty of the quantum mechanical system to which they belong, may be represented as stable and interlocking patterns of vacuum energy fluctuation, that is, as patterns of virtual particle creation, annihilation, and particle (fermion and boson) exchange processes which form with one another a stable, interconnected meshwork of feedback loops of virtual particle reactions.

June 1997

It is not certain what the concept of stability means within the context of virtual particle processes. "Stable" certainly does not mean here persistence of a structure against fluctuations or perturbations thermal or otherwise, since the virtual particle processes themselves are the fluctuation phenomena. Stability must mean in this case the relatively unchanging probabilities of recurring patterns of quantum fluctuation manifesting themselves as virtual particle reactions. Thus, real fundamental particles are viewed within this formalism as mere excitations of the vacuum (ground) state with more complex matter structures, e.g., atoms, molecules, etc., as feedback structures into which these vacuum excitations are organized - provided that adequate excitation energy is available. One possible test as to whether or not a given particle is composite or simple might be: does the particle have a virtual counterpart, i.e., can the particle be produced out or the vacuum as a pure energy fluctuation out of a fluctuation of purely imaginary4-momentum? Although in theory it should be possible to produce whole atoms, molecules, or more complex matter structures through direct excitation of the vacuum state (see above paragraph), the intelligent coordination of the myriad and highly localized excitations required to do this, from within any particular modified vacuum state, is probably rendered impossible due to the inherent uncertainty of total energy which is responsible for vacuum fluctuations: certain existing boundary conditions to the matrix of vacuum fluctuations may already be immediately present - in the form of already created particles, molecules, etc., but these boundary conditions cannot be produced ab initio, but may only be "reproduced," utilizing identical pre-existing boundary conditions (in the form of already available matter) as template and catalyst for the reproduction of the desired vacuum boundary conditions. Any instrumentalities which we might employ to alter the vacuum field boundary conditions would only be effective by virtue of the vacuum field fluctuations themselves which mediate their action; we must realize that the imposition of genuinely

new boundary conditions upon the vacuum, i.e., without the utilization of a "template," even if locally, would imply a change in the global boundary conditions of the entire vacuum energy system ( the entire spacetime continuum). On the view of matter and vacuum which is espoused here, matter is seen as not having an existence independent of the vacuum energy field, rather, the stability of matter at all levels of its hierarchical structure, is underpinned by the myriad field energy fluctuations of the quantum vacuum. Consequently, matter does not possess an independent existence in the Demarcatean sense of "atoms and void;" our view is more consonant with that put forward by Heraclitus, to wit, that everything is composed "of fire in measures kindling and in measures going out;" all change is driven by the clash of opposites and all potential for change lies with the tension between these opposites. Here "fire" is given the modern physical interpretation as "vacuum energy" and the "clash of opposites," as the creation and annihilation operators ( 2nd quantization of quantum theory) into which all operators corresponding to physical "observables" are analyzable. What Heraclitus' physics lacked was a basis for physical continuity from one moment of time to the next; the reproduction of vacuum boundary conditions (in virus - like manner) supplies this missing element within modern physics. Within this understanding of the relationship between matter and vacuum Democritus' notion of persisting "substance" no longer has any application and the continuous existence of real matter particles consists in the continual recreation of a coherent and interlocking pattern of virtual particle reactions which is apiece with the larger pattern of vacuum energy fluctuations within the indefinite surrounding region of spacetime. October 1996

The basic idea behind a perturbative analysis of a quantum system is that one is not able to write down with infinite precision the exact Hamiltonian of the system under consideration and so one describes the energy of the system in terms of a Hamiltonian plus a perturbation energy. This perturbation energy is usually the first nonzero

term in an expansion of energy terms where additional terms are progressively smaller and must be neglected since to include them poses analytic intractability. In other words, one does not have the precise energy eigenfunction expansion of the system's wavefunction; if one did, then one could in theory prepare the system in any one of its energy eigenstates where the system would exist at a precisely defined energy for all time, assuming the system were not interfered with as a result of exchanging energy with some other system. But since the Hamiltonian of a quantum mechanical system is always a function of the system's momentum and position, which are incompatible observables, the energy of the system, which is a function of both the system's particle/field momentum and particle/field source position, can never be precisely defined. In this way we see that energy perturbations are not an ad hoc and practically useful accounting device needed to make up for a merely practical, and, hence, theoretically removable, ignorance concerning the system's real energy eigenfunction expansion. Rather, perturbations to the system's energy - any system's energy - are not merely artifacts of a perturbative analysis, but are ontologically real and not due to a temporary inability to specify the system's true energy eigenfunction expansion. There is a small component of the perturbation energy which is forever irremediable and represents the exchange of energy between any quantum system and another quantum system which is always present. An important conclusion to be drawn for quantum theory here is that, the wavefunction only represents the most that can be known about a quantum system in the absence of the irremovable perturbations. We might be tempted to speculate here that more can be known about a quantum system than can be contained in any wavefunction provided that the effect of the irremovable perturbations are included. If the objective and the subjective are considered to be disjoint categories, then we may say that just as the wavefunction represents the most that can be objectively known about a quantum system, what can be subjectively known about a quantum system in due entirely to influences lying altogether outside all possible wavefunction descriptions of the system.

Such influences, collectively, are the so-called irremovable perturbations. We must not straight-away identify such "irremovable perturbations" with the virtual particles and fields of relativistic quantum field theory as these entities are largely artifacts of low order perturbative analysis involving perturbations which are largely removable, in theory, should the observer acquire greater knowledge of the system under observation. What uniquely distinguishes virtual particles and fields from their real counterparts does, perhaps, point to some of the properties of the medium with which all quantum systems forever exchange energy, leading to the so-called irremovable perturbations. Therefore, the introduction of matter particles into a volume of spacetime is not distinct in principle from creating these particles ab initio from a portion of the vacuum energy already present within this particular volume of spacetime; in an inertial frame of reference, a real matter particle imparts an excitation energy to the vacuum such that a particle identical to itself is created out of the fluctuating vacuum field energy; at the same time the previous particle is destroyed, its massenergy providing the excitation energy necessary to re-create itself anew. In an accelerated, or more generally, a non-inertial reference frame, the particles mass-energy excites the vacuum field in a different manner, continually producing a new variety of particles to take its place. It has often been noted in the literature of modern physics that particle production from the vacuum state is to be expected within curved spacetimes. This leads us to the idea that merely localized alterations in boundary conditions of the vacuum field in no way alters the total energy density of the region occupied by the vacuum field, but merely changes the ratio of mass - energy to vacuum energy from zero to some fraction approaching infinity (in the case of black hole masses). The general relativistic alteration in the local velocity of light may be understood in terms of Mach's formula for the speed of sound in an energy conducting medium in its application to the quantum vacuum. Mach's formula states that the velocity of sound in an energy conducting medium is a function of the pressure and the energy density of the

medium. Specifically, the velocity of sound in the medium is the square root of the pressure of the medium times the speed of light squared divided by the energy density of the medium. Since the pressure of the vacuum is equal to its energy density, and the pressure of matter is effectively zero, the energy density and pressure terms in Mach's formula are the total energy density and pressure of space, respectively; the pressure of the vacuum is always equal to its energy density, which decreases in step with the increase in the massenergy density. By letting the total energy density of space equal to the sum of the vacuum energy and mass-energy densities, i.e., Etot = Ev + Em, and the vacuum pressure equal to the modified vacuum energy density, i.e., Ev' = Ev - Em, Mach's formula works out to vsound = sqrt[(Ev - Em)c2/Etot] which reduces to the result, vsound = [1 GM/RC2] * c, and this result is identical to the reduced local value of the speed of light calculated from general relativity (in the weak field limit). Our requirement of no spatial variation in the total energy density of space, i.e., that the mass-energy and vacuum energy densities are complementary, seems to demand that the density of gravitational energy densitycont= If we are correct in reinterpreting the gravitational redshift of photons propagating in a spatially varying gravitational potential as being due to a spatial variation in the zero-point of the vacuum's energy (against which the photon's energy is to be measured), then the imposition of boundary conditions upon the vacuum field merely produces local and discontinuous variations in the spatial (and temporal) distribution of the field energy, leading to the appearance of negative binding energies which exactly counterbalance the positive gains in mass - energy which thereto result; it is in this sense that mass-energy may be thought to occupy a "hollow" in the vacuum energy field and the "displaced" vacuum energy has merely assumed a new form as massenergy. Meff = Mr/sqrt(1 - (c')2/(c)2), where Mr = binding mass and Meff = effective mass. The binding mass stems from the sum of all (+) and (-) non-gravitational binding energies. The accumulation of many such discontinuous energy gradients submicroscopically leads to the appearance, macroscopically, of continuous energy gradients in the

vacuum. Since the energy of the vacuum field owes its existence entirely to the quantum mechanical energy uncertainty of spacetime, in turn owing to the fact that the energy Hamiltonian is a function of mutually incompatible observables, it follows that the vacuum field shares in the general properties of quantum mechanical energy uncertainty. One such property is that energy uncertainty is required for any discrete change in a quantum mechanical observable; for example, all changes in a physical system stem from the application of forces upon the system while all fundamental forces of nature are mediated via the exchange of virtual bosons between fermions composing the system. @$

Consequently, physical processes undergo temporal evolution only insofar as they comprise quantum mechanical systems possessing finite energy uncertainty, with the rates of the component processes determined by the magnitude of system energy uncertainty. A fermionboson quantum mechanical system may be thought of as an interconnected meshwork of temporal fermion energy transitions with spatial boson momentum transitions, with the fermion wavefunctions and boson wavefunctions being antisymmetric and symmetric, respectively, so that increasing the density of interacting fermions and bosons within a particular region of spacetime results in a decrease in the energy uncertainty and increase in the momentum uncertainty of the vacuum state, respectively. November 1996

Any wavefunction may be alternately represented as a sum of symmetric and antisymmetric wavefunctions. If one calculates the probability density function for a wavefunction in this new representation, one is tempted to give some physical interpretation of the three distinct components which result. X*X = X*symXsym + X*antiXanti + 2X*symXanti The first term represents the probability function resulting from the mutual interaction of bosons while the second term represents the probability function resulting from the mutual interaction of fermions.

The third term may represent the probability function resulting from the interaction of bosons and fermions with each other. July 1997

In Fourier analysis, a function which satisfies the prn=Dirichlet conditions, may always be represented as a prn=Fourier sum of weighted sine and cosine functions of the bounded variables. @$We note here that this function may be represented as either purely even or purely odd, i.e., as either purely a Fourier sum of cosine functions or sine functions, provided that the appropriate transformation of the coordinate system is performed within which the Fourier expansion is to be computed. In direct analogy to what has been said concerning Fourier analysis, we may say that through a judicious transformation of the spacetime coordinates, we may represent an arbitrary wavefunction as either of purely even parity or of purely odd parity. The notable exception to this is what we cannot do, however: take a wavefunction of purely even parity and transform the coordinate system so that this function is now represented as possessing purely odd parity, or vice versa. Continuing with our analogy, we cannot represent a sine function in terms of a sum of cosine functions and so on. We cannot do this, as was said, through a transformation of the spacetime coordinates, however, an odd function can be readily converted into an even function and vice versa through the mere addition of a phase factor ( of pi/2 ) within the argument of the function we wish to transform. We know that if an operator does not commute with the Hamiltonian operator, then the observable corresponding to the first operator cannot be a conserved quantity. Conversely, any operator which commutes with the Hamiltonian will be tied to a change in the total energy of the system if this operator itself suffers any changes. It is well known that parity is conserved within the theory of both the electromagnetic and strong nuclear interactions. This is all to suggest that an alteration of the momentum-energy tensor through the judicious insertion of phase factors into each momentum and energy eigenfunction, may result in a transformation of the momentumenergy eigenfunction, Psi(x,y,z,t), without altering the momentumenergy tensor, Ti,k itself. (See spontaneous symmetry breaking in gauge theory and its artifact exchange boson, which results from the transition

from global to local field symmetry) This is just saying that the wavefunction representing the quantum mechanical system with momentum-energy tensor, Ti,k, is itself degenerate with respect to the phase. We may deduce from this that matter cannot exist in either a purely fermionic or purely bosonic state. Otherwise, we would be in a position to alter the tensor, Ti,k, describing this matter distribution, through a non-coordinate transformation, namely, through the mere introduction of an arbitrary nonperiodic phase factor into the energy eigenfunction representing this mass distribution. This would constitute a stark violation of the Equivalence Principle of General Relativity which implies that each distinct stress-momentum-energy distribution, as represented by T, uniquely correlates to a distinct curvature of the spacetime metric. To wit, matter must always exist as a mixed system of fermions and bosons, namely, any given real matter distribution must be described by a wavefunction which is neither purely symmetric nor purely antisymmetric. This figures into the necessity of any quantum field giving rise to virtual particles. November 1996

By calculating expectation values for various observables for the quantum vacuum, such as , , , , etc., we may be able to exploit our intuitions about what X*qX(vac), where q is the observable in question, must be in order to guess at the probable relationships of these various vacuum expectation values. The relativistic effects upon kinematics (space and time) are grounded in the relativistic effects upon the dynamics through the conservation of momentum-energy. We believe, for instance, that the relativistic contraction of the positional uncertainty of a particle, say, and the relativistic time dilation (of the particle's lifetime, if it is unstable), do not lie behind the dilation of /\p and contraction of /\E, respectively through the Heisenberg uncertainty relations. This would be to ground dynamical effects in mere kinematics. Rather, the kinematics should be grounded in the dynamics: the effects on space and time are epiphenomenal to the substantive effects associated with the conservation of momentum-energy. This is thought to take place

through the Heisenberg uncertainty relations for position/momentum and time/energy. Changes in the components of the momentum-energy tensor cause alterations in the tensor of stress-momentum-energy uncertainty. We may suppose that the presence of real fermions reduces the number of available vacuum fermionic energy states while the presence of real bosons increases the number of available virtual bosonic momentum states, relative to the reduced number of virtual fermionic energy states. In this manner, more virtual energy transitions occurring within the vacuum state must be effected via similar transitions occurring within the massive body in question. This situation is consistent with the effect mass has upon the surrounding vacuum of simultaneously decreasing the energy uncertainty and increasing the momentum uncertainty radially about the gravitating massive body. A general result of the preceding discussion is that the accumulation of mass - energy, more particularly binding energy, within a volume of spacetime causes a corresponding reduction in the density of energy uncertainty (vacuum energy), in turn resulting in a corresponding decrease in the rate at which physical processes occur within this particular region of spacetime. How are we to understand so-called energy-degenerate transitions within the vacuum state, which is to say, transitions within the vacuum state not involving a change in the vacuum's energy? The degenerate wavefunctions represent the possibility of change which falls outside of the physically temporal. An important question in this connection is whether gravitational time dilation shall have any effect upon the frequency of energy degenerate transitions. Is the density matrix an approximation made in lieu of the actual wavefunction which we are for merely practical reasons unable to specify, or does a quantum system sometimes not possess a bona fide wavefunction at all? What relation does the 2nd rank tensor relating two different virtual particle current densities have to the momentum-energy tensor of GR...to the metric tensor of GR? Would an exceedingly intense beam of coherent electromagnetic radiation (laser beam) result in a kind of anti-squeezed state? This might have the precisely opposite effect to that of the Casimir Effect which normally induces an expansion

of the momentum uncertainty along two orthogonal directions to the axis along which the conducting plates are oriented. A question here is whether the momentum uncertainty along the time axis (the energy uncertainty) is also dilated due to a squeezing of the momentum uncertainty between the plates. The token reflexives, here and now, seem to presuppose the token-reflexive, I, or me. Conversely, the tokenreflexives, I, or me, seem to equally presuppose the token-reflexives, here and now. This seems to suggest that the nonlocal connections, manifested in the relations of virtual particles/fields to abstract spacetime may also be essential in mediating the individual consciousness of observers interacting with spacetime. Within the context of an expanding universe, then, matter does not merely alter the density of the vacuum, but also alters the rate at which the density of the vacuum energy decreases with time due to cosmological expansion, and since the time rate of change in energy density is, itself, a physical process, matter, by reducing the energy uncertainty of the vacuum, also causes a radially varying vacuum field energy density which manifests itself as a spherically symmetric energy gradient centered about a mass which is identical to the gravitational field! July 2011 There is an exponential relationship involved here with the effect of cosmological expansion upon the time rate of change of vacuum energy density. The discrete cosmological redshift may be understood in terms of the model suggested here, c.f., WKB approximation of electron tunneling problem. Certain versions of Modified Newtonian Dynamics (MOND) call for a gravitational “constant” with an exponential factor giving rise to the small anomalous constant acceleration which has been observed producing inaccuracies in the charting of deep space probe trajectories, c.f., Pioneer Anomaly and the papers of au=P. W. Anderson. Changes in the composition of the total energy density of a region of space with respect to the proportions of mass - energy and vacuum energy are reflected in the transformation of the spatio-temporal variation in vacuum energy density from being purely temporal, in the case of free space, to a mixture of two parts, temporal and spatial, in the case of typical distributions of matter, to a purely spatial variation of

vacuum energy density, in the case of black hole masses; and there is a homologous mapping between the degree of tipping of the Minkowski light cone in curved spacetimes and the degree of transformation of a temporally varying vacuum energy into one which is purely spatial in its variation. Within curved spacetimes, the local value of the velocity of light is reduced below its normal value in "free space," and this may be envisioned as a narrowing of the hypersolid angle swept out by the Minkowski light cone centered at a given point within this region possessing a gravitational potential. This contraction in the area of the hypersurface of the Minkowski light cone may be alternately described in terms of a light cone which suffers no contraction of its hypersurface area, but a decrease in the uniform density of vacuum energy occupying the uncontracted light cone surface, and hence @$the equivalence of the spacetime curvature with the spatiotemporal variation in vacuum energy density. If we are correct in positing an exact equivalence between spacetime curvature and spatio-temporal variations in the density of the vacuum's zero-point energy, then the phenomenon of particle production in a spatially or temporally varying spacetime curvature, or via the equivalence principle, due to the effects of noninertial motion, may be explained alternatively in terms of spatial or temporal variations in the boundary conditions on the vacuum field such that spatial or temporal variations in its zero-point energy result. In this scenario, the existence of real particles is understood as just a manifestation of zero-point energy from the vantage point of a noninertial frame of reference or equivalently, from the standpoint of a region of the vacuum possessing "less restrictive" boundary conditions than the region of the vacuum in which the particles appear. On account of the precisely thermal spectrum of the particles produced within curved spacetimes and also due to the unique requirement of a thermal spectrum for the vacuum itself in order that it possess Lorenz invariance, an entropy may be meaningfully assigned to both the vacuum as well as the particles produced from it as a result of the imposed vacuum boundary conditions.

June 2011

There must be a degeneracy in how energy uncertainty in the vacuum is transformed into 3-momentum uncertainty such that entropy is increased, i.e., there is a choice among alternative ways to effect this transformation that is not determined by the initial and boundary conditions. For example, lifting a particle out of a gravitational potential and allowing it to fall back to its starting point involves a pathdependence in addition to creating an “open loop” in spacetime and so necessarily involves the production of some entropy. “The equivalence principle strongly suggests that freely falling motion in a gravitational field should be viewed as analogous to inertial motion in pre-relativity physics and special relativity, c.f., cit=Teaching General Relativity, arXiv:gr-qc/0511073v1 14 Nov 2005. So what determines the local velocity of light does so by determining the local velocity of cosmological expansion. @$ See the relationship between quantum entanglement, polarization and magnetization, electric field permittivity and magnetic field permeability, Heisenberg 3-momentum and energy uncertainty, spin-0, spin-1 and composite spin-2 correlated vacuum fluctuations, Einstein’s causality principle versus the so-called Bohm’s causality principle. Since this production of particles from the vacuum state due to imposed boundary conditions is a reversible process, because the particles are reabsorbed if the boundary conditions are later removed, the change in the entropy of the vacuum field must be exactly compensated by the entropy increase due the particle creation so that the total entropy of the particle - vacuum system is a constant. The Feynman path integral technique for calculating the ground state energies of atoms may ( in principle ) similarly be utilized to calculate the ground state energy of the vacuum state of free space or, indeed, the vacuum state of a region of space in which a gravitational field is present. It is probable that fewer paths comprise the Feynman integral where a gravitational field is present than in the free space vacuum; this limits the number of valid available paths along which energy may be exchanged between two points in this particular region of spacetime - hence the reduced value of

the integral, and in turn, the decreased value of the vacuum state energy in this region. The reduced number of Feynman paths, or histories, means that the vacuum's ability to exchange energy with itself, as well as its ability to exchange energy with particles and fields, and thusly to mediate the exchange of energy between particles and fields among themselves, is correspondingly diminished so that the rate at which the vacuum's energy density decreases with time ( due to the expansion of the universe ) is likewise diminished. In light of the diminished self-energy of the vacuum, the resultant increased inertial mass of particles within this altered vacuum may be viewed in two distinct, but fundamentally similar ways. First, the diminished capacity of the vacuum to undergo energy exchange with itself means that it is more difficult for the gravitational field energy to redistribute itself in response to changes in the matter distribution within the altered vacuum state; consequently, by the general equivalence of gravitational and inertial masses, it follows that there is an equal difficulty for matter configurations to change their distributions in response to impressed external forces attempting to accelerate these mass configurations. This is further theoretical evidence for the complementary relationship between the mass energy density and the vacuum energy density which together define the total energy density of any particular region of spacetime. Moreover, if there are already existing particles both prior and subsequent to the imposition of the vacuum boundary conditions, then the masses of these previously existing particles is expected to increase in accordance with the decrease in the vacuum energy density (and vice versa); this is consistent with viewing particle production more generally as an increase in mass within the region of varying vacuum energy - as the conversion of vacuum energy into mass - energy: the fraction by which particle masses are increased in transporting them from a region of higher vacuum energy density to one of lower density must complement the fraction by which the vacuum energy density decreases between these two points. This means that the maximum density of mass possible within a certain

spherical region is equal to the maximum density of particles which may be created from the vacuum energy occupying this region, via excitation of the vacuum state. We arrive at the interesting result that the density of the vacuum energy in a certain spherical volume of free space (where no mass-energy is present) is precisely equal to the mass-energy density of a black hole which could possible occupy this same volume. One important idea which suggests itself within the context of this discussion is the famous cosmological constant problem and the discordant interpretations of it within quantum theory and general relativity theory. There is a 46 order of magnitude discrepancy between the calculations of the value of this constant within these two theories, hence the profound difficulties in developing a consistent theory of quantum gravity! Now if the energy of the vacuum is interpreted as suggested by the work of Sakharov and more recently by the zero-point energy gravitation theory of Hal Puthoff then rather than being, itself, a source of gravitational fields, like particle or field energy, the energy of the vacuum would merely be the mediator of gravitation so that differences in gravitational potential would correspond exactly to differences in the energy density of the vacuum at two different points in spacetime. A uniform distribution of vacuum field energy would therefore have no more effect upon matter particles within this energy distribution than would a series of concentric mass shells upon the matter particles contained within them; which is to say, no effect whatever, and this due to the precise mutual cancellation of the combined perturbations to the matter particles by the fluctuating vacuum energy field. Thus, only differences in vacuum energy density would have any meaning so that the overall vacuum energy density would play no role in the definition of Einstein's cosmological constant, and there would be no necessity of postulating a unique exchange particle mediating the gravitational force; gravity would not in this case be viewed as a fundamental force as are the electromagnetic, strong and weak nuclear forces, but would be understood as a "parasitic" force stemming from the imposing of boundary conditions upon the combined vacuum electromagnetic, strong and weak nuclear fields which together owe their existence to the fundamental energy uncertainty of the vacuum state, described by an

energy Hamiltonian which is a function of incompatible observables. The pure imaginary momentum of all "rest masses" within the 4 hyperspherical cosmological model may be justified beyond its value as a convenient mathematical formalism if these masses are viewed as presently being in the act of tunneling through a hyperspherically symmetric potential barrier. The gradient of this hyperspherical potential would be a four - vector with components 1,2, and 3 vanishing in free space, but transforming through multiplication by a tensor into a new four - vector with non-vanishing spatial components, resulting in the appearance of a gravitational field. Certainly this tensor is the matter-stress-energy tensor described in the field equations of Einstein; the only difference is that the vacuum energy does not contribute to the value of T, the matter-stress-energy tensor, which is responsible for altering the metric tensor which describes the curvature of spacetime, or alternatively, the spatiotemporal variation in the vacuum field energy density. It is perhaps now easier to see at an intuitive level why the field equations of general relativity predict the existence of a universe which is either globally contracting or expanding: unless the energy density of the vacuum field is temporally varying in free space, the matter-stressenergy tensor operates upon a zero four-vector (representing the gradient of the hyperspherical potential) and the introduction of matter distributions, represented by the matter-stress-energy tensor, into this vacuum field, cannot produce a non-zero four-vector, namely, nonvanishing spatial components of the free space four-vector, i.e., a gravitational field. Within this particular cosmological model, the energy, linear 4-momentum, and angular 4-momentum of a particle is always conserved, regardless of motions or accelerations which it might undergo as a result of interactions with other particles and fields. We are saying here that gravitation is, itself, a four-vector, whose magnitude is always conserved independently of the matter distribution. The matter-stress-energy distribution within a particular volume of space merely alters the decomposition of this four-vector into a new set of vector components in much the same way that a boost, rotation or

translation produces a new decomposition of the Minkowski four-vector which describes the instantaneous world segment of a particle; hence, matter distributions manifest themselves as tensor fields in spacetime. If the gravitational field owed its existence to the presence of matter-stressenergy distributions in spacetime, then we would certainly describe the gravitational field as being itself a tensor field; however, the gravitational field is actually a conserved four-vector ( in the sense that the magnitude of this vector is conserved ), and this four-vector owes its existence to the inverse square decrease in the vacuum's zero-point energy density in combination with the inverse cubic decrease in the mass-energy density which results due to the process of cosmological expansion. The action of matter distributions, however, must be described in terms of a tensor field; again, the gravitational field, itself, is not a tensor field; the action of mass upon this field is, however, tensorial in nature. As we know, from the many discussions of attempts to produce quantum gravity theories, quantization of a 2nd order tensor field results in the appearance of a spin 2 boson which acts as the unique exchange particle mediating the tensor field. The fourdimensional zero-point energy gradient does not transform itself with time in free space in a manner which necessitates a tensor description; consequently, gravitons will not be present in free space as vacuum field fluctuations; however, any valid theory of quantum gravity ( assuming one is possible ) demands, along with the uncertainty principle, that the total vacuum field contain virtual gravitons in its mix of fluctuating energy, but because a tensor does not describe the transformation with time of the free space vacuum, the quantization of the total free space vacuum field cannot include spin 2 particles, which is to say, the free space quantum mechanical vacuum does not possess virtual gravitons and hence does not possess (per se) gravitational field fluctuations. Consequently, gravitons do not exist in regions where matter distributions are present so that the search for gravitational waves must turn out to be a fruitless endeavor. Another way in which the imaginary coefficient may be justified is to note that the rate at which the vacuum energy density decreases with

time is proportional to the vacuum energy density itself, just as are the time rates of all physical processes, so that if the vacuum energy density is reinterpreted as its probability density (in terms of the square of the vacuum wavefunction amplitude), then the negative exponential time evolution of the vacuum probability density implies that the vacuum has a purely imaginary four - momentum with a four velocity of magnitude c. The effect of accelerations, for instance, upon a particle is merely to change the distribution of its total linear/angular momentum within the conserved 4-quantity. The perhelion shift in the orbit of Mercury, predicted by general relativity, may be simply understood as a cyclic redistribution of the planet's 4-angular momentum as it moves around its orbit so that the 3-dimensional projection of it 4-angular momentum varies sinusoidally with the orbital period; this causes Mercury's 3angular momentum to be slightly greater than that predicted by classical mechanics, producing the observed advance in perhelion. The black hole, as noted earlier, represents mass-energy in its most compressed state. For maximum symmetrical energy exchange between any two shells occupying a given volume of matter ( of uniform density ) where the density of vacuum energy exchanges is proportional to the density of the vacuum energy itself, we require that the density of mass-energy decrease with the inverse square because certainly the density of bundled energy trajectories (along which all energy exchanges occur) must also fall off with the inverse square due simply to the geometry of spherically symmetric radiation of energy in 3 dimensions. We expect the density of exchange energy, due to vacuum field fluctuations, to be proportional to the density of energy so exchanged because it has already been established that the rate at which all physical processes occur is proportional to the density of Heisenberg-uncertain energy (vacuum energy) and the decrease in the density of this energy with the expansion of the universe is itself a physical process; moreover, there is a vectorial continuity equation, analogous to a field equation of Maxwell's, which describes the relationship of spatial and temporal variations in the density of the vacuum field energy so that the spatial variation of this zero-point energy will have the same structure as the temporal variation of the zero-point energy due to cosmological

expansion. The question then arises, " what is the structure of this variation in vacuum energy density in free space, where no mass-energy is present?" Well, the density of the vacuum zero-point energy is only meaningful as a physical quantity in relation to the density of the mass-energy just as the energy of a particle is only meaningful in relation to the energy of the vacuum state, so the general time variation in the mass-energy density due to cosmological expansion should give us a clue to the manner in which the vacuum energy density changes with time; provided that our hypothesis of a dynamic vacuum energy mechanism for gravitational fields is fundamentally correct. Therefore, if we postulate this vacuum mechanism, then it is clear that the time variation of the vacuum energy density in the universe due to cosmological expansion must be such that the ratio of the temporal variation in vacuum energy and mass-energy has the same mathematical structure as the spatial variation in the ratio of these two densities about massive bodies which acts as a gravitational potential. Since the gravitational potential decreases inverse linearly so that the strength of the gravitational field itself decreases with the inverse square, and since the density of vacuum energy (zero-point energy) must be smaller in stronger gravitational potentials than at weaker ones because gravitational time dilation increases in step with the increasing potential, it follows that the ratio of mass-energy to vacuum energy must decrease inverse linearly to mimic the inverse linear variation in the magnitude of gravitational time dilation; remember that gravitational time dilation is owing to a decrease in available exchange energy with which all physical processes are mediated. Hence, since the decrease in massenergy is with the inverse cube, the decrease in vacuum energy must itself be with the inverse square. At this point we note that the decrease in black hole energy density is with the inverse square of black hole radius. We are therefore led to think of a black hole as constituting the maximum density of mass-energy possible in the sense that all energy exchanges occurring within the volume of space occupied by the black hole, occur between the black hole and itself, symmetrically, with no

exchange energy left over to mediate matter-vacuum energy exchanges. This is presumably why the intensity of gravitational time dilation is infinite at the surface of a black hole; the vacuum energy fluctuation field (zero-point energy) no longer interacts with the black hole mass so that no physical processes (which can be communicated to the "outside") are mediated. As stated earlier, it the interaction of the vacuum zeropoint energy with quantum mechanical systems which is wholly responsible for all changes in the quantum mechanical observables in the system, i.e., temporality of the system. The theory of quantum electrodynamics explains the propagation of fermions and bosons in the following manner: a massless photon propagates through spacetime by continually transforming into an e+e- pair and back again into a photon of identical energy (assuming a flat spacetime), while an electron propagates through spacetime by continually transforming into I thought I would write you, first of all, to thank you for the interpretive astrological chart you mailed to me a couple of days ago. I could have done so by telephone, but somehow it's more sincere to reciprocate by writing you - thanks so much for the time and consideration you must have put into constructing it, as well as explaining its obviously portentous, if to me somewhat cloudy significance. Even if it turns out that you have enlisted the aid of a computing device in interpreting it, I remain flattered, nonetheless, by the obvious attention. I have always known that the horoscopes appearing in your average city newspaper are very much like fortune-cookie messages. They are so ambiguous that, combined with human suggestibility ( cause for the unreasonable effectiveness of natural languages ), the component words can't help but conspire to form an intriguing personal insight, fleeting, as it usually turns out. In the case of this "a boy's first astrological reading," I'm sentimental in thinking that my chart, lovingly prepared by you, does, in fact, contain some important hints and warnings which I might do well to meditate on.

Your claim, through the chart, that I need to "do more Leo things," and that I need to seek out persons with a lot of energy in their earth and air signs in order to balance the plethora of energy flowing from my water trine (sp?), seems to be really good advice. Also, the fact that the north node of my moon, representing my path of highest potential, is opposed by Saturn, representing the influence of my father, or perhaps fatherly influences, appears to explain chronic problems I've had in the past in self-definition and development. I confess, Leslie, that I haven't given enough thought to the other messages in my chart. I have already ordered the book, Inner Sky, from Eliot's, and I've promised myself that I will return to the study of my personal chart anew, once I feel I've gleaned enough of a working knowledge from reading, or skipping through the book. Getting back to the ambiguity question. Astrology probably possesses too few built-in constraints upon its interpretive procedures, the number and variety of which having steadily increased over the millennia, compared to its relatively smaller and constant number of possible symbolic structures - notwithstanding the discovery of a few new planets. I nonetheless feel that it is valuable as a metaphor in a couple of different ways. Firstly, it acknowledges the fact, kept secret since the Enlightenment, I think, that the development, or unfolding, if you will, of history is by no means linear or logical, but at once cyclical and suprarational: history, both that of civilizations as well as that of individual persons, repeats itself interminably, though never exactly in the same way twice. It is an inextricably intertwined dance between the act of creation and the act of interpretation. If History seems so amenable to a systematic interpretation, it is only because so many of the great human figures who have played a role in shaping it have, themselves, been serious students of history. Secondly, the social relationships which form between persons place them in various mutual orbits which help to realize or inhibit their multiple though not altogether consistent potentialities, determining more fully their identity and, hence, their life's fate. Assimilating the basic handful of distinct personality archetypes to their analogous astrological signs opens up a rich interpretive structure within which the transformative or stultifying effects of each personality type upon the other may be predicted and

explained. The positions of the various planets within our Solar system move along cyclical courses, to be sure, but they never exactly repeat any of their previously held configurations - contrary to what the best of eighteenth century science might have had to say about it. This seems to grace existence with a richness of multiple potentialities. 07/98 And now, we will practice Microsoft Word by taking notes on Jacques Derrida,"The Retrait of Metaphor," which was published in ENCLITIC 2:2 (1978): 5-33. As we know, the editors point out that the article works with two semantic systems for the word RETRAIT, which has a variety of meanings in French. The reason that words tend to have myriad meanings is that words coined to denote things or activities within some original context are borrowed for use in an unfamiliar or less familiar one. But the first denotative terms were actually metaphor since various images were being assimilated over time (in the subjective experience of primitive man) to the notion of a thing which appeared and reappeared. So objects are distilled out of the flux of experience in the developing feedback between the infant and his environment and constitute a kind of reified metaphor. September 2011 au=Nozick notes that au=Frege held the view that “concepts cannot be referred to (as concepts).” And this is what the Self really is. This is somewhat Kantian and is along the lines of what Piaget says about cognitive development in the sensorimotor stage: the infant learns through interacting with a reactive environment that the image of her hand moving, the sound it makes when it strikes a mobile hanging over her crib, the feeling in her hand, the kinesthetic sensations in the arm and shoulder muscles are all part of the same “thing.” This integration of sensation has to be learned from experience. Existence definitely precedes essence and objects in the external world and the Self emerge from the flux of dissociated

sensation simultaneously. We commonly here of the “thrownness” of the individual. More correct here is to speak of the thrownness of the self and its world together in a single act. @$Information never once entered one’s developing infantile brain. Rather, data streamed in the form of trains of neural impulses into one’s developing brain via the various sensory nerve channel and were interpreted in terms of contextproviding structures, which were in the midst of being developed by you or, rather, these context-providing structures and your ego/self were hand-in-hand simultaneously developing. Metaphor represents the right brain version of the left brain/analytical activity of the instantiation of abstract categories. September 2011 Metaphor cuts across the established lines along which abstract categories are fashioned and seeks a larger umbrella category for two or more contexts whereas abstraction or abstract thought consistently works within a single context. This distinction is akin to that between disciplinary and interdisciplinary theoretical research. There is always somewhat of an insight involved in the use of metaphor and it’s a linguistic competency not likely to ever be equaled by a machine. When we learn a language this latent structure of metaphor lying at various levels beneath the surface of language is subconsciously assimilated and it conditions and delimits all thought, even at its most creative. Especially then. “Rich as the English language is in media of expression, it is curiously lacking in terms suitable to the conveyance of abstract philosophical premises. A certain intuitive grasp of the subtler meanings concealed within groups of inadequate words is necessary therefore to an understanding of the ancient Mystery Teachings”, c.f., The Secret Teachings of All Ages. Now mostly what Heidegger does when he's doing metaphysics is to unearth this latent structure by going back, he thinks, much closer to where it originated. Usually in the Greek. When you read Heidegger

you realize that, at bottom, that's all metaphysics really is - it's just archeology of language, the "mining" of latent metaphors which are masquerading as purely denotative concepts or logical categories. When I'm doing metaphysics, I always feel that I'm not completely in control of what I'm thinking and sometimes I feel like I'm more or less a passive vessel into which insights flow and intuitions crystallize. And that's because I think that I'm supposed to be utilizing clear and distinct categories although I'm really utilizing metaphor. All of the time, in fact. This is why logocentrism doesn’t really work. And logocentrism is itself the kwd=reification of a metaphor and does not really qualify as a truly denotative concept. Deconstruction deconstructs itself. The statement that absolute truth is false cannot be absolutely true! Deconstruction is a giant case of question-begging, I think. In instantiation of a concept or logical category, the grasping of a particular is prefigured in the pre-existing concept or form which is not expanded or enlarged through this re-cognition under the concept of one of its concrete particulars. In metaphor, however, there is a creative interpretation of the unknown or unfamiliar through the importation of a contextual web of associations (based in experience) as opposed to logical relations or abstract categories.. A static, stable order in the old context becomes a dynamic ordering principle whenever it is transplanted into the new context. The dynamism is generated by the reactivity of the new context as ground into which a seed or viral contaminant of foreign meaning is introduced. In metaphor an inductive as opposed to a deductive step is taken which enlarges the original category that was borrowed. And all of the entities treated of denotatively are, as alluded to already, metaphorical constructs. This is what makes metaphor open-ended and irreducible in the scope of its action, as well as translogical. Because logic presupposes metaphorical relationships and so the process by which formal categories are generally brought about cannot itself be given a formal description, which is to say, no formal description can be given for how formal descriptions are generally brought into being. Metaphor, which is

prelogical, underlies the production of all formal categories/abstract concepts. This idea seems to support au=Alan Watts’ critique of the presumably inviolate principle come down to us from the ancient Greek philosophers of ex nihilo nihil fit. September 2011 “Discover all that you are not — body, feelings, thoughts, time, space, this or that — nothing, concrete or abstract, which you perceive can be you. The very act of perceiving shows that you are not what you perceive.” [italics mine] Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj, I am That. One of the systems has to do with retreats, retracings, withdrawals, and soon: leading to questions of economy, pathway, passage, and circulation. The second system has to do with erasure/rubbing but also usury, by which use and wear BUILD UP or increase value/meaning. There are two kinds of metaphor - two senses in which metaphor is a "Retrait." The first is the interpretation of the new in terms of the old. The second is the reverse of this: the reinterpretation of the old in terms of the new, such as a metaphor, suggested, for example, by new social relations enabled by developments in technology. An example of this might be the drawing of an analogy between the rise of the Internet and the World Wide Web's impact upon postmodernity and the social/cultural impact of the printing press upon the Renaissance in Europe ( in terms of the freeing-up of individualism). By making of history a Palimpsest, we make the transition (passage) into the future less discontinuous and more comprehensible. March 2014

One definite advantage of the Internet for the creative process that is usually overlooked is its value as inspirational of lone creativity that should have otherwise second-guessed itself into quietude, even in the absence of forum-like context. Similar to how astrophysicists are able to “observe” stellar evolution “over the course off billions of years” during a career of 30 or 40 years, one can simulate communication and collaboration through the deft posing questions to a sophisticated online search engine. In this way the ego and the personal are more or less altogether bracketed out. Search engine serendipity is an art. The

bracketing out of common, ordinary and routine search terms, in combination with the use of terms as “targeting tags” with which these general search terms of usually associated, is an online search strategy that is more likely to yield the kind of surprising and counterintuitive search engine results capable of stimulating new directions in thought, if not an altogether breakthrough insight, than is the mere stacking of search terms in an attempt to progressively sieve information on the Web to unearth that wondrous clue to one knows not what. “Wornness, worn-outness, will be important here as well, since Derrida will be talking about metaphor as something old, something coming near its end. Is Derrida talking about the ending of History in the sense of the end of grand narratives?” Myth is metaphysics clothed in metaphor. The most fundamental myth is that of the Ego or Self-consciousness. The Ego is the most fundamental of myths because it represents the operation of metaphor at its most fundamental: consciousness is an unbounded flux which is in continual change along a determined but not predetermined path. The Ego possesses continuity throughout this fluxion despite its always being the artifact of an ever changing ground. The Ego always manages to reconstitute itself as such against this changing, grounding flux of altering consciousness. The Ego in the present moment is always the importation of a structure from the previous momentary ground (consciousness) into a new one all the while remaining the self same Ego. Sorry if I’m belaboring the obvious. Derrida begins by pointing out that metaphor works with these notions of passage and circulation: inhabiting, transporting oneself, passing through, and so on: all of this is of course is good for poetry in general, and given my fixation, for Vallejo in particular. A key initial idea is that while we think we "use" metaphor, it in fact comprehends us, sweeps us away, displaces us: we aren’t like a pilot in his ship, we’re DRIFTING, skidding.

The importation of the structuring of the old ground from the preceding moment manages always (or almost always) to impose a new structure upon the newly emerging ground which returns the Ego to itself. This return of the Self to Itself continually, all the while the ground of consciousness fluctuates underneath it, represents the power of metaphor in its greatest generality. For this reason we might term Mind the metaphor of all metaphors. And that is inevitable, for no speech is possible without metaphor. [It is not clear to me why Derrida thinks metaphor is coming to the end of its life he says it’s old, does he say how he knows it’s almost “retiring” (he says it is retiring)?] But here comes something: because it’s old, it has MORE and not less weight: a lot is attached to metaphor. Metaphor is "a suspensive withdrawal and return supported by the line (TRAIT) delimiting a contour" (9) [this again is good for Vallejo]. Now he asks why we privilege Heidegger’s text (he doesn’t say which text) on this topic. It seems to be because of H_s concentration on TRAIT, in the sense of line, the "tracing incision of language" (10). Now D reveals two of H_s titles: DER SATZ VOM GRUND and UNTERWEGS ZUR SPRACHE. He also reminds us, in his inimitable way, that he will quote himself ("WHITE MYTHOLOGY: Metaphor in the Text of Philosophy") but this is not in order to draw attention to himself but rather, so as not to have to repeat here what he said there (yeah, yeah, Jacques-baby). This is getting difficult. D is going to slip himself through one of H_s notes on metaphor - in which "the metaphoric exists only within the boundaries of metaphysics" - as discussed by Ricoeur in LA METAPHORE VIVE, whose eighth essay, in turn, discusses D_s "White Mythology" piece. [Gossip: the current piece by Derrida was read at a symposium in Geneva where Ricoeur also read.] Anyway, the point is that we will be relating metaphor and metaphysics here, in the above sense, which the metaphoric exists only within the boundaries of

metaphysics. [Guessing: as we know, D wants to get beyond metaphysics, so I suppose this article will try to lead us beyond metaphor: let’s see, that’s interesting, it sounds THEOLOGICAL to me and I know D would probably hate me for thinking so.] D says R didn’t pay enough attention this point of H_s. So now he will critique R. First point. R, according to D, assimilates D too easily to H. Second point. More on R_s misreading of "White Mythology;" overassimilation to H. [Not having read "WM" or the Heidegger piece on it, it’s hard for me to comment here.] [Gossip: D comes from a repressive family background, I can tell, he’s like me, keeps saying "but that’s not what I said, how can you attribute it to me" - he is very fixated on being precisely understood, I agree intellectually with that feeling, but what I am gossiping about here is his tone.] Here, he’s also mad at R because, D says, R criticizes D from the place to which D had himself carried the critique. A key point appears to be that according to R, "WM" makes death or dead metaphor is watchword - this idea offends D (note though that R_s text is called LIVE METAPHOR). What D purports to really be talking about is the TWO DEATHS or SELF-DESTRUCTIONS OF METAPHOR [he doesn’t explain this here; we have to read "WM" which I’m beginning to suspect is more interesting than the piece at hand]. Now we talk about economy. A. usury B. the law of the house C. EREIGNIS [?] D. passage, fraying, transfer, translation, withdrawal (because, I intuit, metaphor TODAY is withdrawing, according to D). Now we look at mother-tongue and father-language again, complicated little arguments, my first guess here is that mother-tongue is not metaphoric, but father-language is metaphorical and metaphysical, has to do with formal language, the law, and so forth. Retreat, tracing, translation_let_s talk about "traits," then. We need metaphor when we can_t get to Being_if we could get there, there would

be no metaphor. And, what Heidegger calls metaphysics ITSELF corresponds to a withdrawal of Being. So we only get out of metaphysical/metaphorical discourse by a withdrawal of the withdrawal of Being. [SIDE NOTE: COMPARE TO THE NIETZCHEAN TALK ON MINERALS IN THE YES: COMPARED> TO THAT, THIS SEEMS VERY WESTERN AND ENCLOSED, AND COMPARED TO EASTERN RELIGION, WELL, NEED I SAY MORE?] Anyway, what we_re going to get with metaphor is a series of retreats, withdrawals_this is how metaphor gets so complex_as it withdraws, it "gives place" to "an abyssal generalisation of themetaphoric." Being, like metaphor, "withdraws into its crypt" [VAMPIRES AGAIN! DOES THIS MAKE BEING A VAMPIRE? PROBABLY, DAS STIMMT, IT FITS.] BUT, and this is going to be important, we get a CATASTROPHE when metaphoricity no longer allows itself to be contained in its _metaphysical_ concept when (I THINK) metaphor stops being a metaphor of something that is absent (but whose absence is palpable, as in the absence of Abraham’s God). Existence is, of course, the contextualizing of Being. The withdrawal of Being would mean the loss of coherence of the ground of existence. Metaphor is the continual recontextualization of Being which maintains this coherence of ground. Metaphor, in its root and most basic manifestation, effectively simulates the continued presence of Being. But this is for some not satisfactory. One tragically desires the Being of the Other. The phenomena resulting from the very action of Being, Being’s metaphorical manifestation as existent entities falls short of this tragic desire for Being. But secretly the Being of the Self and the Being of the Other are one and the same. For one is the Other for the Other. But one can see from one’s own case, that one is more than merely the

Other for the Other! Metaphysics is the attempt to discursively describe what can only be glimpsed, which is the coherence of existence in the light of Being’s presencing as Other. Metaphysics tries to reconstitute Being from out of the coherence of Being’s existence even in Being’s absence. The immediacy of Being obviates the necessity of metaphysics as "ontological neurosis" caused by its withdrawal. On the other hand, the thrownness of Being is its thrownness as Self and Other simultaneously. September 2013 In the same way that the intersubjective falls short of the objective, the 3rd person based concept of consciousness falls short of the 1st person concept of consciousness and the 1 st falls short of the concept of consciousness from a/the 0th person perspective. This is no mere superficial appearance of induction. The 3rd person does not imply the 2nd and 1st persons as is pointed up by the notion of “philosophical zombies”, although the 2nd does imply the 1st just as the 1st implies the 0th as Alvin Plantinga suspected. The 1st does not imply the 2nd because of the ever-present specter of metaphysical solipsism. Continued play with these seemingly sophomoric notions may point up a heretofore unsuspected system or relation. The Self is a sociolinguistic construct. The self only emerges within the social environment of a linguistic community. Part of the process of learning any given task is that of the making of subvocalized, mental notes to oneself as one is attempting to perform and master the task. So this is here not entirely a case of learning by doing. But when it comes to learning the “task” of becoming minimally competent in one’s first language - this is entirely an example of “learning by doing”. The understanding of what one is doing appears later after the necessary preparation of ground. We have here the real thing in hand and we can dispense with saying what something is like. Our difficulties in having an authentic relationship with Being which would have powerfully validated the self stimulates in us an impulse to hatefully gossip - to talk bad about Being. Metaphysics is an attempt to deconstruct Being which is motivated by a dark, underlying necrophilic urge to tear down,

demystify, and demythologize the Other which seems to have rejected us, not unlike a haughty and unapproachable, would-be lover. But it is not Being which has done the rejecting here. Rather this necrophilic and destructive impulse, which manifests itself in the form of a metaphysics of Being, is precipitated not through Being’s callous rejection of us, but on account of rage against impotence to intimately relate to Being. But there is another sort of metaphor in Heidegger, a non-metaphysical one. [AND AT THIS POINT, I AGAIN CONFESS I DON_T KNOW: I THINK DERRIDA READS HEIDEGGER MORE WESTERN- LY THAN I, AND THIS MAY BE CORRECT_BUT SOMEONE TELL ME SOMETHING ON HEIDEGGER, I READ HIS BEING IN SORT OF A ZEN SENSE, THOUGH I WOULD SAY HE IS MORE INTERESTED IN AN ANTHROPMORPHIC WHOLE THAN ARE THESE EASTERN TYPES _I GET THE STRANGE FEELING THAT I DON_T KNOW ENOUGH TO HAVE AN OPINION, BUT THAT ON THE OTHER HAND IF I KNEW ENOUGH TO OPINE I WOULD BE INSIDE THE DISCOURSE AND HAVE TO AGREE WITH IT. ] End of metalanguage, metaphysics, meta-rhetoric, but pure metaphoricity_ By now we_re talking about famous Heidegger lectures like "The Nature of Language." Metaphors, words, are INCISCIONS, tracings_as in wood-cuttings, gravures, engravings_and these incisions make possible graftings, so to speak, splicings_ and BEING ITSELF IS A DIVERGENCE, A SPLITTING, SOMETHING CONSTANTLY IN WITHDRAWAL, A BORDER [***AGAIN THINK VALLEJO, THIS IS VERY SUGGESTIVE FOR "LINDES"]_ITS INSCRIPTION SUCCEEDS ONLY IN BEING EFFACED (that_s the English translation, a more interesting affirmation than the French original “n_arrive qu_a s_effacer”)_being happens and comes about only in effacing itself_(there is more on this) The essence of speech is INCISION [this is interesting, we speak of "incisive arguments" but here speech IS incision]_INCISION BRINGS TOGETHER AND SEPARATES THE VEILING AND THE UNVEILING [now there_s a metaphorical phrase_;)) so today, metaphor is withdrawing, splicing,

un/joining. What is happening? “Rien, pas de reponse, sinon que de la metaphore le retrait se passe de lui-meme. I have often marvelled at how the movement of Being through time is at the selfsame, identical instant, both a passing away and a coming into being. In other words, the coming into being and the passing away of the Self within the flux of consciousness (during each passing instant) are grounded in the very same phenomena, and this paradox of passage is essential to the continuity of experienced time. 07/98

Representation is grounded in the participatory and the objective is no more “real” than the intersubjective. Representations are metaphors and convenient recapitulations of an open-ended historical process. All form is metaphor; the concrete always transcends the metaphorical. 07/98 dynamical system temporally evolves may be given a consistent definition in terms of the ratio of the density of energy exchanges of the system with its outside environment to the density of 3-momentum exchanges of the system with itself. By this definition, the most rapidly temporally evolving dynamical system would be that of the pristine quantum mechanical vacuum state - the quantum vacuum in the absence of real particles or fields. We must note that the notion of the absolute passage of time, i.e., the passage of time for reality as a whole, is a meaningless concept, or at least, a concept which cannot be given a selfconsistent formulation or interpretation. This fact is intimately related to the fact that a thermodynamic system to which the notion of entropy applies (the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics) is by definition an open system in the sense of a system undergoing continual energy exchange with a thermal reservoir or "heat bath." @$A completely closed system, as noted earlier, would possess initial and boundary conditions resulting in the quantizing of energy and momentum throughout the system giving it a closed state space and a Poincare recurrence time which would be indistinguishable from a finite 4th spatial dimension. In such a system, with time being spatialized, the notion of the direction of time is completely arbitrary - there is not outside to which the system is tied

which can serve as a memory of the history of the system to prevent the system from being completely reversible. The system would be ergodic and possess a conserved phase space volume. In perturbation theory within quantum mechanics, we find that an incompletely described dynamical system is approximated by a Hamiltonian possessing a perturbation energy which may be thought of as a system exactly described in terms of a Hamiltonian, H0, which is interacting with a larger energy system through the perturbation Hamiltonian, Hfluc which is simply added to H0 such that the new wavefunction calculated from this sum through the Schrodinger equation is just the new wavefunction expanded in terms of the old one defined in terms of H 0. In this way the actual system is seen to be the old system undergoing virtual transition between its energy eigenfunctions. The old system's energy uncertainty is represented in terms of the perturbation energy associated with the fluctuation Hamiltonian, Hfluc. In this way, it is seen that, in general, the temporal evolution of any quantum system is representable in terms of the interaction of an approximate system represented by a zeroeth order Hamiltonian, H0, with its outside environment from which is has originally been abstracted. When one has taken into account all possible perturbations due to real particles and fields interacting with the given system in question, one is left with the ineradicable residue of the quantum vacuum itself. So the concrete (and real) temporality of any quantum system, when the mere appearance of change in the system due to inadequacies in our nth order perturbation expansion description of the system have been taken into account, is wholly attributable to the action of the quantum mechanical vacuum. So we now come to an important distinction: changes in the system which are not directly measurable and hence understood as virtual transitions between energy levels of an approximate Hamiltonian description of the system versus transitions between energy levels of the system due to an actual incompleteness or openness of the system description due to ontological, i.e., actual, indeterminacy or indefiniteness of the system itself, as opposed to mere epistemological indefiniteness of the system which is a mere artifact of an incomplete quantum-perturbative analysis of the system. This is the distinction of ontological versus epistemological

energy uncertainty of a quantum mechanical system. This above discussion pertains to the distinction, made in an earlier letter, of /\E, which I have said may be wholly attributable to the observer, and the square rootcont’d Since momentum and position are incompatible observables, then so are a function of momentum and a function of position. Now the total energy of any quantum mechanical system, the Hamiltonian, H(p,r), is the sum of its kinetic and potential energies, H(p,r) = f(p) + f(r), where p and r are momentum and position, respectively. So by what has been said, H(p,r) cannot have a precise value - for this would imply simultaneously precise values for the kinetic and potential energies, which, in turn, would imply simultaneous values of p and r. So the value, H(p,r) must undergo fluctuations of a fundamental sort. Now even the vacuum is a quantum system, i.e., a qm ground state. @$So the vacuum's Hamiltonian, that is, its total energy, must also fluctuate. These fluctuations interact with every particle and field, introducing uncertainty in the location of particles in phase space, i.e., x-p space. All measurement does is alter the shape of the area of phase space "occupied" by the particle. Measurement does not change the area of phase space where this particle is likely to be found ("occupied" by this particle"), however. The particle does not possess an exact "position" within the x-p (phase) space. We can never say beforehand how the vacuum fluctuations interacting with the particle (and out of which the particle is constituted and sustained) will nonlocally resonate with the vacuum fluctuations interacting at the time of measurement with the observer's brain (the observer's brain is also a quantum system, BTW). Remember that qbar = sqrt[^q**2 - /\q**2 ] where ^q is the fluctuations of q due to the quantum vacuum and /\q is the uncertainty in q which may be wholly attributed to the observer's brain due to the influence of vacuum energy fluctuations upon it!. It is the cooperation of these two terms which results in qbar, the expectation value (classical value) of q! This perhaps reminds some of you of Huxley's theory of perception: the receipt of photons by the retina of the observer results in a stimulation of

the brain in such a way that its “ether wave filters” reconfigure so that the signals representing the object seen are no longer screened out by the consciousness reducing valve (the brain, that is) which are then "picked up". The brain is then conceived of as a kind of ether wave tuning device and perception is just an altering of the set of frequencies of ether waves (vacuum fluctuations, if you prefer modern parlance) which the vacuum can resonate with where the brain acts only as a hardware interface between two unbounded sets of interfering ether wave spectra. pru= The brain on this view is simply a changeable and complex set of boundary conditions placed upon the vacuum electromagnetic field's self-interaction! “What we see and hear, or what we feel and smell and taste, is only a small fraction of what actually exists out there. Our conscious model of reality is a lowdimensional projection of the inconceivably richer physical reality surrounding and sustaining us. Our sensory organs are limited: They evolved for reasons of survival, not for depicting the enormous wealth and richness of reality in all its unfathomable depth. Therefore, the ongoing process of conscious experience is not so much an image of reality as a tunnel through reality”, cit=The Ego Tunnel: The Science of the Mind and the Myth of the Self (au=Metzinger). Is there some general relationship between the height of the potential barrier and the magnitude of the energy uncertainty? Or is there really no general principle at work here relating these two quantities? H# = E# --> = --> = / **2 = **2 /\E = sQrt{ - **2} , where H = H(T(p),V(x)) What is the relationship between the reduction of the wavepacket upon an observation being performed on some quantum mechanical system and the conversion of virtual particles into real particles? It may be possible to modify Poisson's equation, @ 2P/@2r = 4pi(rho), to include a 2nd partial derivative of P, the potential, with respect to the

time such that we might assimilate the 2nd partial derivative with respect to r to the state variable, (rho)mass, and assimilate the 2nd partial derivative of P with respect to t to the state variable, (rho)vacuum, so that (rho) in the above equation may be interpreted as the space density which is a locally conserved quantity. Let us examine Einstein's field equation for any potential mathematical affinity it might have with respect to our equation relating the space energy density to the sum of the vacuum and mass energy densities. ====>

Tuv = -Ruv -1/2Rguv

Each of these three terms are what are called tensor densities. They have physical dimensions of energy density. In Mach's formula for the speed of pressure wave oscillations in a continuous, energy-conducting medium, the pressure is associated with the vacuum energy density since the quantum vacuum always obeys the equation of state that its pressure and energy density are identical. But this identification leaves only one possible further identification of the medium energy density; that is, the energy density must be identified with the total energy density of space, what is termed within our theory, the space density. In order for an entropy and temperature to be assigned to the quantum vacuum, we must suppose that this vacuum remains in thermal equilibrium with this heat reservoir, the energy density of which is the space density referred to earlier. Intuitively, if any further identifications are to be made between terms within our theory and terms within Einstein's theory, then the following identifications might be made: The scalar curvature, R, should be identified with the space density, the momentum-energy tensor, Tuv, should be identified with the massenergy density, and the term, -Ruv, should be identified with the vacuum

energy density. The term, guv, which in relativity theory is the dimensionless dot product of the spacetime coordinate unit vectors, eu and ev, may be alternatively interpreted to correspond to the ratio of sum of the momentum-energy and Riemannian tensor densities to the scalar energy density. Within our theory, the guv correspond to mixed 2nd order partial derivatives of the ratio of the sum of the vacuum scalar energy density to the total space energy density. xx virtual - virtual virtual |----------------------------| |---------------------------| | x x x | o o x | | x x x| xo | |x x x x | ox | | x x x | x o| | x x x x | x o | | x x x x | o x| |----------------------------| |--------------------------|

real - real

real -

|-------------------------| |o

oo

| o |

o

o|

| xo xx

o

o

o

|

|

o o

o

o

|

|o ox

|o

o|

| x

o

o|

| o

| o o o o

o o|

|

o o

o

o

xo

o

oo x xo o o x ox x

| x x o

o

|--------------------------|

G = U - ST (free energy) is minimized and configurational entropy is maximized when

rho(v) = rho(m) in the formation of a black hole. Do the partial derivatives of the gravitational potential transform like the components of a four vector? @$It would appear that an arbitrary Lorenz transformation of the 1st order partial derivatives of a standard static gravitational potential should transform so as to evince the existence of a time-varying potential, and hence, that of a 4-hyperspherical potential.

There is an important distinction to be made between massive and massless particles. This distinction consists in the fact that a massive particle which is seen to be at rest has a 4-momentum which is purely imaginary, but which may be re-represented by a Lorenz transformation in terms of a new set of real and imaginary components within some different inertial reference frame. This is not generally true of massless particles, however. A massless particle, such as a photon, possesses a relativistic 4-momentum which is purely real in any and all inertial reference frames. There is no possible Lorenz transformation which can succeed in re-representing the 4-momentum of the photon as a mixture of real and imaginary momentum components. However, in the case of real massive particles, the relativistic mass increases exactly in step with the increase in imaginary momentum. This suggests that perhaps photons do not possess a gravitational mass, and that the true source of the gravitational field is a massive body's imaginary momentum. How then, if this is true, do we account for the disappearance of the gravitational mass which results from the total conversion of mass into photon energy? Does this energy disappear in the form of longitudinal pressure waves in the quantum vacuum?

A photon which is climbing out of a gravitational potential must acquire

an imaginary component of 4-momentum relative to its previous location within a stronger potential. We say, then, that a photon possesses an imaginary momentum relative to a point in spacetime of greater gravitational potential.

The inertial frame-dragging effect deduced by Lenz and Thirring from Einstein's field equations, may be understood intuitively in the following manner: angular momentum of a massive gravitating body as observed from a great distance away (where the body's gravitational potential has fallen off appreciably) appears greatly reduced when the observer is transported close to this body. This change in the appearance of the 3angular momentum of the massive body in transporting the observer from a reference frame of small gravitational potential to one possessing large potential may be understood in terms of a different partitioning of the total conserved 4-angular momentum of the body in the two different, locally Minkowskian frames. In other words, 4-angular momentum which is mostly about an arbitrary z-axis, for example, when the body is viewed from a region of spacetime of small potential, (relative to so-called "free space") is rotated within 4-dimensional spacetime in moving the observer to the region of large potential in such a way that most of the 4-angular momentum of the body now "appears" along the local time axis within this spacetime. The angular momentum seen by the more distant observer is hidden from the observer in close vicinity to the body because he is occupying a space which is, relative to the distant observer, spinning in the same sense as the body itself. This interpretation is consistent with the general relativistic effect of perhelion precession which occurs in the sense opposite to the direction of the body's orbital motion. In a conversation with Brian Swift it was suggested by me, in connection with a discussion of the old density wave theory of galactic

spiral arm formation, that perhaps a spinning supermassive blackhole lies at the center of any given spiral arm galaxy and that the LenzThirring inertial frame-dragging effect could be at least partially responsible (maybe also in conjunction with density waves) for the formation of the classic spiral arm structure of, for example, the Milky Way Galaxy.

Outline of a taped conversation between Dr. Brian Swift and Russell Clark Energy and time transform in opposite manner within relativity from how they transform within the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. The local velocity of light is affected by a Lorenz transformation analogously to the way time and length transform within this transformation. There may be a difference between energy and mass parallel to the distinction between fermions and bosons within quantum mechanics. It may be that gravity is only generated by fermions and not by bosons. This would violate the principle of broken supersymmetry , c.f., au=Barrow and Scherrer, cit=astroph/0406088v3, Do Fermions and Bosons Produce the Same Gravitational Field? “Spin” is responsible for generation of “artificial gravity”. November 2011 According to Einstein, the gravitational force is not a bona fide “force”, but is an effect due to curved spacetime. There may be a generalization lurking within the notion of “spin” so that “real gravity” like artificial gravity is an effect generated by the action of “spin” though at the subatomic level of scale. Energy and mass may not be equivalent in all reference frames. Mass and energy may transform in opposite manner within a Lorenz transformation. Real fermions disturb the normally balanced renormalization which

exists between the vacuum fermion and boson fluctuation fields. There is no fundamental distinction between real bosons and virtual bosons. End of this installment of the conversation between Dr. Brian Swift and Russell Clark (1996) It is possible to understand from quantum theory, the causal relationship between the momentum - energy tensor and the space - time tensor of general relativity by noting a pair of bridging relations between these tensors via the Heisenberg space-momentum and time-energy uncertainty relations? These uncertainty relations prevent the defining of precise, deterministic trajectories for particles moving within 4dimensional Minkowski spacetime. In particular, no precise trajectory can be defined for particles whose sole component of motion is along the Minkowski ict axis. Such particles are observed to be "at rest" with respect to the local system of coordinates. What does it mean, we may ask, for a particle at rest to have an ill-defined trajectory, as implied by the Heisenberg principle? One obvious interpretation is for the particle to lack the continuous, independent existence of a classically described, inert and atom-like substance, which subsists indifferent to the passage of time. The particle must possess an uncertain momentum and hence trajectory on account of continual exchange of virtual photons (in the case of a charged particle) with the vacuum electromagnetic field. The analogue of the particle - wave complementarity in quantum theory is the dualism between mass and energy within the theory of relativity. The general absence of either a precisely defined particle position or momentum implies an oscillation of the particle between its particle and wave mode manifestations which may be understood in terms of the continual back-and-forth transformation of matter from its mass to its energy manifestation. This spontaneous activity on the part of matter may be visualized in terms of its continual reformation and disintegration into mass and energy. July 2011 Just consider here the fact that all quantum mechanical operators may be alternately expressed in terms of the creation and annihilation operators corresponding to field observables.

Only massless particles are reintegrated exclusively from the vacuum energy. Though massive particles are largely reintegrated out of the energy of the quantum vacuum, a tiny percentage of this energy must be supplied internally, that is, from energy resources of the mass itself, which is to imply that, massive particles possess internal binding energies whereas the photon does not. However, just as in the case of superconductivity in which the photon takes on mass, the photon takes on an effective mass within a vacuum laden with a gravitational potential. The measure of this fraction is the ratio of the mass-energy and vacuum energy densities within the volume occupied by the mass. @$ This tendency for matter to replenish itself from a fraction of its own existing mass-energy in competition with its reintegration out of the locally available vacuum energy may account for the linkage of inertia and gravitation. This reintegration process may be modeled as a constant process of 3-momentum (boson) exchanges amongst matter particles (fermions) in competition with energy exchanges between these particles and the thermal reservoir of the vacuum nuclear electro-weak field fluctuations necessitated by the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. The exchange of energy within quantum mechanical systems may be generally characterized by three principle modes of energy exchange: first, the exchange of energy between mass-energy and itself which is mediated by the totality of fundamental force-carrying particles, collectively known as bosons. This particular mode of energy exchange is owing to the position-momentum manifestation of the generalized Heisenberg principle, April 2011 c.f., creation-annihilation/exchange of quantum correlated, spin-1 virtual vector bosons. Second, the exchange of energy between mass-energy and the vacuum energy field which is the mode of energy exchange responsible for the phenomena of spontaneous emission, nuclear decay, quantum mechanical tunneling, etc., owes its origin to the time-energy form of the Heisenberg principle. Finally, there is the energy exchange mode taking place between the vacuum energy field and itself, April 2011 c.f., creation-annihilation of quantum correlated, spin-0 virtual fermion-antifermion pairs (virtual Cooper pairs/scalar bosons). This energy exchange mode we suspect

powers the process of global cosmological expansion. Dark matter and dark energy may perhaps be better understood in connection with the model suggested here. In general, an operator which does not commute with the Hamiltonian operator, i.e., [q,H] \= 0, must experience fluctuations. The Hamiltonian itself is subject to fundamental quantum fluctuations so we may say that [H,H] =\ 0. This means that changing the order in which we measure H makes a difference in the results of our measurement. This doesn't seem to make sense unless we are speaking of making these same measurements, but in opposite time order. @$If this is the correct interpretation of [H,H] =/ 0, then quantum fluctuations in the Hamiltonian of spacetime may be responsible for time's fundamental asymmetry. But how can H fail to commute with itself? This mode also constrains, we believe, the thermodynamic equilibrium of mass-energy systems embedded within the expanding massenergy/vacuum-energy system, and so seems the most general manifestation of the Heisenberg principle. The overarching system of energy exchanges will altogether comprise a total conservative energy system to which will correspond the conservative force-field known as gravitation. On this view, gravitation is not thought to be mediated by a unique force-carrying particle, or boson, i.e., graviton, but is a fundamentally "parasitic" force, one which depends for its action on the collective interaction between matter, its fundamental exchange forces, and the total vacuum nuclear-electroweak field. Specifically, it is the shift in the balance between the three types of energy exchange continually occurring within the quantum vacuum: particle-particle, particle-wave, and wave-wave, energy exchanges. Because matter is continually being reintegrated from the vacuum energy field which originally created it, the transport of matter particles from one region of vacuum locally, to another region, cannot, on our view, be understood as being fundamentally different from the destruction of these particles within one local region of the vacuum field (and subsequent conversion to vacuum energy within this region) with the subsequent re-creation of these particles from the vacuum energy locally available within the destination-region where they are ultimately

"brought to rest." April 2011 This is a crude paraphrase of David Bohm’s principle, set forth in his dialectical materialist quantum mechanics textbook, Quantum Theory (1951, heretofore and subsequently referred to as Bohm’s principle of causality/Bohm’s causal principle – the principle namely, that all causal relationships may be alternately represented as a sum of correlated fluctuations. The question arises at this point as to whether there are two distinct types of causality implied by Bohm’s causal principle: classically correlated versus quantum correlated fluctuations, or even perhaps four distinct types of causality are implied here: classically correlated classical fluctuations, quantum correlated classical fluctuations, classically correlated quantum fluctuations and quantum correlated quantum fluctuations? July 2013 @$The combination of a fermion with an antifermion in which they undergo mutual annihilation yields two quantum entangled photons of opposite momentum, spin, phase and helicity. On the other hand, a collective spin 0 boson or Cooper pair can be constructed with a quantum entangled (anticorrelated) fermion and antifermion. What determines whether we have two anticorrelated fermions or two correlated bosons, matter in the first instance or energy in the second instance appears to depend on the specific mode of quantum entanglement present. July 2011

The brains real action may indeed be in the construction of quantum entanglements between the subtlest components of its structure, i.e., microtubule dimer electrons as well as electronic states of DNA. The actual processing of these entanglements, which give them context, meaning and reference (pointing “outside” the otherwise closed system of the biological brain) and indeed, as well giving them temporality is the preexistent quantum entanglement network constituted by the quantum vacuum electromagnetic field aka the QED vacuum. The substance of awareness lies here and the object of awareness is constituted from a particular and unique spectrum of frequencies of the entangled vacuum electromagnetic field with which this or that particular person’s brain resonantly tunes. The question arises as to whether the unique spectrum of networked quantum entangled vacua which constitutes the particular person’s dynamic contextual ground

with which his brain resonantly tunes was originally “knitted together” after his fetal brain had reached a crucial stage of neuroanatomical development in which brain development and that of the networked vacuum frequency spectrum move hand in hand or whether the fetal brain must first reach a certain critical stage of developmental complexity before this matter-vacuum feedback mechanism can begin to operate. What perhaps allows this feedback to “phase-lock” and to begin “homing” and “tracking” is the fact that the quantum vacuum itself also informed the evolution and and function of the DNA which coded for the structure and function of that individual person’s brain in the first instance. @$ It seems as though providence is inescapable when it comes to the bringing into being of a self-conscious entity. Therefore, we believe that the total energy density of any given region of locally Euclidean 3 - space may not be altered through changes in the local distribution of energy constituted by real matter particles and fields. We understand energy density more broadly here as the total four-momentum density of local regions of Minkowski spacetime, and understand the conservation of energy density as the constancy of total 4-momentum density despite phenomenological (apparent) variations in energy density (classically understood) within local Euclidean 3-spaces. To wit, though the magnitudes of the various components of the total 4momentum density may change within an arbitrary 3-volume of Euclidean space, the magnitude of the total 4-momentum density of spacetime does not change locally; that is to say, it does not change observably over relatively small distances and times within a Minkowski metric. April 2011 The vacuum energy within the context of cosmological expansion either acts like an expanding medium of finite energy or it behaves like a cosmological constant, c.f., the arXiv pre-print article, cit= Dilution of Zero Point Energies in the Cosmological Expansion. The so-called mass-energy reformation process is limited by the density of available vacuum field energy out of which real particle/field energy systems must constantly reform themselves, and there is an antagonistic relationship between real particle/field energy and virtual particle/field energy (via the Pauli exclusion and Bose

condensation/Pauli Inclusion principles) such that the relative alterations in the densities of each be constrained by the principle of their conservation in total combination through the principle of conservation of total 4-momentum density. In general outline, the mechanism of gravitation works through the parallel connections mentioned earlier between the momentum-energy tensor and the space-time tensor in the following manner: a decrease in the positional uncertainty of a collection of particles induces an increase in the momentum uncertainty of these particles, one which is associated, through the definition of momentum uncertainty within quantum mechanics, with an increase in the collective energy of the particles which cannot originate with the forces initially bringing the particles together. Consequently, to conserve energy, this energy must be supplied from somewhere; we maintain that this energy is supplied by the quantum vacuum. This consequent decrease in the energy of the vacuum energy field leads, in turn, to an increase in the energy of other distributions of particles already occupying the general region of this modified vacuum state. This increase in energy of the other particles occurs through an increase in the expectation value of the square of the particles momentum, but without altering the quantum expectation value of the magnitude of the particles’ total 4-momentum (consistent with special relativity). The only consistent way of effecting such a change in the quantum state of these particles is for the momentum uncertainty of the particles to increase. In turn, the positional uncertainty of these neighboring particles must decrease, and in such a manner that the total system of particles experiences a decrease in its positional uncertainty. April 2011 The loss of magnetization of the vacuum spin-1/2 fields is compensated by the increased polarization of the vacuum spin-1 fields. Quantum entanglement is conserved though it is transferred from the spin-1/2 fields to the spin-1 fields in this process. Similarly, the momentum-energy uncertainty is rotated in spacetime. http://phys.org/news/2011-08-dark-illusion-quantum-vacuum.html The specific manner in which the particles do this is by being attracted toward the center of mass of the total particle distribution - an effect

which manifests itself generally in the phenomenon of gravitational attraction. Because a particle's energy uncertainty is not an intrinsic property of the particle itself, but must be communicated to the particle through the interaction of the particle and the vacuum energy field sustaining its existence, the communication of energy uncertainty between particles distributed throughout space is after the fashion of an inverse-square law. Of course, a collection of particles may not really be thought to have a defined positional uncertainty unless these particles form with one another a bound system of particles. This is why we suspect that the gravitational force is only capable of coupling to binding energy so that the energy of the unconstrained vacuum may not itself be thought to gravitate; it is only spatiotemporal variations in the energy of the vacuum field which may be thought to produce gravitational effects. In fact, it is the tendency of massive bodies to hold themselves together against the opposite tendency of the cosmological acceleration field to disperse the particles forming these bodies, which sets up the spherically symmetric imbalance in the distribution and flow of the vacuum energy field ( in the case of spherically symmetric matter distributions ) which manifests itself as the gravitational field engendered by these and all other massive bodies within the expanding universe. Three-momentum is conserved in particle collisions because the acceleration of a particle always involves the rotation of its 4momentum, describable by a Lorenz transformation, and equal and opposite 4-momentum rotations on the part of the colliding particles always results; this is just a relativistic expression of Newton's actionreaction principle. In the case of two colliding particles with 0 initial and final total net momentum, an arbitrary quantity of energy may be supplied to the two particles without disturbing the net momentum of the particles. This may be regarded as a special instance of a property of momentum which is normally not obvious to an observer confined in his observations to the three dimensions of Euclidean space, but which is always operative within the context of the higher dimensionality of Minkowski spacetime. Accelerations merely have the effect of rotating the 4-momentum of particles within Minkowski space, as mentioned earlier, and so the magnitude of a particle's 4-momentum can never be

altered. In general, forces are manifestations of momentum exchanges between the local imaginary and real momenta of particles and fields. When these momenta exchanges are rendered asymmetrical, the 3momenta of particles and fields are not generally conserved. Within a hypersurface of simultaneity in flat Minkowski space, the vacuum 3momenta are conserved despite the participation of the vacuum energy field in the local cosmological velocity field. This is due to the inherent symmetry of the momenta exchanges between the real and imaginary vacuum momentum components. The presence of matter induces an asymmetry in the momentum exchanges between the vacuum's real and imaginary components of momentum reflected in the asymmetry of the vacuum's self-energy exchanges. When energy is spontaneously imparted to a massy particle and then returned spontaneously to the vacuum energy field, within this brief interval of time, the energy state of the local vacuum has altered slightly in the direction of decreasing vacuum energy density so that each time the energy originally imparted to the mass is paid back to the vacuum, the vacuum receives in return a slightly smaller quantity of energy. May 2012

If we recast the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle (HUP) in terms of information and its conjugate or complementary quantity, then the Boltzmann Brain Paradox can be considerably sharpened. If the enormous information content of the cosmos is assumed to have arisen from a vacuum fluctuation on account of the HUP, then if energy content and information content are proportional (prn=in some sense) then for an enormous information fluctuation (we need at some point to define the notion of negative information because conservation requires fluctuations to occur in +/- pairs) we have a vanishingly small lifetime for this information (but doesn’t it continue to exist in some latent form in between manifestations?) so either the great age of the universe is an illusion or . . . the true age of the universe (age of the true universe) is immensely greater than the age of our universe. On the other hand, for the subjective appearance of a universe to persist for say, a human lifetime, the amount of information borrowed would have to be relatively small (compared to that contained in an entire cosmos). June 2012

Can the Boltzmann brain paradox be dealt with by invoking the fact that human consciousness only possesses a temporal integration span, i.e., specious present or span of integrated time of something between one and two seconds, such that the complementary quantity of energy or rather its subjective time analogue, a form of integrated energy or “intergy” is vast. If this complementary quantity of integrated energy or intergy provides the informational grounding or context for its embedded bubble of subjective time, then there would be some natural limit for the temporal size of the bubble based upon available forces of temporal cohesion provided by the underlying intergy reservoir. If the time bubble of the specious present grows too large, the reservoir of available intergy becomes too diminished. The action of the brain as filter, reducing valve and interface provides the conduit for this reservoir of integrated (quantum-entangled) energy. So we are concerned here not merely with the quantity of energy, but with the quality of this energy in terms of the energy’s degree of development of quantum entanglement. June 2012

The shared, causally and narratively structured intersubjective world of any given quantum observer is not contradicted without reason, i.e., without causal or narrative and hence, reasonable explanation by the accounts of other persons occupying the observer’s holographic projection because, however the MWI wavefunction collapses, it does so in such as manner as to respect causality and narrative coherence up to and including the sensory and mnemonic states of other iconic observers. All are part of the same in-reality- discontinuous though always-perceived/remembered as continuous, i.e., classical shared physical reality. Invoking a generalization of the anthropic principle in this connection seems to suggest that it is my universe that undergoes superposition and collapse and everybody else is just carried along for the ride! One of the implications of Everett’s relative state formulation of quantum mechanis seems to imply that I share my world with a motley collection of also-rans, in other words. But is not my subjective state of consciousness as perceiver of each new alternate quantum universe just as much along for the ride as is anyone else’s. I mean isn’t my sense of continuity with my remembered past just as arbitrary as is

that of those who are carried forward with me into each altogether new branching of the universal wavefunction? I know that I am continuous while they are not. But cannot each of them say the very same thing about themselves? The sensory and mnemonic states of my brain are just as discontinuously and randomly changing as are theirs, and I am no more the same person in this new quantum universe than they are, isn’t that correct? This is a case of completely egalitarian multisolipsism in other words. We all secretly rely on God or universal, transcendent mind as bulwark against the collapse of ontology into what is merely a largest conceivable epistemology. The result of this is that the mass of the particle continually increases very slowly with passing time as the universe continues to expand during the course of the constant exchange of energy between the particle and the vacuum in which it is embedded. @$It is this constant exchange of energy between the particle and its vacuum energy field which is responsible for the magnitude of the particles momentum/energy uncertainty. We term this the "perturbation interpretation" of the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. Because the cosmological expansion rate is locally constant, the imaginary momentum of particles is always increasing very slowly with the cosmological expansion. It can be independently demonstrated that the real momentum of particles is always increasing at the very same rate as is their imaginary momentum. If the mass of a body is relativistically increased, then if the magnitude of its 4-momentum is to be conserved, then the 4-momentum of this massive body must experience a rotation in Minkowski space which just compensates the effect of this increase in mass on the imaginary momentum of the body. In brief, we say that an acceleration field induces an increase in the relativistic mass of a body, and conversely, a field which induces an increase in the relativistic mass of a body, must itself constitute an acceleration field. The presence of a real fermion inhibits the appearance of certain virtual fermion-antifermion pairs out of the vacuum because, by the Pauli Exclusion Principle, a virtual fermion in the same quantum state as the

real fermion which is already present is forbidden to appear where the positional uncertainties of the real and virtual fermions were to overlap. Thus, the creation of the entire pair within this region of overlapping positional uncertainty is suppressed. There should, of course, be some sort of smooth decay of this suppressive effect of real fermions on the creation of virtual fermion-antifermion pairs in the vacuum away from the center of the "volume of positional uncertainty" within which the real fermion is to be found. In a similar manner, an energy of 2m sc2 must be created out of the vacuum in order for a black hole of mass energy, msc2, to "evaporate" via the emission of Hawking radiation. In the case of bosons, the opposite principle is operating. This principle might be termed the Pauli "inclusion principle." The more bosons we have in a particular quantum state, the greater is the probability that more bosons will enter this same quantum state. We might, therefore, expect the presence of real matter to enhance the probability of spontaneous emission/absorption of virtual bosons from the vacuum in a quantum state with operator values closely approximating those expectation values describing the bosons mediating the mean nuclear electro-weak field responsible for the binding forces of this matter. Of course, what we are really saying here is that the operator expectation values themselves for vacuum operators are altered, or shifted in value, from their "free space" values. This alteration in the vacuum field may be viewed as stemming from either: 1) a shift in the value of the quantum operators, 2) an alteration of the vacuum wavefunction acted upon by the quantum operators, or 3) a combination of both 1) and 2). In the particular case where only the vacuum wavefunction itself is altered, we might interpret this in terms of an alteration of the vacuum Hamiltonian from which the vacuum wavefunction is calculated. We already know that any alteration in the Hamiltonian describing the energy of a harmonic oscillator will result in the oscillator undergoing a change in its zero-point oscillations, that is to say, the oscillator will

suffer a shift in its zero-point energy. @$Any change to the zero-point energy of a harmonic oscillator may be modeled on a change in the oscillator's Hamiltonian owing exclusively to the appearance of an additional potential term within the Hamiltonian function of the oscillator. May 2013 cit= auth=

Unruh and Wald [12] examined the behavior of a detector under uniform acceleration, and in particular the emission of radiation by such a detector. We looked at two cases in particular. In the one case we asked for the state of the field under the condition that a two level detector was found at the end of the process to have been excited. In this case they found that the field was in a single particle excited state. That single particle was concentrated in the region which did not have causal contact with the detector. In the case where the detector was found after the experiment to be unexcited, the field was in a coherent superposition of an unexcited vacuum state, and a two particle excited state. Here I will examine the question from a slightly different point of view. The detector is taken to be a harmonic oscillator as above. I will ask what the state is of the radiation field (the massless scalar field) without any measurement of the state of the detector. The equation of motion for an internal oscillator coupled to a scalar field is the final outgoing field is a linear function of the ingoing field. This implies that the annihilation and creation operators of the outgoing field are linear combinations of those for the ingoing field. If the outgoing annihilation operators were functions only of the ingoing annihilation operators, which is what happens when the particle is unaccelerated, then the state of the outgoing field will be indistinguishable from the vacuum state. On the other hand, if the outgoing field’s (φ’s) annihilation operators are functions of both the ingoing field’s (φ0’s) annihilation and creation operators, then that outgoing field will in general by a “squeezed state” with respect to the outgoing vacuum state. A squeezed state has the property that it is a coherent sum of even numbers of particle states. i. e., the detector “scatters” the vacuum fluctuations in the field φ0 so as to produce correlated pairs of particles in the outgoing state. Since this state is again

a Gaussian state, it is completely characterized by the pairwise correlation function. The two point function with the detector can be calculated as a function of the two point function of the free field. However, measuring these correlations would be difficult, since in general the two correlated particles are separated by a time of order the decay time of the system. For any known accelerating system (e. g., electrons in a synchrotron) that time scale is of the order minutes or hours. If we want to integrate the quantum mechanical and relativistic effects of matter on the vacuum nuclear electro-weak field, then we must reconcile the influence, which changing mass-energy distributions have upon the uncertainty relations within the vacuum, with our requirement that the variations in vacuum momentum-energy and position-time uncertainties be connected to one another along contiguous points in spacetime by series of instantaneous Lorenz transformations. If the energy structure of the vacuum is modeled as a crystalline lattice of coupled harmonic oscillators, then the reconcilement of the two so-called Heisenberg and Einstein effects of matter upon the vacuum energy field might be possible. We might succeed in doing this by introducing just the sort of ad hoc potential term alluded to earlier. By this we mean the potential function which incorporated into the Hamiltonian of the vacuum's oscillator meshwork effects the desired spatio-temporal alteration in the vacuum's zero-point energy. Such a spatio-temporal variation in the vacuum's zero-point energy should recoup all of the anticipated general relativistic effects, e.g., gravitational redshift, light deflection, time dilation, length contraction, mass increase, etc. It should achieve this while at the same time explaining a concomitant change in the BoseEinstein and Fermi-Dirac statistics of the vacuum consistent with the application of wavefunction symmetry/antisymmetry to the interaction of matter and vacuum. We might begin doing this by explaining away, if you will, the seemingly inconsistent demands of the time/energy expression of the Heisenberg principle and the relativistic expressions for time and energy within relativity theory. This must be done with respect to the predicted interactions of time and energy uncertainty

within both theories. First, let us note that both principles, Einstein's and Heisenberg's, agree with one another concerning the relationships of changes in length and positional uncertainty, on the one hand, and momentum and momentum uncertainty, on the other hand. Where these two theories conflict, is in comparing the effect of a change in energy uncertainty on the value of the time uncertainty: relativity predicts that a relativistic increase in energy uncertainty will be accompanied by a relativistic increase in time uncertainty, while Heisenberg uncertainty principle predicts that an increase in the energy uncertainty of a quantum mechanical system (here, a relativistic increase) will be associated with a decrease in the time uncertainty of the system. The solution to this dilemma may lie with the simple fact that position and time are not on an equal footing with one another as they are within the special relativity theory - there is no operator corresponding to the time variable within quantum mechanics as in the case of position, momentum and energy. Or the solution may lie with the possible inconsistencies of the notion of energy uncertainty within both theories. This may be due to a deeper inconsistency in the definition energy within both theories. Energy in quantum mechanics is defined as the Hamiltonian function whereas the energy referred to in relativity theory is the mass-energy, or, perhaps, the kinetic energy. The Hamiltonian is, of course, the sum of both the kinetic and potential energies of the quantum system. Of course, if the vacuum modeled as a Debye solid, that is, as a network of coupled harmonic oscillators, then the Hamiltonian describing this system of oscillators must be consistent with relativity. The potential energy of the Hamiltonian must be a function of not only x,y and z, but must also be a function of the variable, ict, within the Minkowski metric. The kinetic energy component of this vacuum Hamiltonian must be a function of all four components of the relativistic 4-momentum vector of special relativity. Perhaps we may think of virtual particle reactions as lying "off the mass shell" between two extreme points off-shell. These are: virtual momentum fluctuations with negligible virtual fluctuations in energy, and virtual energy fluctuations with negligible virtual fluctuations in

momentum. We may liken the spontaneous creation of virtual bosons from the vacuum as pure momentum fluctuations, and of virtual fermion-antifermion pairs as pure energy fluctuations of this vacuum. Is spin another name for angular momentum about the ict axis? Is it possible, then, for a spin 0 particle to possess a component of angular momentum within the three normal spatial dimensions? If so, then wouldn't this constitute a stark violation of the principle of the relativistic invariance of angular momentum? There is an apparent paradox associated with the gravitational redshift of starlight predicted by Einstein's theory of general relativity. The general theory explains this reddening of the sun's light, for instance, as being due to the fact that the energy of photons has an inertia associated with it and that, therefore, the photons must give up the requisite energy in overcoming the Sun's gravitational potential as they fly away from the Sun, off to infinity. The specific paradox is seen when one considers the reverse of this process, the gravitational "bluing" of starlight as it falls into a gravitational potential, and then imagines "bouncing" photons off of a huge mirror stationed closed to the surface of the Sun, presumable in a very tight circular orbit! Photons leaving the Earth for the Sun, for example, experience an increase in their energy ("bluing") which will exactly offset the decrease in their energy on their return journey, after bouncing off the mirror, so that the wavelength of these photons will not differ from that when initially leaving the Earth. October 2011 So, for example, although the characteristic wavelength of photons emitted by spectroscopically known elements or molecules on the Sun’s surface will exhibit a redshift of the precise magnitude predicted by general relativity, these same characteristic photons, if emitted, say from Earth’s orbit in the direction of the Sun, will suffer no observable reshift on their return journey after being reflected from a mirror stationed at the Sun’s surface. But we must consider here that what is called reflection involves the stimulation of an excited atomic state, i.e., the “boosting” of an outer orbital electron into an energetically unstable orbit, which immediately decays, yielding back a photon of precisely the same wavelength as originally caused the excited state, and a “blueshifted”

photon would possess an energy too large to produce a reflection photon of the appropriate wavelength predicted by general relativity when the gravitational redshift is taken into account. This appears to suggest that, for example, a television signal containing real time footage of an Earthbased chronograph, if transmitted to and reflected off the surface of the Sun, would reveal no mismatch between the time displayed by the transmitted image of the clock and the actual time indicated on the original chronograph. And this would be presumed to be the case even though real time footage of a second clock based on the Sun’s surface and transmitted to us simultaneously along with the reflected transmission of the Earth-based chronograph reveals a time-dilated rate of elapsed time of the Sun-based clock relative to our Earth-based clock. When particles are compressed into a progressively smaller volume of space, the positional uncertainty of all the particles decreases. Consequently, the momentum uncertainty of all of the particles will increase. Although the quantum mechanical expectation value of momentum for the particles will not be affected by a change in the momentum uncertainty of the particles, nor the square of the expectation value of the momentum, the expectation value of the square of the momentum will change, however - it will increase. This all follows from the mere definition of momentum uncertainty in quantum mechanics. This is to say that the total energy of the particles will be increased simply by virtue of the obvious decrease in quantum positional uncertainty of the particles as a result of their having been confined to a smaller volume. Note that this energy conferred to the particles cannot be explained in terms of any work which might have been performed upon the particles in the process of pushing them together, as we might have taken, theoretically, any amount of force at all in pushing them together, depending upon how much time we were willing to take in doing so. This is yet another reason for believing that the collective vacuum energy field is associated with the operation of a conservative force-field. If we have not really imparted any energy to these particles simply by virtue of having moved them together somewhat, then how are we to explain the appearance of this energy in such a manner that the

total energy of the volume occupied by the particles remains constant, that is to say, so that the total energy of this volume is conserved? We might postulate a kind of hidden energy which, along with the particles, also occupies their space. We might further suppose that these particles may be thought to be made out of this energy so that an increase in the energy of particles within a particular volume of space becomes tied to a corresponding and compensating decrease in the amount of this hidden energy such that the total energy of the volume remains unchanged - a kind of radical energy conservation principle. One way to make such an assumption, and there are indeed many different ways in which this assumption might be realized, would be to postulate that there is a fourth component of particle momentum, previously unsuspected, itself unchanged by our having pushed the particles together, but possessing a square whose quantum expectation value has been altered in a manner which exactly cancels the changes in the expectation values of the squares of the usual three independent components of momentum along the x, y and z axes of a Cartesian coordinate system. One way for the momentum of the particles along the hypothetical "w-axis," as well as along the other three axes, to remain unchanged, with the energy of the particles changing at the same time, would be if the masses of the particles were permitted to change in inverse proportion to the change in the velocity of the particles along this new w-axis. We can succeed in doing this by permitting the particles to possess a negative kinetic energy which is decreased as the particles are pushed together. But turning to an analogy with the case of a particle "tunneling" through a potential barrier, any change in the necessarily negative kinetic energy of the tunneling particle could be compensated for through judicious instantaneous adjustment of the height of the potential barrier though which it is moving, that is to say, through the appearance of a kind of ad hoc potential term which is to be added to the original barrier potential, V(x). If we identify this ad hoc potential so-called with the gravitational potential, then two things immediately follow: 1) a gravitational potential exists in space whether or not matter is present; it is built into the very structure of space itself. And, 2) matter has the peculiar effect of altering this essentially cosmologically-based potential through

quantum mechanical interactions taking place between all matter particles and the continuum of space in which they are embedded. The quantum vacuum offers itself as a logical candidate for this medium of space (aether, if you will) with which all matter particles are in interaction. Moreover, the variation of the density of this vacuum energy due to the process of the cosmological expansion of space provides a logical basis for our postulated potential barrier. The increase in energy of this hypothetical system of particles is based on the decrease in their mutual positional uncertainty and the masses of the particles are irrelevant to the determination of this energy increase. If gravitational effects are to be ultimately traced to variations in the energy uncertainty of mass-energy distributions, leading in turn to a modification in the cosmological spatiotemporal variation in the vacuum nuclear-electroweak field from its equilibrium momentum density in socalled free-space, then there must be some means of defining the masses of particles, as well as the mass equivalence of field energies, in terms of their binding or self-energies alone. Lorenz attempted to do this in the early 1900's with respect to the mass of the electron; he tried to define the mass of the electron exclusively in terms of its electromagnetic selfenergy. He was, however, unsuccessful, and to my knowledge, no further efforts have been made to repeat the attempt. Let us look at this question in term of a hopefully illustrative analogy. Suppose instead of simple monochromatic light, we send a modulated carrier wave of electromagnetic radiation from the Earth to the Sun and back again. Suppose the modulation upon the carrier wave was a simple TV transmission of a normally functioning analogue wall clock. Particle creation at the event horizon of a black hole gives rise to a precisely thermal spectrum. This suggests that the vacuum itself is in thermal equilibrium with itself so that the vacuum must be continually exchanging energy with itself. because the time rate of change of all physical quantities depends on the existence of energy uncertainty, dq/dt

= [H, q] + f[H,q], where f[H,q] is usually written as @q/@t. On this view, quantum mechanical systems possess energy uncertainty because they are continually perturbed by intrinsic vacuum energy fluctuations. In this way, all mass-energy systems are in a process of constant energy exchange with the quantum mechanical vacuum. Since all macroscopic transfers and exchanges of energy between two points in spacetime are mediated via the submicroscopic energy exchanges occurring within the vacuum, it follows that conservation of energy macroscopically is dependent upon conservation of energy exchanges within the vacuum. The temporal evolution of the quantum vacuum is, therefore, mediated by its own action. A number of conclusions follow from this fact. 1) the vacuum’s energy is conserved, but not by virtue of this energy possessing a determinate quantity: the vacuum’s energy is conserved even though it is an indeterminate quantity. The rate of decrease of the vacuum’s energy density, cosmologically, is exponential because the energy density of the vacuum itself governs the rate of decrease. It is not possible to distinguish different time rates of change within a closed dynamical system. This is because such a closed system possesses only a finite number of discrete energy levels, and when the total system is in a particular energy eigenstate, its energy uncertainty is 0 so that there are no vacuum fluctuations available with which to mediate changes in physical observables of the system. We may define the distance separating two events as a function of the number of vacuum momentum fluctuations existing between the two said events. Similarly, we may define the time interval between two such events as a function of the number of vacuum energy fluctuations existing between the two said events. Of course, the partitioning of the relativistic momentum - energy tensor into pure momentum versus pure energy components is dependent upon the particular Lorenz reference frame within which one performs the momentum and energy measurements.

Since the energy levels at which information is stored in a neural network are defined in terms of the lowest stable energy of the neural network as a whole, virtual energy transitions between these energy levels presuppose a coupling between the wavefunctions describing the quantum mechanical states of all of the individual neurons of the network in the sense of their being nonlocally connected. It is the spontaneous coherence in which the neural network is embedded which provides the ultimate context within which the neurological events are to be interpreted. This coherent field is that of the nonlocally connected vacuum electromagnetic fluctuation field. The many worlds interpretation of the quantum measurement problem may be understood as a reversal in causal relationship between the uncollapsed wavefunction representing the mind of the observer and the uncollapsed wavefunction representing the potentialities of the quantum mechanical system being observed by this mind in the following manner: when the observer notes the collapse of the wavefunction with respect to an observable he is attempting to measure, what is actually occurring is the collapse of the wavefunction describing the observers mind so that it now abstracts from the Weltall one particular eigenvalue of the object wavefunction, but without inducing a collapse of the object wavefunction itself. One might ask what is the fundamental difference between these two interpretations if there is not some third realm, independent of both the observer's and object wavefunctions in terms of which one interpretation might be favored over the other as being ontologically prior. This third realm belongs neither to that of causality (the mutual interaction of collapsed wavefunctions), nor to that of contingency (the interaction of collapsed with uncollapsed wavefunctions, and vice versa), but to that realm constituted solely by the mutual interaction of all uncollapsed wavefunctions. This realm we may refer to as the composite contingency - necessity manifold or continuum. There is an exactly parallel assimilation between the

category space - time with our category of necessity - contingency. In this way we may realize that the concepts of locality and nonlocality constitute a distinction which cuts across that constituted by the polar concepts chance and necessity. Good is that which enhances creativity which is the explicit expression of implicitly integral wholeness. Evil constitutes that which seeks to destroy, confuse, disintegrate as well as to impair the expression of unity and wholeness through creativity. All creativity is in reality re-creativity. The probability spectrum of a given wavefunction may be overdetermined so that there exists an unlimited number of ways in which an ensemble of measurements of the eigenstates of the wavefunction with respect to a particular observable may sum together so that the wavefunction appears perfectly normalized; this property may permit an additional degree of freedom within quantum mechanical virtual processes not previously suspected to exist.

There is an absolute simultaneity which mental events distinctly enjoy due to the fact that they do not admit of perspective; if anything they constitute perspective. However, the order in which neurophysiological occurrences occur ( in the brain) is at least partially dependent upon the reference frame (in the relativistic sense) that these events occur (as observables). There must be an embedding of these neural events in a substrate which extends beyond the merely neurophysiological in order for a reference frame to be defined in which there can arise a correspondence between subjective and objective simultaneities. If metaphysical dualism is false in the strict sense of there existing two distinct and parallel fundamental processes, one physical, the other mental, but if this doctrine is nevertheless true in the less restrictive sense of there actually existing mental and physical realms which are not distinct but somehow mutually interacting, then it is in principle

impossible to formalize the operation of mind. It is quite true what many psychologists (as well as lay persons) have noted concerning the tendency of a task to become executable without the aid of conscious attention the more and more that it is performed. However, what has not perhaps been widely noted by either is the somewhat contrary tendency for one to become more, rather than less, aware of the abstract operations lying behind the performance of a task in new contexts where the specific concrete operations constituting the task would never otherwise suggest themselves. This tendency for us to become aware of the abstract operations specific to one particular oftrepeated task within a context normally foreign to it, or at least for our performances of operations within new previously unrelated contexts to be guided by these abstract operations, I refer to as operational modulation - or op-mod, for short. What we are calling op-mod may be alternately thought of as the manipulation of something in terms of an operational metaphor; it is itself the very essence of the human toolusing intelligence, and may be considered to be a general property of any neural network computing device. More specifically, op-mod is peculiar to the problem solving strategy of the neural network device because the specific neural circuits which are utilized by such a network for solving one particular "problem" will necessarily overlap with neural circuits which are being established in the course of attempting to solve problems in extraneous contexts. The existence of the ground of Reality consists exhaustively in its very activity. Consequently, that which creates this ground is that which sustains this ground; from which further follows the truth of Leibniz's principle that, "the conditions sufficient to create the world are necessary at every succeeding moment to sustain its existence." We know that there has to have always been something in existence and so the ground of Reality must be self-sustaining, and hence, self-creating. It follows that the ground of existence necessarily exists, and so is eternal. All possibility ultimately lies dormant within that which necessarily exists. In the language of quantum mechanics, every determinate eigenstate

with respect to a particular physical observable may be alternately represented as a series of eigenstates with respect to an indeterminate physical observable incompatible with the first. Hermann Weyl notes in his book, "The Open World," that the state of a two-electron system is not determined by the state of each individual electron added together, but that the states of each electron may be deduced from the state of the two-electron system. Leibniz's series: 1 - 1/3 + 1/5 - 1/7 + 1/9 - 1/11 + . . . , does not converge when the terms are rearranged into a sum of the following two sequences: (1 + 1/5 + 1/9 + . . . +) + ( -1/3 - 1/7 - 1/11 - . . . ). This is a rather common property of what are called alternating infinite sequences. This property is very mysterious, but can be made to seem less so if one pictures each term of the sequence as a numbered bead on a string. A finite number of terms of the series may be rearranged arbitrarily to produce the identical sum, and this may be thought to be possible simply because the string, being finite in length, permits the removal, and hence, rethreading of all the beads onto the string in any arbitrary order. However, given an infinite number of beads, the string is now itself infinite in length and so it is no longer possible to remove the beads so as to put them into a new order. The order of the beads may only be changed into that represented by the two sums provided that the original string is cut, and this changes the topological relationship of the beads; in a finite sequence the order of the terms (beads) may be rearranged without altering the topological relationship of the beads. It is also interesting to note that Leibniz' series converges to the value of pi/4 because the value of convergence is itself an irrational number possessing a decimal expansion which possesses no determinate order whatever so that what we have is an equation between an irrational number and an infinite sum of rational numbers, on the one hand, and, on the other hand, an equation holding between an infinite sum of terms possessing a mathematically determinate sequential order with respect to a simple mathematical operation, namely, addition, and an infinite sum of terms possessing no mathematically determinable sequential order -

no sequential order with respect to any definable mathematical operation. We may suspect that Cantor's argument for the existence of what he calls nondenumerable infinity, i.e., the famous "diagonal argument," can be applied to the decimal expansion of pi to show that this sequence of decimal fractions itself constitutes a nondenumerable set of rational numbers. What is interesting here is that no possible rearrangement of the indeterminate sequence of nondenumerable rational numbers constituting the decimal expansion of pi will produce an irrational which diverges although there do exist rearrangements of the terms of Leibniz' series which diverge. From this simple fact we may deduce that there is no infinite sequence of denumerably infinite subsets of terms taken from Leibniz' series, on the left hand side of our equation, which will produce a one-to-one correspondence with the infinite sequence of rational numbers in the decimal expansion of pi. Gödel has stated that his incompleteness theorem applies only to logicodeductive systems more powerful than that represented by arithmetic. This is because the proof of the theorem is based on the Gödelnumbering procedure, where each operator, as well as all the symbols utilized by the system, are represented by Gödel numbers, while all of the logical operations of the system are defined in terms of arithmetic operations. So we may say that arithmetic is definable within all socalled Gödelian deductive systems. The domain of all arithmetical operations is a domain devoid of topological structure. Self-referential propositions introduce a topological structure into the domain of proof. Rational numbers are the sums of convergent infinite series where the order in which the terms of the series appear does not affect the value of the sum. We may say in this case that rational numbers occupy a number field possessing arithmetic, or null, topological structure. Irrational numbers, on the other hand, are the sums of infinite series which may diverge if the order in which the terms of the series appear are altered. We may say that the irrational numbers occupy a number field possessing a topological structure.

The degrees of freedom required for certain reactions, or interactions, to take place, are only allowable within a space of large enough dimensionality to accommodate them. The unreasonable effectiveness of mathematics within the physical sciences, borrowing the famous phrase of the quantum physicist Eugene Wigner, is owing to the radically overdetermined nature of natural phenomena. A genuinely recursive system may only be derived from a recursive system equally or more complex than itself, or if the recursive system is "constructed" out of simpler recursive elements, the control system effecting or mediating the process of construction is, itself, a recursive system, of greater complexity than the system being constructed. The information content of a particular structure is defined by the degree of preciseness to which the system approximates its intentional object. This definition is best understood in terms of the "shattered hologram" metaphor. A molecule belonging to a complementary molecule pair , a molecule which naturally hydrogen-bond to one another, favors the spontaneous self-assembly of the molecule to which it bears a topologically complementary relationship. More generally, the spontaneous selfassembly of molecules is favored by a vacuum containing energy resonances complementary to those upon which the molecule's energy structure depends for its sustained existence. John Searle, the linguist and philosopher, has stated that formal computational systems are incapable of consciousness because such formal systems do not effectively exploit the causal powers of computation available for utilization by the human brain. Since the causal powers of matter, as Searle terms them, stem from what is forever spontaneously occurring in the natural realm at the very smallest

dimensions of time and space, the process of abstraction, itself founded upon the systematic ignorance of finer details of structure and function, introduces a kind of built-in blockheadedness into systems of "artificial intelligence" which are physically realized from relatively macroscopic and "insensitive" component parts, in accordance with "analytically closed-form" designs. epi=

When the dividing line between memory and imagination is hard and fast, there you have a blockhead. Vacuum fluctuations which are simultaneous in one reference frame (Lorenz frame) will not necessarily be simultaneous in other frames. @$ We may deduce from this that the density of the quantum vacuum is different in different Lorenz frames. I do not think that Hugh Everett's many worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics is consistent with the implications of quantum experiments which have been performed in the last few decades since the time (1957) when he originally proposed his version of quantum theory. In Everett's theory, the collapse of the wavefunction is interpreted as a sudden, discontinuous branching of the observer from one parallel universe, where the wavefunction is uncollapsed, to a new parallel universe where the wavefunction exists in one of its component eigenstates. Enantiomer molecules, that is, molecules which were once thought to be identical in every way except that they are the mirror reflection of each other, have recently been generally found to differ in respect to their binding energies. So-called "right-handed" molecules, such as the amino acids, D - tyrosine, D - glutamine, etc., have been found to posses smaller binding energies (and hence are less stable) than their mirror image counterparts, the L - series amino acids by the same names. Given the existence of a spatial fourth dimension, it is possible to convert a right-handed molecule into its identical left-handed

counterpart by pulling the molecule into 4 - space and rotating it 180 o against the hyperplane (normal to) and returning the molecule to its original position within this 3 - hypersurface. This would suggest the existence of a preferential curl field acting within this four dimensional continuum in a direction opposing the rotation of an L - molecule and aiding the rotation of a R - molecule. This mechanism would be one logical way to account for the observed differences in the binding energies of identical L - and R - molecules. Information is neither created nor destroyed; information is always conserved, and when it appears to be created, it is merely being transduced by being re-expressed within another medium. There are myriad different media through which portions of the eternally preexistent information may be expressed, but there exists a primary medium which contains all information originally. All other media through which information might be expressed are ultimately dependent upon this primary information medium. In the same way that the transduction of energy from one medium, say mechanical, to another medium, say electrical, is always accompanied by a loss of a portion of the transduced energy as heat energy (whereby entropy is increased), some information is always lost in the transduction of information from the primary medium to other secondary media. For this reason, no informational systems or structures are permitted to come into being which possess an information density greater than that of the volume which they occupy, this volume being pervaded by energy in its primary form (vacuum energy). In the same way, there is a limit to the massenergy density of any particular volume of spacetime; this limit is that specified by Schwarzchild's equation for the energy density of black holes. The information which is inevitably lost as a result of the transduction of information from the primary medium to secondary media simply passes back into the primary medium. The law of the temporal evolution of information systems is provided by

the pre-existing spatial distribution of information. The determinate is dependent upon the indeterminate. Any eigenstate which results from the process of quantum measurement is sustained in existence by the eigenfunction spectrum of noncommuting operators. In other words, the determinate eigenvalue associated with the determinate eigenstate which results from the act of quantum measurement must be sustained in existence through the fluctuations of incompatible eigenvalues which constitute the infinite Heisenberg uncertainty which exists with respect to the noncommuting variables. To wit, the finite exists only through its participation with the infinite. All transformations are definable in terms of mere projection operations; therefore, these transformations, when investigated, always reveal the presence of conservation laws which seem to govern, or provide constraints upon, these transformations. What is called the unity of apperception in Kant's Critique of Pure Reason is synonymous with the existence of the underlying noumenon which provides the rationality of any particular series of perceived continuous transformations entertained within a finite mind. The interpenetration of the categories of time and space support the unity of apperception. The increase in complexity of coherent systems with time would seem to involve the creation ex nihilo of quantities of information. There are reasons for believing, however, that what is really involved in cases such as this is merely the partial redistribution of data along a spatial information gradient onto a gradient which is part spatial and part temporal where the total quantity of information is conserved in the process. With the introduction of excitation energy, the nonlocal, distributed information content is partially transformed into local, lumped information content. Is it, in principle, possible for all the neural firings which comprise the brain state to which is associated a particular mental state to have been stimulated to occur entirely from outside the brain's neural network,

obviating the need for intricate feedback loops connecting the neurons with one another which normally support such patterns of neuron firings? Intuitively we suspect that merely reproducing the requisite neural firing patterns from outside the network would not be sufficient to produce the normally occurring associated mental state. This is because the observed neural firings would only possess a determinate order in terms of the perception of their order by means of a neural network genuinely possessing intricate feedback structures. We might, in turn, be puzzled by the force of this particular intuition which has at its root the notion of the importance of timing and synchronization of the neurons with respect to one another. But this would really only be important if there was something which the neurons incidentally interact with in the course of their normal process of functioning to which the order of their "firing" might be fundamentally related. We might then seek to include this additional something and produce the changes in it also from outside, just as in the case of the neurons. Notice that in every case where we are supposedly able to reproduce a given sequence of neural firings, we are dependent upon a favorable condition wherein the time interval between firings within a given small region of the brain are larger than the time uncertainty of the quantum system constituting the neural network. It is precisely at this point where the time interval between neural events becomes comparable to the quantum mechanical time uncertainty in which we become no longer able to determine the sequence of these events from without, or outside these events! It is here that we say that the temporal order of events becomes indeterminate. However, what we really mean to say here is that the sequence of events has become indeterminate with respect to a set of external controls. We find that our earlier intuition about the problem of the timing of the events appropriate to the establishing of the requisite brain states crops up yet again. There is still something with respect to which the patterned events (comprising the requisite brain states) occur which is important from the standpoint of timing and synchronization, and we might, therefore, again, seek to include it, just as before. The point here is that this process of trying to include the entire background against which the timing of the brain events are significant can never be

completed; we face an infinite regress here. This regress is apparently resolved within the quantum mechanically uncertain time interval of the network and therefore is forever beyond manipulation from outside, that is to say, there cannot exist a determinate program adequate to produce the timing necessary to integrate or unify the neural firings into the requisite coherent pattern we term consciousness. To restate, this is because the ultimate embedding substrate within which the neural network functions is made up of interconnected events possessing a time uncertainty which prevents their delicate synchronization from ever being introduced from outside; moreover, such a synchronization of events could not be simulated by a computer utilizing a deterministic program since the notion of the rate of time's passage is meaningless within a deterministic system. We must remember that a computer simulation is a strictly formal operation for which the physical system mediating the simulation must satisfy a mere set of necessary conditions such as stability, continuity, causality, internal synchronization, etc. The timing of physical occurrences taking place within the physical medium of the program with respect to external events is completely immaterial because, in effect, nothing new ever takes place during the course of the calculation which is one and the same process as the simulation itself. Contrast to this, a situation in which the medium in which data manipulation or processing is taking place, constitutes not merely a necessary condition, but a necessary and sufficient condition for the "calculation" being performed. Distributed throughout the medium, is the information necessary to the carry through the action of data processing to its desired conclusion, but this information is not immediately available, it must be accessed. @$We stated earlier that digital computer did not, in a fundamental sense, possess memory since it is always possible to duplicate a digital computer possessing data in memory without the duplicate ever having been "switched on" so that it might receive "input." We also noted that a quantum computer is capable of possessing genuine memory due to the impossibility, in principle, of copying a quantum state! This genuine memory possessed by the ideal

quantum computer represents an authentic example of privileged or private access of the computer to its own "computational" states! How do we succeed in explaining the action of a medium in terms of elements derived through reductive abstraction of these elements from the original activity of such a medium? An example of this paradox is the on-going attempt by theoretical physicists to explicate the action of the total quantum vacuum energy field in terms of the subatomic particles discovered to date. Of course, what is called dualism is completely ruled out in the case where the brain is thought to function in a deterministic manner. This is because the isomorphism which must maintain between brain states and mental states precludes the possibility that these two qualitatively different types of states are causally connected; for any effective causal interaction between the two would necessarily disrupt the isomorphism which is presupposed by the dualistic theory of mind. On the other hand, in the absence of causal interaction between brain states and mental states, there is no rational basis upon which we can say that particular mental states correspond to, or belong to a particular brain. On the other hand again, however, if dualism is rejected and causal relationships are allowed to obtain between brain states and mental states, then both types of events/processes must be mediated by the very same underlying substance, or substrate. In this way, the whole distinction between what are called brain states and mental states completely breaks down, and one is forced to adopt a monistic theory of mind. The notion of historicism, in the sense provided by the theories of Marx and Weber, is conceptually unintelligible because it assumes the existence of a distinction the validity of which it then later denies. That is the distinction between physical causal factors and historical factors in the explication of social, political, cultural, and economic developments. The validity of historicism would mean that history as a science of large

scale human development doesn't really work, that it doesn't have anything substantive to say at all because the real causal efficacy behind the changes which history has traditionally studied lies at a level of description which is at once lower and more fundamental than that where historical explanations are articulated. That which is the source and sustainer of all things cannot be viewed as being anything but infinite. Evolution may only be a local phenomenon - not a global phenomenon; evolution in the sense of the genuine emergence of wholly unprecedented and unanticipated forms, structures, or dynamisms - without this process of development somehow drawing upon a pre-existing reservoir of information within which these "emergent" forms are at least implicitly prefigured, and which mediates and underpins the evolutionary developmental process - is tantamount to the acceptance of a fundamental process which is itself uncaused and which is not admitted to be the cause (or reason) for its own existence. In the vacuum, information exists in a nonlocal, simultaneously connected form. When the vacuum energy fluctuations mediate the occurrence of physical processes, there is a transduction of nonlocal, parallel and simultaneously connected information into a new local, sequential, and temporally connected form. The paradigmatic example of this transduction process is the spontaneous production of fundamental particles out of the vacuum within accelerated reference (non-Lorentzian) frames. The ground of existence cannot be outstripped by any possible existent "thing." Nonlocality presents the possibility of putting quantum mechanical probability on a "rational" footing; in other words, a given wavefunction is normalizable on the average. The condition of normalizability is not a very restrictive condition on a quantum mechanical wavefunction; there are an infinite number of ways to refract or decompose a given wavefunction into a spectrum of eigenstates (of an incompatible observable) so as to satisfy the normalization condition.

The fundamental paradigm shift which marked the transition from classical (Newtonian) mechanics to the mechanics of quantum phenomena may be captured in the manner in which the implied unified physical law constrains the phenomena of nature: classical physical law states that what it prescribes to occur must necessarily occur - any behavior apart from this being forbidden; quantum mechanical physical law states that what it does not proscribe or forbid to occur necessarily occurs. This constitutes a kind of fecundity principle. If the quantum mechanical vacuum is the origin of temporality, then the vacuum must itself be timeless, which is to say, eternal. Moreover, that which is the originator of space must itself be spatially unlimited. Human intelligence has evolved to a point just short of that required to think something genuinely interesting. The neural network computer does not store information in any particular location within the network, but stores information at particular energy levels of the global interaction of the network as a whole. Each new bit of data which is fed into the network is stored at a next higher energy level of the network. What ultimately becomes this next higher energy level is determined by a virtually chaotic process of neural "firings" which occurs throughout the network and which is stimulated by the introduction of a data input signal. Myriads of neurons throughout the entire network continue to fire randomly until a new state of least energy is reached by the neural network as a whole. If the separation between different energy levels within the neural network (representing different bits of information) are close enough together in energy, then it becomes very probable that there will be a process of continual virtual energy transitions occurring between the various discrete energy levels of the network throughout its entirety. An interesting point here is that these virtual energy transitions within the network owe entirely to the action of the quantum fluctuations in the energy of the vacuum electromagnetic field. Moreover, the probabilities of given neural energy transitions occurring within the network are

determined by the presence of the constantly occurring virtual energy transitions of the network which, again, are mediated entirely by way of the quantum mechanical fluctuations in the vacuum electromagnetic field, themselves, owing to the necessary presence of Heisenberg energy uncertainty within the quantum vacuum. An essential difference between what are called virtual and what are called real energy transitions, is parallel to the distinction between what are called virtual particles and what are called real particles, respectively, in the theory of particle physics, namely, virtual energy transitions cannot be measured directly, whereas real energy transitions can be measured directly, for instance, in laboratory experiments. The real energy transitions which take place within the neural network, and which are responsible for the communication of its processed information to the "outside world," i.e., to the consciousness of both the individual subject as well as his listeners, in the case of verbal communication, are, themselves, overdetermined phenomena. This is to say, there are an indefinite number of distinct sequences of virtual energy transitions which are capable of producing the very same real energy transition within the neural network. This assertion reminds us of Feynman's sum of histories formalism for calculating the probabilities of fundamental particle reactions. If it were not for the existence of energy degeneracy within the neural network, there would be only one path of neural firings possible connecting one energy level of the network to the next higher one. The operation of a neural network would in this case be formalizable in the form of a computer algorithm. Thus is the way to what is called intentionality opened up and made possible: the very same determinate sequence of neural firings may have an unlimited number of alternative future brain states in view, in other words. It is interesting to note that the interaction of the virtual energy states of the neural network is not mediated primarily by the physical realization of the network itself, but by the next highest order of perturbations to the energy of the neural network. What we have been calling "virtual energy transitions," are really only the first order perturbations to the global energy of the neural network, conceived of as a quantum mechanical system. The first order perturbations, what we have been

calling, "virtual transitions" within the network, are themselves, informed or mediated by, the quantum mechanical perturbations to the first order perturbation energies of the network, i.e., 2nd order energy perturbations, thus making the first order perturbations overdetermined phenomena as well. In turn, the second order perturbation energy transitions (what might whimsically be called, virtual - virtual energy transitions) are mediated by the occurrence of transitions between second order perturbation energies, etc., and so on. At this point we might realize that the real energy transitions occurring within the neural network which are normally thought to be immediately responsible for the processing of all information by the network, are engendered not by physical processes occurring at a lower level of organization, but via processes taking place at higher levels of organization, represented by the next higher order perturbation energy description of the neural network. We know that the virtual energy transitions of any given quantum mechanical system are owing to the presence of energy uncertainty in the system. It is more accurate, however, to say that this energy uncertainty is present in the quantum vacuum itself, and is merely communicated to the quantum system, of interacting elementary particles, say, through the exchange of energy between the quantum system and the vacuum, which is itself where the energy uncertainty originates; we saw earlier that the wavefunction describing a quantum mechanical system cannot be normalized if the energy uncertainty is conceived of as being a property of the quantum system itself, so that it must be an inherent property of the quantum vacuum. So perhaps we see now that the neural network itself acts merely as a kind of terminus to an information reduction process, it acts as a kind of "reducing valve" which serves to abstract a relatively tiny portion of information from the virtually infinite information content of the overdetermined quantum vacuum which is instantaneously and nonlocally connected with itself, and therefore represents the highest level of information processing because it constitutes the interconnectivity of energy at its most exhaustive level. On this view, information, like energy, may not be created or destroyed, but is a

conserved quantity, and its ultimate source is the infinite energy reservoir represented by the quantum vacuum. We already saw how Temporality itself stems from the presence of quantum energy uncertainty, which, in turn, originates in the vacuum, conceived of, again, as a reservoir of virtually infinite energy density. Consequently, since Temporality itself has its origin in the vacuum, it follows that the this infinite sea of vacuum energy itself had no beginning in time! The vacuum now begins to remind us of Heraclitus' "ever living fire," "in measures kindling and in measures going out," and thereby mediating, as an eternal flux, all the changes continually taking place in the natural order. Moreover, Heraclitus' statement that, "everything is an exchange for fire, and fire an exchange for every thing," reminds us the interconvertibility of mass and energy in quantum relativistic field theory, this interconvertibility being mediated by the continual exchange of energy between matter and vacuum. Heraclitus' "ever living fire" is to him the fire of the gods, yet uncreated by the gods. His statement that "Thunderbolt steers the Universe" no doubt refers to the thunderbolt wielded by Zeus, the greatest of all the Olympian gods; when this thunderbolt is identified with "the fire of the gods," that is, with Heraclitus' ever living fire, the parallel between it and the vacuum becomes an intriguingly close one; the quantum vacuum, by eternally mediating all physical processes, manages to "steer the Universe." It is also interesting that Greek mythology tells us that Time owes its existence to Chaos through that fact that the god, Chaos, is named as the father of Kronos. Moreover, the Greek word, arche, which means source or origin in ancient Greek, is translated into Latin as principium, i.e., ordering principle. The idea behind this particular translation of arche into principium is the same one expressed by Leibniz, when he states in his Monadology that, "the conditions sufficient to create the world are necessary at every succeeding moment of time in order to sustain the world's existence." We now arrive at the notion of first cause, not in the usual sense of first in a temporal sequence, but in the at once broader and subtler sense of most fundamental or substantive.

Since it is the pattern of virtual particle emission and absorption which every real particle continually undergoes which determines the mass of the particle, it follows that real particle masses are determined through the particular manner in which real particles exchange energy with the fluctuating quantum vacuum field; consequently, alterations in the density of the vacuum field energy will affect the masses of particles occupying this vacuum. We might expect that this relationship between mass-energy and vacuum-energy is symmetrical in nature because the interactions mediating the continual exchange of energy between matter and vacuum are themselves reversible interactions. This two-way causal, symmetrical relationship between mass energy and vacuum energy within quantum field theory reminds us of a similar relationship between mass and space-time curvature within the theory of general relativity: the presence of mass within a given region of spacetime produces an additional curvature in this spacetime; also, an increase in the curvature of a particular region of spacetime produces an increase in the mass of particles or material bodies already occupying this region. Since spatio-temporal variations in the energy density of the vacuum energy field are correlated with variations in spacetime curvature, we might suppose that some sort of conformal mapping relationship obtains between the ratio of real particle to virtual particle energy densities and the degree of mutual inclination of the time and space axes ( of the Minkowski light cone ) to one another. This relationship is also suggested by the fact that real particles are virtual particles which have been promoted to the level of real existence through the absorption of energy; particles are excitations of the vacuum state which is itself a reservoir or sea of virtual particles. Also, through the application Mach's formula for the speed of sound to this vacuum energy reservoir, we see that such a conformal mapping relationship between Einsteinian spacetime curvature and spatial-temporal variations in the zero-point energy

of the vacuum (or, alternatively, its energy density) must involve mappings between the hypersolid angle swept out by the light line in four-dimensional (Minkowski ) spacetime, and the energy density (or pressure) of the vacuum. We must distinguish between evolution's creative and its critical faculties. Adaptation is not the purpose of evolution; it is the trial and error critical process which evolution is subjected to by the contingent environmental conditions within which it finds itself operating. Darwinian natural selection is merely a critical process; it is not in any way a creative process, in and of itself. Natural selection merely structures, channels or filters the creative suggestions made to it; it plays no role whatever in the fundamental dynamism driving biological evolution; natural selection is merely the set of boundary conditions within which the dynamism of evolution functions, perhaps in the sense of Bergson's elan vital. Here again, we have an example of how boundary and initial conditions are essentially separable from the dynamisms which they conscribe. Similar remarks were made regarding the process of technological advancement, which was viewed as a progression in sophistication in imposing initial and boundary conditions upon the invariant and unitary dynamism of Nature. We know that natural selection is not able to operate unless self-reproducing information-bearing structures are already in existence; moreover, natural selection has little opportunity to mold these self-reproducing structures into more complex forms unless it can profit from the creative suggestions made to it through the operation of random mutations, themselves useless if they cannot be passed on to future offspring. So it is also necessary that something analogous to a genetic code be contained within these self-reproducing structures, themselves the expression of the information contained within this genetic code. The problem, then, with Darwinism, or its modern derivative, neoDarwinism, is that a great deal of evolutionary development must have already occurred, in the form of so-called chemical evolution prior to the

appearance of the first self-reproducing, information bearing structures, before the distinctly Darwinian process of natural selection of random mutations is permitted to begin. So the creative dynamism, spoken of previously, is to be identified with that dynamism lying behind the prebiotic process of chemical evolution, a process which does not halt its operation once the Darwinian process of evolution commences, but which continues hand in hand with natural selection, and, moreover, maintaining its central role as the motivating dynamism in the evolution of progressively more complex forms of life.

The subjective "I am," which is just the individual's personal consciousness, dependent upon the objective world outside itself, is not to be confused with the objective "I AM," which is the one and unique self-existent Consciousness which is the source of all individual subjective consciousnesses. It is the quite common type of fantasy, frequently indulged in by proud and vain human mortals, to imagine oneself in some glorious situation where one is either vindicated, suddenly elevated in greatness (or suddenly shown to have been great) or rendered, usually by one's own efforts, victorious or triumphant over some powerful adversity or persecution, or moreover, to receive praise and adulation from the many as one speaks, performs or otherwise acts in a manner which compellingly displays ones authority. We human beings indulge in this kind of fantazisation a great deal when we are children, perhaps more so when developing adolescents, while some of us, upon becoming "adults," tend as we approach middle age to set aside, eventually completely, such obvious puerile self-glorifications of the imagination. Some of us, on the other hand, never seem to put such self-gloried imaginings behind us, despite advancing age and maturity. Everyone has either heard of or reflected upon the phenomenon of selfishness exhibited in the strong tendency we all have of seeking out (in secret, of course) from a pack of family photographs, those particular

photos in which we ourselves appear. Eventually, we become aware of the implications of this kind of behavior, which shames us: if everyone were to be this self-centered, then there would be no one left to care for me as much as (or more than) I care for myself and I would be a selfish person alone in a universe of selfish persons. Of course, part of one's motivation for thinking in this way, perhaps unbeknownst to oneself, is the Kantian notion of the Golden Rule; to wit, that I must act in such a manner that I will that my action become a universal moral law. But what of the phenomenon where I imagine myself being some other person when I am in the midst of some profound or deeply moving aesthetic or intellectual experience; I imagine what this experience would be like for this other person and somehow the intensity and wonder of the experience is amplified for me, myself, through this psychological projection. Part of the augmentation of the aesthetic experience for me is the sense of personal, if partly disembodied glory which redounds to my sense of identity because it is I who is leading this person, in my mind's eye, to the unaccustomed though fuller appreciation of this experience. Partly again, the experience is, for me, augmented because I borrow the other's innocence, using it as a foil against which the experience may be rediscovered by me in all its aboriginal wonder. Moreover, I act as this person's spiritual mentor; I help this person penetrate a mystery which I have long ago discovered for myself, and if this other person is ultimately identified with my own self; this is implied because all of these projections occur within my mind's eye, then I seek to view myself as the father of my own future spiritual and intellectual development. But on a more basic human level, I am imagining the sharing of a profound idea or experience with another person in a way which is seldom, if ever demonstrated in actual social intercourse with my fellow human beings; certainly it is love which motivates this peculiar psychological projection - the kind of love which does not distinguish self from other.

I have no acquaintance with either physical objects so-called nor with

any phenomena taking place within the domain of other minds; in fact, I have had no acquaintance with any phenomena whatever other than those pertaining to my own psychological states, states which are presumably closely related to the concerted electrochemical activity of my billions of cortical neurons. Consequently, I am forced to accept the existence of physical objects and other minds purely on a faith borne of appearances which might be easily explained numerous other ways than those which seem to be dictated by what is called "common sense." I wish to remark here that if an omniscient ( not to mention omnipotent ) God fails to exist who is, by the way, the only possible vouchsafe for the existence of an objective world containing other consciousnesses than my own, then there is absolutely nothing standing in the way of my drawing the less than comforting conclusion that I alone exist, i.e., Solipsism is the metaphysical truth, and moreover, there is absolutely nothing standing in the way of my concluding that I, myself, am ultimately responsible for all the phenomena which I have experienced or ever will experience and that God does indeed exist and that I am Him. But of course, I wholeheartedly reject such a preposterous conclusion: solipsism is a thesis which I must reject out of hand and with it the proposition that God does not exist. What I have just stated above is by no means a rational proof of the existence of God. But it is an argument which reflects the inner logic of the whole of my being in its ineluctable affirmation of His existence from which I have not the strength to depart. The very structure of language contains within itself the subtle implication that all human beings possess the belief, whether they consciously realize it or not, that the sum total of possible knowledge is itself integral. But this hypothesis about the inherently integral nature of knowledge implies, in turn, the existence of a unitary repository for this sum of knowledge, which is to say, a universal mind or intellect.

It occurs to me that all true mysteries are intimately connected and intertwined with one another; to find the solution to only one of these mysteries would mean having found the answer to all. Just listing some examples may succeed in illustrating to one's deeper intuition that this must be true: a few of these mysteries are that of existence itself, the origin of consciousness, freedom of the will, the mystery of Time and along with it that of eternity, the mystery of immortality and that of divinity. A bright young child may agree with this observation, remarking, "well, God exists and He knows the answer to all things." But it really does seem that the contemplation of any one of these mysteries inevitably leads to the contemplation of all the others as well as some which I haven't mentioned, and one may ask, " why might this be so?"

Most individuals are totally incapable of what is called lucid dreaming, dreaming where the dreamer remains aware that it is he who is in control of all the action of the dream. Freud's doctrine of the conservation of psychic energy suggests that the control of the dream action is mediated by the domain of the psyche lying between full consciousness and the level of consciousness at which the dreamer's mind operates so that the action of the dream must dissolve upon the dreamer attaining his full consciousness because the intermediary domain of consciousness which controls the dream is reduced to nil or "squeezed out." An analogy will serve here. A river may not rise to an altitude greater than that of its source, at which level its kinetic energy is completely transmuted into potential energy. It might therefore be thought that only those individuals who experience repression of their normal full consciousness would be capable of "lucid dreaming" as the control of the dream action would be mediated by the consciousness within the domain between the individual's repressed consciousness and his normal potentially full consciousness; this is just a slightly more abstract way of saying that the

psychic energy which is usually unavailable for utilization by the conscious mind is freed up during the unconsciousness of sleep and rendered available to the unconscious for use in mediating the phantasmagorical action of the various dream sequences, themselves, according to Freud, the acting out of wish fulfillments. The upshot of all this is that the presence of lucid dreaming is a possible indication that the individual experiencing it is not reaching his normal psychic potential for full wakeful consciousness and that the reason for this is a deficit of available psychic energy due to the presence of myriad emotional conflicts lying repressed within his unconscious mind.

Quantum Mechanics verifies the old Scholastic metaphysical understanding of all change or Becoming as occurring due to a deficit of Being: all real physical processes are mediated via virtual processes; these virtual processes possess by definition an energy smaller than the energy uncertainty of the quantum mechanical system which is comprised by the real processes mediated by them. The total energy uncertainty of a quantum mechanical system is, by the way, relative to the reference frame within which the system is "viewed," and therefore differences in the vacuum's zero-point energy reflect changes in our frame of motion - in the sense provided by relativity. More specifically, Lorenz contractions occur to not only to the eigenvalues of length, but also to the quantum uncertainties of length. Similar statements may be made with respect to momentum, energy, time, etc.. This precise "deficit of Being" may only be defined in terms of the complete description of the total process; this description, as already noted, exists only for itself and cannot be derived from without as an infinite regress of description stands in our way here. In this connection we may state the fundamental principle that "the mediator may not be defined in terms of the total set of processes which it mediates." This "deficit of Being" of Scholastic philosophy is exactly analogous to the energy uncertainty of quantum mechanics. If Hegel is correct in saying

that positive entities exist only by virtue of the accumulation of various negations of relations holding between the Absolute and itself, then each entity must more or less clearly and distinctly exhibit the unified totality of Reality in microcosm, the developmental program of which is contained in the greater quantity of information which is determined when a number of these entities come into conjunction with one another. For instance, the molecular bonding of atoms, whether it be ionic, covalent, or by the weaker Van der Waal's force, cannot be induced to occur within a previously specified period of time simply through the manipulation of the atoms 'from outside;" one may only place the atoms in the approximate position whereupon the action of bond formation ensues through the spontaneous action of the vacuum electromagnetic field. In fact, the quantum mechanical method utilized in physical or quantum chemistry to determine the various bonding probabilities has nothing whatever to say about which precise configuration or shape, out of the many possible configurations, will be formed as a result or the spontaneous bonding process. This fact is readily seen when one attempts to view the spontaneous conformation of a denatured macromolecule such as a nucleic acid as the result of the amino acids of composing the molecule trying myriad possible different conformations by trial and error until the energetically favored (most stable) conformation is found. In even relatively small macromolecules the total number of possible conformations is so staggeringly large that even if the components try a different configuration every 10 -13 seconds (a very liberal assumption) the time required to hit on the "correct" conformation by chance would take many orders of magnitude longer than the present age of the observable universe! The wavefunction which describes the total system of interacting atoms entering into the bonding process is approximated as a product of the individual wavefunctions describing the approximate quantum state of the atoms; it is only the complete wavefunction which describes these atoms as being inextricably entangled with the whole vacuum-energy/ mass-energy matrix which contains the information about the shape of the resultant

molecule, among other things. No individual quantum mechanical wavefunction is truly normalizable, although a large ensemble of such wavefunctions will approach normalizability in the limit of infinite ensembles. There will always appear to be coupling between the eigenstates of a wavefunction which is, itself, merely an approximately exact wavefunction; in reality, there is only one universal wavefunction, as its normalizability requires. This process is very much akin to the decrease of fuzziness in a holographic image which occurs on two or more pieces of a shattered holographic emulsion when the various pieces are refitted together. On this view all development of material systems from the simplest subatomic constituents to the most complex living organisms, consists in the negation of negation, engendered by the conjunctions of these constituents which occurs by chance outside length uncertainty of the constituents, but which is actively directed once they interpenetrate within this range where they enter into the effective range of their innate quantum- uncertainty mediated tendencies toward selforganization, tendencies which are a manifestation of the partially distinct "image" of the Absolute, i.e., the universal wavefunction, which each constituent contains in microcosm within itself. Because creation is conceived under the aspect of the negation of the negation of contextual relatedness within the Absolute, this negation which is negated being understood as the reduction of information resulting from the partial expression of the universal wavefunction as a product of partial wavefunctions corresponding to relatively uncertain subatomic constituents, the problem of "Why is there something rather than nothing?," is no longer rendered insoluble by the requirement of explaining creation ex nihilo, but it is simply recognized that there has to have always been something or other, so what better candidate for this something than that unified plenum which is its own description, which is per Aristotle its own eternal contemplation; that entity which Hegel calls the Absolute, and which we have styled "the universal

wavefunction." September 2011 Should the notion of substance turn out to be an incoherent one, then we are not barred from asserting that, “you can indeed get something from nothing provided that there are no possible conditions to prevent this.” May 2014 You can't get something from nothing, but neither can one get everything from anything. Are we then forever cut off from certain possibilities of existence, if we insist that Reality is One? The ground of being is itself neither thing, nor existent nor being and is not unified because is falls short of unity, but on account of its superabundant and overflowing richness. Dr. Scholem, in his Trends in Jewish Mysticism, tells us that in any case where there is a transition from one state or configuration to another that, "the void is spanned for an instant." Madame Blavatsky refers to evolution as a "spiritual Opus in reverse," meaning that the world arose through a process of involution (a reduction of the infinite to the finite), but containing a vague recollection of the whole from which it was originally abstracted and which guides its future development. This future development is constituted by the return of the Absolute back to itself, directed from above and hence is a recapitulation of the timeless and transcendent within the realm of the temporal and immanent. To say that Reality cannot be given a complete description on account of the inevitable pitfall of infinite regress is merely to say that if this description does not already exist, then it can in no way be constructed; there is nothing in what has just been said to prevent a complete description of Reality which has always existed. In fact, it is due to the lack of a complete description which is responsible for the existence of temporality. This observation is very much in the same spirit of the mathematician Kurt Gödel's discovery that the notion of truth is stronger than the notion of provability; the fact that a theorem expressible within the symbolic language of a particular logico-mathematical system may not be constructed from the axioms of its system utilizing the rules of inference of this system does not prevent this theorem from "existing" in

the sense of its being true. But one might ask what is the meaning of mathematical theorems which are beyond the comprehension of any finite mind and which are not true by construction from a possible collection of axioms, but true in some more fundamental sense. Wittgenstein tells us that we may not use substantives in a manner which attempts to extend the reference of these terms beyond the scope of all possible experience without falling into either meaninglessness or absurdity. Therefore, when we ask the question, "Does God exist?" the most we can possible mean by this question is, "Does God exist within our space-time continuum?" We cannot ask whether God exists in Reality (Wirklichkeit) since Reality cannot possess a complete description without this description having always existed and without admitting the existence of such a description, one necessarily beyond all possible attempts to construct it, and which may only exist from a single point of view or perspective. So it seems that one may not ask whether God exists in Reality (in the sense of Wirklichkeit ) without presupposing an answer in the affirmative, because the admission of the existence of Ultimate Reality is one and the same with the admission of God's existence. It is meaningful, however, to ask this same question in the sense of Realitat. That which has always existed, and its complete description, which has always existed must be a part of this same eternally pre-existent Reality. It is obvious that the description and the Reality must be essentially one and the same entity which is, who is, God. The finite may not be complete without conditions being specified, and these specified conditions may not obtain except within the purview of a larger context, containing the particular finite thing. Only those independently occurring genetic mutations may occur at lower levels in the gene regulatory hierarchy, i.e., to structural genes, which become integrated together within a member of an evolving species which might have possessed a common source in the form of single mutation to a higher order regulatory gene, one which controls the expression of the original set of structural genes prior to the occurrence

of these independent mutations. The operation of Darwinian natural selection presupposes the existence of a gene regulatory hierarchy which controls not only the expression of individual genes, but more importantly controls the integration of the expressions of large numbers of genes at the lower levels of this hierarchy. April 2014 cit=“ENCODE is an acronym for 'ENCyclopedia Of Dna Elements'. It is a project that eventuated after the Human Genome Project, which coded all of the human genome, completed in 2003. On 5 September 2012, initial results of the Encode project were released in a set of 30 papers, published in various journals, such as Nature. So far it has determined that over 80% of the genome has biochemical functionality, much of it involved in controlling expression levels of coding DNA”, c.f., web= http://www.dirkbertels.net/diary/diary.php

To reiterate, there has always been something. What better candidate for this something than that than which nothing greater can be conceived (per Anselm) ? This something has no complete description except within and through itself. The only truly determinate entity is the totality of everything which is possible or it is the void, as nothingness is, by its very nature, determinate.

It has been humorously noted that Time exists so that everything will not happen at once. Temporality seems to require that (per Bergson) genuine novelty continually intrude into the world. The act of creation is not an event within history; it is the beginning of history; it is the very inception of novelty. But since the continued presence of temporality seems to require continual activity of creation, it seems more consistent to assume that creation itself is a fundamental process which itself had

no beginning, which was itself never created, that the activity of creation is that which has always existed and which requires no explanation other than itself. On the other hand, however, it seems that this fundamental process of creation cannot be a unified process, for otherwise it is an act which could have been consummated instantaneously, once for all. Temporality must therefore be a process of recapitulation of timeless reality with Reality itself as the medium through which the recapitulation is accomplished.

If Reality has a complete description, it is not one which can be constructed, not one which had any origin in time: it is indeterminacy itself which is ultimately responsible for the existence of temporality itself. If such a complete description exists it must have always existed and the description and the reality must be one and the same. Consciousness offers itself immediately as a likely candidate for such an ultimate reality since consciousness is its own representation. If it is true that consciousness is required in order to collapse a quantum mechanical wavefunction into a determinate eigenstate, then consciousness, if it had an origin in time, must have arose out the interaction of uncollapsed wavefunctions - it must have arisen out of a situation of infinite energy uncertainty. The velocity of light is determined by the ratio of real particle energy to virtual particle energy. Hence, the elsewhere region of the Minkowski light cone may be identified with that region of the vacuum which stands in a relation of Bell nonlocality to the observer. The unity of the conscious mind is no doubt owing to Bell-nonlocal connectivity of neurons within the brain. If it is true that there has always been something (as in the metaphysical question, "why is there something rather than nothing"), out of which the

Universe arose, assuming that this something is not just the Universe itself, then there must not be, ultimately speaking, a universal or all encompassing, ongoing process of either evolution or degradation in the development of Reality. This is because by this present time an infinite amount of time must have already passed so that Reality should have either degraded into utter nothingness or reached a state of eternally unchanging perfection and we do not observe the Universe to presently occupy either of these two extreme states: temporality could not exist within a universe which derives its existence from a ground of unchanging perfection (fullness of being) nor could the universe derive its existence from a ground of nothingness (complete degradation). We now arrive at the conclusion that Reality as a whole is neither evolving (increasing in complexity) nor is it devolving (decreasing in complexity) so that any apparent changes in complexity in the Universe, e.g., biological evolution, increasing entropy, are merely local changes which are on the whole compensated by opposing processes elsewhere.

We may think of causal relationships as obtaining between terms or entities occupying a plane of equal levels of abstraction with the process of abstraction itself and its opposing process, that of concretion, being processes which do not admit of an exhaustively causal analysis. If it is only possible to alter the boundary conditions and initial conditions which the dynamism of Nature is subject to , but not to alter in any way the dynamism itself, then the most advanced technologies will amount to nothing more than having discovered how to goad Nature into doing, in the best way she knows how, what she has all along been in the very act of doing. It is the possibility of formulating recursive propositions and this possibility alone which allows the domain of true theorems, expressible within the language of a deductive system, to transcend in magnitude the

domain of provable theorems, i.e., theorems which may be deduced from the axioms of the system through application of the rules of inference of the system. There is no comprehensive rule by which a computing device may recognize the appearance of a recursive proposition since recursiveness is a structure which can only be suggested; it cannot be literally stated. June 1998

The recursiveness of consciousness is apparent in the fact that the dying away of represent-ations within consciousness takes place in absolute simultaneity with the bringing into being of new representational contents to consciousness. In fact, these two processes, that of the passing away and the coming into being of consciousness’ transitory representations, indeed, are one and the very same process! Unlike representations within consciousness, in which there necessarily exists a figure/ground structure, with only figure being represented and ground supporting this figure beneath the level of awareness, in the dynamic flow of the representations of consciousness, figure and ground coexist on an equal footing as a unified phenomenal flux. We are, however, only using the terms, figure and ground, in the metaphorical sense of becoming as figure, or figuring, and fading, if you will, as ground, or, more aptly, grounding, i.e., grounding of figuring. But insofar as this metaphor of figure and ground applies to the changing representations of consciousness, to this extent we shall say that the process of the simultaneous becoming and fading of these representations is a process which is not enframed. It is a process which takes place ultimately always outside. The contents of consciousness always come into being not from elsewhere within itself, but always from outside itself - from otherness or from alterity, but never from within alterity. For there is not within-ness for the unconditioned, the unbounded, the indeterminate. The indeterminate does not specify anything of itself as a coordinated totality. The contraction of the infinite upon finiteness is itself a transfinite or transcendental process. Now a transcendental being is itself an infinite determination. The outsideness

of alterity transcends the category of spatiality. For this variety of outsideness is not simply coextensive with the outsideness of all other determinations. This holds for a particular existent among a finite set of existents within a preestablished spacetime. In short, the outsideness of alterity is intrinsic or innate, that is, it is not determined outside itself. So alterity possesses its own alterity and this implies the givenness of other alterities. This is why an object determined in space and time is not other in the same way that another being like myself is other. The becoming of a transcendental being is nontemporal as it is not reducible to a determination of substance. The being and becoming of alterity is what constitutes spatiotemporality. All baryons are composed of various combinations of three different quarks out of the six possible different types of quark; the mesons, however, are each composed of different quark pairs from among the six fundamental quark types. The fundamental force responsible for binding together the various quark combinations out of which all baryons and mesons are composed possesses the bizarre property of increasing in strength as the distance separating the quarks increases. The important result of this is that it is impossible to fragment these quark laden particles into their fundamental constituent quarks: it is impossible to produce a "free quark," in other words. This is almost as though the quark does not possess a determinate energy structure except as it exists within groups of two, three or possibly larger numbers of quarks. The quark may be an example of an entity whose identity is totally context dependent with the quark itself, paradoxically, providing the context for its own determination as a substantive entity. Such an entity might not possess a definite energy equivalence in the sense that it is not possible to determine the quark's energy independently of the energies associated with the force fields the particle produces. An entity such as the quark which is defined in terms of the combined effect that it has upon itself (and one or more duplicates of itself ) provides us with the best example to date of what might be called a self-existent entity. Quantum nonlocality effects could govern the superluminal transmission

of information between various widely separated locations within the brain's cortex without producing a verifiable violation of special relativity's restriction on superluminal transmission of information between separate minds. This would be possible if the very same nonlocality effects are required for the integration of the individual's consciousness as a whole. The idea or flash of insight would then be time-delayed by the necessary time interval involved in conveying this idea from the location in his brain where the crucial integration occurred to those parts of his nervous system which pick up this message and in turn translate it into classically described nerve impulses then responsible for the ultimate series of muscle cell contractions required to transmit the message to the external world of attending observers. Another way of looking at this kind of nonlocality is for the nonlocalized quantum effects to be confined to a vacuum energy/information reservoir, exhaustively connected with itself nonlocally, which is continually tapped into by the neural network of the person's brain. September 2011

It is intriguing to consider that, consciousness (implementing a will capable of “startling” the quantum vacuum in its instinctive ambition to marshall its multifarious fluctuations into a giant and useless standing wave pattern) is informed by brain functions likely constituted out of the very superluminal signals that are intersubjectively forbidden by special relativity. Consciousness acts to buffer these forbidden information signals. Time paradoxes can be harmlessly dissipated if the would be causally contradictory information generated by processes potentially leading to them are “vented” to higher dimensional time. Libet’s subjective “time bubble” (specious present) of approximately 500 ms in duration swallows up any possible forbidden signals, since these presumably can travel no further into the past or future than somewhat less than 250 ms. If freely willed action on the part of an embodied spacetime agent in the sense of his possessing the powers and authority to initiate causal chains, presupposes conscious intention to act, while consciousness is incapable of “bootstrapping” itself into an intentional state in real time, but requires the minimum

time to do this which is presupposed by the brain stimulation experiments of Dr. Libet, then what we appear to have here is a natural mechanism within the brain enforcing chronology protection. In a word, if information is always constituted by superluminal signals (because this necessarily occurs within a unified conscious state), but superluminal signals are never constituted by information, then chronology protection seems assured. The fact that only data can be transmitted and received intersubjectively, while information is always transmitted “infrasubjectively”, i.e., is constitutive of subjective conscious states capable of informing intentions of the free agent to act by initiating a causal chain, is what at bottom enforces chronology protection. Also, the prevention of cross-talk between distinct subjective centers of volition through the judicious parceling and administration and quantum vacuum signal bandwidth by what may well constitute the equivalent of a “cosmic FCC”, could be described as an equivalent way of describing the chronology protection mechanism. Or perhaps we are really only attempting to describe the very same chronology protection mechanism from opposite ends as it were. Recall that the initiation of a causal chain itself constitutes a “causality violation”. An amusing thought is that individual consciousness’ may serve a larger “ecological purpose” vis a vis chronology protection within the transhuman context of cosmic spacetime. I am reminded here of those happy and enthusiastic “scrubbing bubbles” from the ubiquitous toilet bowl cleaner commercials of the 1990’s. It would not surprise me if consciousness possesses a peculiar action akin to an entropy engine, the fuel for which being these superluminal signals that Einstein says cannot exist. Note that the conscious mind in the fundamental role conceived for it here, is entirely powerless to stop or prevent the superluminal propagation of momentum and energy! December 2012

Try thinking of personal consciousnesses as causality-violating signal “dispose-alls”. The causality integrative processes necessary for the formation of new individual minds require superluminal signaling, which, however, is fundamentally causality-violating. So as cosmic safeguard, distinct individual consciousnesses are provided as

preexisting “infrastructure” to enable the coalescence of substrates for grounding individual mentalities – a fundamental process which maintains chronology protection by maintanining requisite minimal disjointness of superluminal signals. So Huxley’s notion of the brain qua “reducing valve” may not be too far off the mark. Causal supervenenience may have perhaps been interpreted thus far in a far too philosophically self-serving manner, i.e., teleologically, rather than in a more properly ecological manner (kind of like teleology turned insideout, that is, from the standpoint of someone not blessed with occupying the apex of the chain-of-being). There seems to be nothing to strictly forbid the existence of superluminal causal connections between events which lie outside of any observer's Minkowski light cone. July 2011 Since the speed of light does not serve as a limit for virtual particle processes, we might suppose that the elsewhere region, that outside the light cone is constituted by vacuum fluctuations possessing a correlational structure inconsistent with determinism. Since the common sense view alleges that the past is nothing more than a fixed, crystallized record of what has actually occurred within the present, it follows from this view then that a present which has not had adequate time within which to resolve its internal contradictions and ambiguities must retain a certain small degree of freedom within which change might continue even after this moment becomes past. In this way, backwards causality would be admissible, if only for the purpose of "cleaning up" the "loose ends" of still indeterminate entities occupying past times. But doesn't common sense also define the past in such a manner that it does not actually become past as such until such a point as this crystallization process is complete. In other words, common sense defines the past in such a way that the time axis is necessarily orthogonal to the three dimensions of space and this at every spatial scale, however small; it defines the past in such a manner that there is no substantive distinction between past, present and future, which is to say, it defines the past as a half-infinite time interval

with its later endpoint being the present moment whose status as present must be completely arbitrary. Within a deterministic time continuum there is no nonarbitrary basis upon which any particular moment along the continuum may be chosen over other contenders as being actually present. A natural lawlike system of relationships which govern the behavior of a given entity may only be formulated provided that this entity is not unique ( provided that multiple duplicates of the entity exist and are available ) as in the case of subatomic particles, e.g., an electron. The quest for the "theory of everything" is therefore doomed to ultimate failure, since what we call "everything" is necessarily unique, and this uniqueness prevents us from separating those "variables" which are particular to the thing itself from those which owe in part to our investigatory involvement with this thing. The self, in the act of investigating ultimate reality, must be included within the dynamic of the reality for which we are seeking a complete description. This inherent recursiveness which lies at the heart of any earnest attempt to develop a complete description of reality is alone responsible for the fact that the domain of truth necessarily transcends the sum of knowledge comprising any point of view (of reality). Quantum Mechanics tells us that a closed dynamical system may only undergo temporal evolution provided that a certain energy uncertainty exists within the system. This energy uncertainty is just the standard deviation of the energy about its mean or expectation value. This energy uncertainty may be interpreted in terms of a time-average sum of random energy perturbations to the system "from outside" the system. These random energy perturbations manifest themselves in the form of energy exchanges between the quantum mechanical system and the sea of virtual particles in which this system is embedded. The interaction of these virtual particles with the quantum mechanical system are responsible for virtual transitions of the quantum state of the system to other quantum states. The only real energy transitions available to the quantum mechanical (dynamical) system are those from amongst the set

of virtual energy transitions which are continually occurring within the time interval specified by the system's time uncertainty. The density of this virtual particle energy sea has a direct bearing upon the rate of temporal evolution of any given quantum mechanical system. Our central hypothesis is that the presence of matter has a perturbing effect upon this virtual particle energy sea, i.e., the quantum vacuum field, and this perturbing effect is, namely, to decrease the overall density of this vacuum energy which results in a similar decrease in the time rate of change of all physical processes within the spatial volume occupied by this matter. This proposed vacuum mechanism is exactly similar to the mechanism by which a quantum resonant cavity decreases the rate of spontaneous emission of 'cavity - detuned' photons by a Rydberg excited atom. The resonant cavity achieves this by excluding most of the photons of half-wavelength larger than the cavity diameter: to wit, it does this by decreasing the energy density of vacuum electromagnetic field fluctuations of roughly the same energy as that of the suppressed atomic energy transitions.

Given this inherent circularity in the nature of technological growth, it follows that the ultimate constituents of the World must be wholly recursive: they must be their own symbolic representations. If a "conscious computer" is ever developed in what will undoubtedly be the far distant future, this mysterious property of such a device will in no way stem solely from the design or blueprint by which its engineers will have conceived its construction; the blueprint will, of course, be a necessary component in the realization of such a conscious machine, but will have been derived from a necessarily somewhat fortuitous discovery, owing to much trial and error investigation, of the "correct" hardware interface of the device with the recursive, self-organizing matrix of quantum - vacuum energy fluctuations which underpin and mediate the stability of all fundamental particles and their exchange forces. Only in appropriate dynamic conjunction with this fluctuating energy matrix will any realization of a hardware design possess the

topological energy structure sufficient to tap the pre-existing "consciousness potential" of spacetime. In other words, it is only the grace of Reality's fundamental dynamism which will permit the eventual construction of a so-called conscious computing device. This empirical discovery of the correct interface design will manifest itself perhaps during a testing phase where a long series of simulated sensory inputs, of increasing complexity, are in the process of being fed into the device while its output signals (responses) are being closely monitored. The memory medium of the device will begin to accumulate stored or remembered inputs which it has never received through its various sensory apparatus. Identical sets or series of inputs will produce significantly different series of outputs both from an individual machine over time as well as from different machines at the same time - even if these machines possess identical designs. Occasionally, radically different series or sets of inputs will produce identical sets of outputs. A significant portion of the functional relationship between output and input will depend upon changes in energy in the internal components of the machine's hardware which are, themselves, smaller than the overall quantum energy uncertainty of the device as a whole. Moreover, no mutually orthogonal set of eigenfunctions will describe the "functioning components" of the device. This is why we have been saying that the abstract spatial structure of our hypothetical computing device is nontopological. Clearly, any realization of a static blueprint for a computing device, regardless how complex, in the form or an dynamically functioning prototype, will itself be merely a topological transformation of the blueprint from 2 or perhaps 3 spatial dimensions to 4 spatial dimensions rather than the non - topological transformation from 3 spatial to 4 dimensions of 3 space and 1 time. This is because the state space of the transcribed structure, i.e., the design, can be adequately described in spatial terms. March 2013

What is likely to be the outcome when the quantum entangled signals residing in the quantum akashic record become accessible to the first quantum computers with which the human brain has formed a workable information interface? Of course, without appropriate

feedback, say after the fashion of two-way supervised neural network training, these relic quantum entangled signals are not likely to have any discernible meaning. Another sign of the embedding of quantum computers in an informational matrix is these machines stubborn refusal to follow any pre-programmed or design-based pattern of function/behavior. In a very real sense, an object may not be thought to possess an internality unless it possess an a genuine "outside" in the sense of a radically open system - a system which cannot be contained within a closed system; a system is "closed" only if it is finite and neither receives nor transmits energy to or from any system except itself. Such a closed system possesses no "outside." QZ Contingent uniqueness versus necessary uniqueness. The size of the Universe and the black hole mass limit as important parameters in determining the density of the quantum vacuum energy.

The asymmetrical nature of time perhaps has some bearing on the hierarchical structuring of complex macromolecules. The fact that a molecule has been formed from a set of simpler constituents does not guarantee that it can then be decomposed back into this set of constituents. Similarly, the fact that a molecule has been broken down into a set of simpler constituents does not guarantee that it can be recomposed from this selfsame set of constituents. Perhaps the asymmetrical nature of temporality implies that any sufficiently large set of macromolecules may be partitioned into two disjoint parts; those molecules possessing a bottom - up structure and those possessing a top - down structure. This distinction which I am drawing is not a solid theoretical one; it is a pragmatic distinction which assumes that status of a theoretical distinction when we refer to molecules occupying either

extreme end of the probability spectrum ( in terms of their ability to form "naturally" from simpler parts ). Will may only be defined in terms of a "rational" order foreign to itself which it resists or subverts. Will is the external manifestation of consciousness. Will is a principle of incommensurate causation. The set of lawlike relations which may be said to govern Will's operation are unique and irreproducible. Rational order is simply that order which can be made to manifest its lawlike relations in a reproducible manner. There is no need to invoke a temporal description of this state space - the only reason one would attempt it is because we project our genuine temporality onto the mind's eye realization of the computing device in its act of "functioning." Henri Bergson, in his essay, Time in the History of Western Philosophy, complained of a confusion which inevitably cropped up whenever metaphysicians attempted to analyze the problem of motion. With a kind of gentle contempt he described the frustration of these philosophers in trying to reconstruct linear motion from infinite series of "immobilities", i.e., fixed points of infinitesimal length. He explained their failure as being due to their ignorance of the nature of a linear interval as a mere projection of "mobility onto immobility." This projection, naturally as such, does not capture the whole phenomenon, but merely a point of view with respect to it out of an infinity of equally valid points of view, and so from a single projection, or even a finite number of projections, one is never permitted to reconstruct the original object as it is. There are possible boundary conditions which might be easily placed upon the dynamic of the "flux" which are nonetheless infinitely improbable as "natural" occurrences, which is to say that the operation of intelligence is required to institute them.

It is these seemingly magical self - organizing properties of matter, owing to the recursiveness of its ultimate "constituents," which make any attempt to calculate the "improbability" of biological macromolecules an incoherent and meaningless enterprise. Similar activities are the routine pastime of myriad scientifically inclined creationists attacking evolution. The staggeringly large numerical ratios which they cite against the "chance occurrence" of the simplest eukaryote DNA are calculated upon a permutational / combinational modeling of a prebiotic "soup" in which chance collisions continually occur between precursor molecules, e.g., peptides, amino acids, nucleic acids, etc. The serious problem with such a modeling approach is that it is not an empirically derived statistical calculation as in actuarial computations, where a distinct probability is assigned to each possible event within a pool, based on the observed relative frequencies of each event, but is an abstract calculation where the probabilities are fixed at the outset and remain unchanged throughout all series of calculations. For example, there are a vast number of nucleic acid reactions taking place within the ribosome organelle of every living animal cell which in the absence of certain mediating enzymes will take place anywhere from 9 to 20 orders of magnitude more slowly than if these enzymes are present - the ribosome is responsible for "translating" the coded information of nucleic acids into various macromolecules (proteins) and in so doing expressing the genotype of the developing organism. We see from this example that the probability of the occurrence of various macromolecules essential to the appearance of the first reproducing, metabolizing organic units begins infinitesimally small when the molecule's precursors are yet unavailable, but that this probability grows by large discontinuous jumps each time one of these precursors, the precursors' precursors, etc. arise inadvertently in the prebiotic "soup" so that by the time the exhaustive set of macromolecular precursors is present, the formation of the original macromolecule is virtually assured. The ribosome itself, despite its inordinately complex structure, has been observed under experimental conditions to reform spontaneously after having been dissociated within a carefully prepared enzyme bath into its precursor polynucleotide constituents - and this within the space of only

several hours! It is indeed true that a countless variety of different enzymes (of the precisely correct type) must be simultaneously present along with the polynucleotide matrix for this seemingly magical act of spontaneous self - organization to occur. This is because the self organization of such an enormously complex organic structure depends, throughout the entire process, upon the almost simultaneous juxtaposition (collision is a better term) of three or more precursor molecules which all happen to have the exactly correct spatial orientation, with sufficient kinetic energy to overcome the activation energy barrier against the reaction occurring. It should be noted here that just the chance of any three compatible molecules ( in terms of a desired product ) colliding at once with the roughly correct spatial orientation is an event with a probability only infinitesimally greater than zero - let alone the question of proper activation energies. And so, even if the primordial Earth possessed the appropriate reducing atmosphere with oceans chalk full of all of the required precursor molecules for the ribosome to properly form, without the necessary catalyzing cofactors ( the enzymes ) there would not likely have formed a single such structure by this late epoch. Then perhaps there must have been an extremely long period of time during which the necessary enzymes appeared on the scene, one might think. One suspects, then, a similar self - organizing process behind the formation of these necessary enzymes, the only difference being that the precursors which we are now concerned with are simpler, while their precursors must have been simpler still, and so on. But the precursor macromolecules for many particular enzymes have, indeed, never been manufactured ( because we don't know how to do it), but have to be obtained from more complex molecules than themselves, if not from living or recently living organisms. The theory of evolution, chemical evolution in this case, has secretly conditioned us to believe that there must be some definite if inordinately complex sequence: precursors + cofactors ~ simpler precursors + cofactors ~ etc. leading back to the very simplest organic molecules which form by self - organization spontaneously and easily in a wide variety of environments and without the need for cofactors or helper molecules of any kind, and that it must have been such a process

(only in reverse) which ultimately lead to the first self - reproducing biological units which could then be developed further through Darwinian natural selection. The notion of self - organization gives some of us pause because it concerns a natural process which sits precisely on the fence between what might be called less - than - self - organization, i.e., formation from simpler components, and what is aptly called greater - than - self organization, i.e., formation from more complex components - and it is just such a notion which strongly suggests a top - down hierarchy within the natural order which can only have intelligence at its apex. At every step in the chain in the formation of higher level precursor molecules, the mediation of the required reactions is accomplished via self organization principles : those who attempt to calculate the probability against "chance" formation of important precursor molecules forget a very important general principle first articulated by the great rationalist philosopher Leibniz - which is - that set of conditions which in combination are sufficient to produce some complex structure must necessarily remain in operation at every succeeding moment to sustain the existence of this structure. The upshot of this is that a complex structure which owes its origin to mere chance cannot endure, still less could it respond to its environment in an adaptive fashion. To bend Nature toward our intentions it is merely necessary for us to block all of those except the one paralleling that one which is our own. It is in the very nature of recursion not to be derivable from anything but recursion itself. Therefore, if a recursion or recursive structure has a beginning in time it is complex, but may only be analyzed in terms of other "simpler" recursive structures. These simpler components of the recursive structure are themselves approximations to the larger structure which they form in combination with one another. The behavior of self - organizing systems cannot ultimately be explained in terms of principles of organization which obtain externally, which is to say, such dynamic structures will not submit to a reductionistic

analysis. The distinction between the "mental" and the "physical" may be drawn in the following way: both are wholes composed of parts, both possess principles of organization, but what is termed a physical whole is defined exclusively in terms of its constituent parts while the "parts" which "compose" what is termed a mental whole are, themselves, defined in terms of the whole which they compose. The reconstruction of a mental whole must be guided in a top - down manner whereas the construction of a physical whole must be guided in a bottom - up manner. The principle of a mental whole must exist prior to its actual realization ( in terms of whatever substance). Without substance change is not possible. Coextensive with this principle is: change owes itself to a lack of determination, to a deficit of Being, to negation. From which it at once follows that substance, rather than being the seat of being, of thinghood, as common sense conceives it to be, it owes its existence, to the contrary, to a lack of being. It is not possible for a determinate thing to be made up out of substance insofar as this thing possesses determination. It is easy enough to see that continuity is required for the subsistence of what is called historical time which we will henceforth refer to as temporality. Indeterminate substance is the only basis for the continuity underlying all change.

The science of Physics, at least before the development of relativistic quantum field theory, in the 1940's, imagined that there might be such things as ultimate material constituents - elementary particles - out of which all material bodies would be composed. The implicit Metaphysics behind the notion of elementary particles is that of

substance. There is no such thing as nothing. Nothing, by its very nature, is a nonexistent entity: it is its own negation. We might be tempted to say then that "something," being the opposite of nothing, must exist. But not just any "something" constitutes the opposite or negation of nothing/nothingness, but only a something which is, itself, the unity of all that might possibly exist, and the very essence of which is to exist. In other words, nothing, not being possible because containing within itself its own negation, implies that there must have always been something (or other). But the only guarantee that there has always been something is the existence of something which contains within itself its own affirmation, if you will, the reason for its own existence. A fundamental and most general property of a thing which contains within itself the reason for its own existence is that of recursion, something which is defined solely in terms of itself, a recursive structure. There are logical grounds for believing that there can be only one recursive structure, that there can be only one self-existent entity - with this entity being the "ground" for existence of all other entities. A recursive structure, if it may be thought to be composite, would be composed of parts which are totally interdependent upon one another; no part is the cause of any other without also being itself caused by this other part and so if this recursive structure had a beginning in time, it must have been given existence through a pre-existing, broader and more complex recursive structure. We see now that a given finite recursive structure comes into existence through a process of uncovering or abstraction from a more complex whole - through a process of negation. We are reminded of Michelangelo's claim that a truly great work of sculpture already exists within its marble block and that all he did in order to produce his works was merely to free them from the marble in which they were imprisoned. All simpler recursive structures come into being through a kind of figure-ground transformation, through a change in perspective. This reminds us of Leibniz' monads, each of which are only different perspectives on an eternally pre-existent whole, with each monad

defined in terms of, or dependent upon, all of the other monads making up the whole. This exhaustive interdependence is what Leibniz refers to as the preestablished harmony between monads. Again, a recursion may only be defined in terms of other recursions like itself. Consciousness is an example of an inherently recursive structure as it is its own symbolic representation ( of itself to itself). Consciousness' objectivity is exactly coextensive with its subjectivity; this is simply a restatement of Bishop Berkeley’s principle, esse est percipi, i.e., to be is to be perceived, and as consciousness necessarily experiences itself as a unity and never as a multiplicity - the objective reality of any multiplicity of consciousness' could only exist as a subjective reality within a larger individual consciousness (itself a unity) and so cannot really be a multiplicity of consciousnesses at all. This argument against the multiplicity of consciousness was succinctly stated by the physicist Erwin Schrodinger in his short seminal work, Mind and Matter. It follows that since consciousness cannot experience itself as a multiplicity, it therefore cannot exist objectively as a multiplicity: consequently there can only be one consciousness. Both the American psychologist William James as well the French philosopher Henri Bergson did not believe that the brain was itself productive of consciousness but that the brain was merely a kind of reducing valve (Bergson) which filtered and reduced down the cosmic consciousness (James) to a vastly simpler form containing roughly the level of information handling capacity (intelligence) which the human organism would need to adapt to the limited challenges of an earthly environment. In fact, if we view the brain as being productive of consciousness rather than as merely structuring a pre-existing consciousness, then there seems no compelling reason to believe in a socalled infinite consciousness. However, if the brain is viewed as not productive of thougt, but as merely providing a complex set of constraining boundary conditions upon some pre-existent conscoiusness field, equated, say, with the quantum vacuum energy fiedl, then the case for a universal infinite consciousness does become rather compelling. The novelist and author of Brave New World (1932), Aldous Huxley, discussed this view of consciousness in his popular treatise, The Doors

of Perception - Heaven and Hell. In this work Huxley describes the effects of the psychoactive (psychedelic) drugs mescaline and LSD which he experimented with towards the latter part of his life in an attempt to trigger or facilitate the mystical experience of enlightenment in which he had had an almost lifelong curiosity. Huxley explained the effects of these substances in terms of the James-Bergson theory of consciousness: the experience of self-transcendence and transfiguration which Huxley experienced on mescaline was for him due to the drug's disabling effect upon the cosmic reducing valve. The brain under the influence of mescaline is no longer able to filter out the thoughts and intuitions irrelevant to earthly life (because appropriate to the upwardly contiguous levels of consciousness) - hence the experience of a vastly larger mental space. This type of explanation would have been readily understandable to the ancient Greek philosopher Socrates who viewed learning (through experience or education) as simply a mechanism by which latent knowledge is recollected. The theory of entropic processes tells us that energy and information are interdefinable and this fact in conjunction with the principle of energy conservation suggests that information, like energy, may neither be created nor destroyed: the "creation" of a quantity of information is really constituted by its being abstracted from the preexisting integral system of information defining it. Like a piece broken off from a holographic emulsion, there is a necessary trade - off involved in this abstraction process: the "newly created" entity only acquires a relative independence from the whole in which it eternally preexisted (and which defined its true being) by losing some of its knowledge of itself. There is a direct analogy with this process in the creation of "new" subatomic particles through the collision of particles within a linear accelerator. In the first couple of decades after the first "atom - smashing" experiments performed with the primitive particle accelerators of the 1930's, it had been supposed that the particle products of these violent collisions were actually pieces of the colliding particles which had been jarred loose by the sudden impulsive force of their slamming together. But soon after this early period the kinetic energies of the particles going

into these accelerator collisions began to significantly exceed the combined mass - energy of the particles which themselves initiated the reaction, with the result that the end product of these collisions was a set of particles with individual member particles possessing a mass greater than the combined mass of the particles originally participating in the collision. The common sense "broken pieces" explanation of accelerator products now had to be modified in some way or rejected outright. Two alternative interpretations of this "mass paradox" were suggested by particle theorists: either the product particles were created from the excitation of the vacuum by the kinetic energy of the collision with the "input" particles serving as the points of application of the excitation energy, or they were really inside the initial particles all along but the excess mass - energy was being exactly balanced by an equal and opposite negative energy due to the internal binding forces holding the particles together. Thanks for the response. An energy eigenstate is an abstraction in the sense that only a closed system can be in an energy eigenstate, but thermodynamically this is not possible because of the fact that vacuum fluctuations in momentum-energy cannot be screened (kinda like gravity). Some modes can be screened of course and the Casimir Effect is an example of this. But in this case only momentum fluctuations, virtual photons, are being suppressed here. Virtual electron/positron pairs are not suppressed, in fact, the probability of the creation/annihilation of these pairs is actually enhanced between the Casimir plates. We may think of virtual fermion/antifermion creationannihilation events as energy fluctuations, collectively of spin 0 and the photon creation-annihilations as momentum fluctuations of spin 1. Together, the spin 0 energy fluctuations and the spin 1 momentum fluctuations may be considered to be a fluctuating momentum-energy four vector of expectation value for T(i,k) (momentum-energy tensor) = 0 and this is part of the reason that the vacuum does not gravitate, I believe. Getting back to the main point, as long as there is a fluctuation component to the Hamiltonian, which cannot be completely removed

through supplied boundary conditions, the system will never exist in a true energy eigenstate and will be forced to temporally evolve due to the exchange of momentum energy between the system and its fluctuation Hamiltonian (the vacuum fluctuations). (April 2011 addition: reevaluate the above in terms of experimental investigations of the Scharnhorst effect) Regards, Russell P.S., see my post, "What is gravity?" Use dejanews power search. I see two electrical cords coming into my computer. One of these is the power cord and the other is the data cord. We may think of the first cord as a conduit of the substance of what is simulated on the screen of my computer and the second, of the form which this substance shall be induced to assume at any given time. Data versus information: passive versus active channeling of the chaotically dynamic substance.

Downloading versus moving of files from one directory to another. Beginning of Physics Notes -------------------- = highlighted in blue.

web=

update www.driveway.com with new material

Do nonlocally connected observables commute? (April 2011 If they are compatible observables, otherwise, not) What about spacelike separated ones? (April 2011 Yes, unless they are nonlocally connected) An adiabatic change in a thermal system is one in which there is no exchange of heat (energy, really) between the system and its outside.

Now on account of exchanges of energy continually taking place between the system and the quantum vacuum, no thermal (or quantum mechanical, for that matter) system can really undergo changes without some exchange of energy with the system’s outside. But cannot a large component of quantum vacuum energy fluctuations interacting with such a system be just that necessary to reconstitute the system from one moment to the next? How can those quantities of energy be understood to alter the net entropy of the system? Is the system entropy changed, then, by just those fluctuations of vacuum energy that are coupled to the internal exchanges of 3-momentum within the system responsible for the system’s binding together of itself, and hence, also of its inertia (gravitation)? There are two distinctly different possible bases for novelty. These are: changes in vacuum energy interacting with a quantum system, which cannot be anticipated by the system and, changes in the state of the system, in terms of its internal energies, which cannot be anticipated by the vacuum itself. Interactions taking place internally to the system fail to be anticipated by a given vacuum (heretofore referred to as the vacuum) on account of these interactions being mediated via an altogether different vacuum state, unbeknownst to the first vacuum state. This amounts to a more general statement of the problem of wavefunction collapse being triggered by unanticipated internal interactions of a quantum system – one which subsumes the distinction, heretofore noted, that between interactions of the vacuum not anticipated by a system and interactions of the system not anticipated by the vacuum, both of which, perhaps, then, turn out to be different though equivalent interpretations of the mechanism of wavefunction collapse. April 2011 Partial differential equations forcing function has equivalence in terms of time-varying boundary conditions and absent forcing function? An adiabatic interaction with a quantum mechanical system does not change the wavefunction, but may result in the system making a transition between energy eigenstates. A closed system is one in which what “takes place” within the system is not and cannot be communicated to consciousness. Is there a distinction here, that between what, in fact, is versus what may only

potentially be, communicated to a state of consciousness? These kinds of considerations might help to clarify the connections between the quantum wavefunction, as representing the most that can be possibly known (information/consciousness) about the state of the system it describes, and gravitation, wherein, it has been stated on various sides, that either gravitation or consciousness or both are relevant to the underlying mechanism of wavefunction collapse, itself understood to be a nondeterministic phenomenon. Here the “binding problem” of consciousness, nonlocality and the fact of the general relativistic nonlocality of gravitational energy (which must be described within this theory by a pseudotensor rather than by a bona fide tensor, may be found to possess a close connection to one another while at the same time a description of the complex structure of the relationship of information to entropy supplants the heretofore simplistic understanding of this relationship as being one of mere dual opposition. Implicate Order as a bed of Nonlocality~correlations~energy Locality~causality~momentum fluctuations.

quantum

degeneracy. fluctuations.

Certainly quantum theory allows that the manner in which the subatomic particles shall interact with one another during a random collision (mutual scattering) must be significantly different if this event occurs under the watchful eye of some physicist armed with a high-resolution electron force microscope. Might nonlocal interactions be partly explicable in terms of a latent >c velocity of propagation. In the case of the rapidly separating components of the decayed particle, the state of each component may be overdetermined. The extra information (about the state of the opposite particle) may be comoving with each component by each particle’s local vacuum state. But in the case of both component particle and comoving vacuum state

propagating at the speed of light, there would seem to be no room for interaction between each component particle and its locally comoving vacuum state. April 2011 This is reminiscent of the problem of symmetry breaking for psychophysical dualism. Cosmologically, the direction of time was consistent with the direction in which the rate of decrease of the (matter + vacuum) energy density and the rate of entropy increase were maximal. This direction would be described by a vector within Euclidean 4-space and the manner of cosmological decomposition of this 4-space into a 3+1 dimensional spacetime would have been determined by the global, cosmic distribution of momentum-energy. The coupling of the dynamics of space to time (and vice versa) must, of course, be mediated by the nondiagonal elements of the stress-momentum-energy tensor, Tuv. Fluctuations in energy of a system due to Heisenberg energy uncertainty introduces discontinuity into the system, i.e., change in the system’s topology. The less the system interacts with vacuum energy fluctuations, the greater is the system’s inertia. All of these distinctions of beings, past vs. present vs. future vs. potential (potential-in-in-the-past,” “-future,” “-present), across “universes,” within “universes,” and all of this within consciousness that is still to be distinguished from beings outside consciousness, paradoxically, all of these distinctions of different types may be unified by admitting the reality of only one “concourse of transcendental otherness” populated by an infinite number of infinite beings (with perhaps an infinite majority subset of which abstaining from selflimitation). Virtual momentum and energy imply the existence of virtual space and virtual time (through the Heisenberg uncertainty relation. Virtual stress implies the coupling of virtual space to virtual time. But independent fluctuations in vacuum stress must become correlated in order for these

fluctuations to grow (relative to a background) and stabilize at elevated levels, i.e., real stress possessing a net spacetime curvature. April 2011 This looks like the quantum entanglement basis of induced gravity. It appears that an initial “seed compliment” or quantity of real stress energy must be supplied before the global spacetime boundary conditions can be favorable for the production of real stress-momentumenergy. To have a net spacetime curvature, “flat” or otherwise (positive, negative or some complex, periodic or aperiodic, structuring of positive and negative curvatures), momentum and energy have to be initially “coupled.” Of course, once a global spacetime structure is already in place, the coupling of momentum and energy within this continuum or on this manifold is a given. This is because gravitational waves (or gravitons as spin-2 exchange particles) presuppose such a coupling of space and time (through the coupling of momentum to energy). The second law of thermodynamics states that all matter and energy tend toward a maximally entropic state. If we were to interpret entropy as the complement of information, then the increase of entropy of a closed system would mean that information was flowing out of a closed system! Based on arguments supplied elsewhere, a closed system does not possess temporality, but time is spatialized within such a system. Discuss the relationships between Penrose’s argument in favor of a gravitational basis for decoherence (as well as for wavefunction collapse due to measurements performed by a conscious observer) and the necessity of the breaching of a closed quantum mechanical system, i.e., superposition state, producing state vector reduction. A relevant consideration here is our earlier discussions of information being a (perhaps necessary) artifact of an open system, an eigenstate of the Hamiltonian being a state of a system with zero energy uncertainty where the coupling of the system to the quantum vacuum (understood as the system’s ground of possible change, including both growth and decay). But then we are left with the notion of entropy increasing through information leaving an open system. But then also, how can

entropy be the complement of information within an open system? The notion of something’s being the compliment of something else presupposes another notion of a closed set that can be partitioned into two disjoint subsets, e.g., X entropy + X information = 0 entropy and 0 information. If there is a residue of entropy or information within the system (and we still wish to term the system causally closed, then this residue should be nonlocal, and it should be present in the form of quantum mechanical, nonlocal correlations. Also, we are faced with the notion of information “flowing” out of an open system to some where outside. Now two or more closed systems exchanging momentum and energy with one another implies the existence of a background spacetime (which must possess some kind of curvature structure so that in reality these two systems must also be exchanging some small component of stress and the momentum and energy exchanged between them must be partially (if only infinitesimally) coupled. In turn each system itself must possess coupling together of its own local momentum and energy. There is by the way potential relevance of the speed of gravity controversy here. Two truly isolated systems would only be able to exchange nonlocal correlations with one another. Nonadiabatic changes in boundary conditions cause increase in system entropy. It seems probable that somehow the two distinctly quantum phenomena of wavefunction “collapse” and nonlocality (in the form of the determination, instantaneously and at a distance, of the eigenstate of a quantum mechanical system) reflect opposite tendencies of the vacuum to act (in determining a quantum state) in which the vacuum either has or has not, respectively, adequate time to have prepared itself for such an act of determination. Nonlocality may be explained in terms of the fact that both, widely

separated components of a decayed particle, for example, are perceived simultaneously by this same vacuum. And although the quantum state of either, if determined individually, without knowledge of the uncertain state of the other particle, must collapse to produce a randomly determined eigenstate, information nonetheless exists between the structured uncertainties of each particle of this pair in the form of a correlation of two random signals. We may look at causality as not just a propagation of momentum, stress, and energy along trajectories through space, but also as propagation in the sense of causal influences doing so through the progressive enlisting of one another to form structures of ever easier delectability, that is, as propagation upward from smaller to larger, through continua of spatiotemporal scale. November 12, 2000 Since the action of every operator, ^q, is reducible to the actions of ^a+ and ^a, then certainly the quantum statistics of the quantum states upon which ^a+ and ^a act are to be investigated as the likely underpinning of the dynamics of all quantum mechanical systems. What is the relationship, if any, between the mechanism (perhaps this term is a fundamental misnomer, since normalization is always assumed) of “late time normalization” and the role of consciousness in the quantum measurement problem. Can an extremely dense body, e.g., neutron star, be a black hole in some reference frames but not in others? If not, then would this constitute a counterexample to Einstein’s equivalence principle? ^H(xî , pî) = Ñ(xî)E But V(xI) is a function of /\pI = /\pî ; /\pî ; î = 1, 2, 3

And T(pI) is a function of , So more generally V(xî) is a function of the magnitude of fluctuations in the vacuum’s momentum-energy and T(pî) is a function of the expectation values of the components of the momentum-energy of real particles and field within the quantum vacuum. Cellular automata theory can, of course, be recast in terms of conservation of some large, but nonetheless finite, signal bandwidth. “Rent's rule pertains to the organization of computing logic, specifically the relationship between the number of external signal connections to a logic block (i.e., the number of "pins") with the number of logic gates in the logic block, and has been applied to circuits ranging from small digital circuits to mainframe computers”, c.f., http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rent%27s_Rule Time uncertainty necessarily includes fluctuations in the direction of time due to the simultaneous presence of momentum fluctuations. Just as the external input of energy can make a virtual particle “real” so can an input of energy make an alternate time axis real. /\t/\E >= h takes into account the possibility of energy degeneracy. A similar statement applies to the equation, /\x/\p >= h. Perhaps the energy uncertainty, /\E, can be broken into two pseudoorthogonal components, a degenerate and a non-degenerate component, each with their respective conjugate time variables. Do disturbances to the potential energy structure, i.e., the structural relationships of local energy minima, have to be treated as “late time” (ad hoc) adjustments to the system initial conditions? The degeneracy space is not spanned by basis vectors associated with thermodynamic degrees of freedom. Superlattice of quantum wells model of competing tunneling resonance

phenomena. Myriad, interpenetrating 4-vacuum which are to varying degrees in and out of resonance with one another. Each possesses a timeless temporality that only takes on the ordinary attributes of time ( as historical time) through its resonance and interaction with other 4-vacua. The speed of light increases between Casimir plates due to an increase in the probability rate of production of virtual e+e- pairs between the plates. The e+e- virtual pair creation/annihilation events are how the energy uncertainty between the plates in the modified vacuum manifests itself as energy fluctuations. So the decrease in momentum fluctuations, virtual photon exchanges between the plates, is offset by a corresponding increase in energy fluctuations between the plates in the form of virtual scalar particle exchanges between the modified vacuum and the four dimensional quantum vacuum. The substance of any given relative 3 + 1 vacuum state is an absolute 4vacuum. These two vacua continually exchange energy with one another. The linear density of virtual e+e- virtual pairs is increased although photon wavelengths are unchanged, resulting in higher frequency and same wavelength, i.e., a greater value of “c.” This is explained by a greater probability rate for energy-compatible (or what is called “resonant”) virtual e+e- virtual pairs being created and annihilated along the photon’s “trajectory” between the Casimir plates. The concept of resonance is pervasive within physics and there are myriad instances of concept of resonance in almost all branches of physics. In the above paragraph we have an example of “resonance-tuning.” By altering the electromagnetic boundary conditions of the quantum vacuum electromagnetic field through the use of simple Casimir rectangular plates, one has succeeded in modifying the free space

vacuum by altering this vacuum’s resonance structure. Alternately, virtual photons of a given energy/frequency within this modified quantum vacuum are no longer described by a virtual e+e- pairs of energy, E = hc / lambda or, no longer resonate with virtual e+e-‘s of energy, hc/lambda. We speculate that the change introduced to the vacuum’s resonance spectrum is confined to the volume contained within the world hypervolume defined by the casimir plate geometry over time. If this is indeed the case, then the change to the probability rate of virtual e+e- pairs being created and annihilated within the geometry of the casimir plates is only for those pairs possessing “halfwavelength” smaller than the plates separation. Here is the conceptual difficulty: although the density of vacuum electromagnetic photons within the plate’s geometry has been effectively decreased, the density of vacuum e+e- pairs being created and annihilated within this same geometry is increased. The idea behind these two allegedly related vacuum effects is that of the conservation of momentum-energy or 4momentum density with all possible (self-consistent) hypervolumes. A simplistic way to understand this phenomenon where the above casimir geometry is concerned, which is not, I believe, fundamentally misguided, is the following. The amount of energy (in the form of photons) that has been excluded from the casimir plate geometry is made up for by an exactly offsetting increase in the density of virtual photons of energies falling within the frequency spectrum, hc/lambda, where lambda < 2 x distance between the plates, dcasimir. E hc/ So in a given interval of time, say, for convenience here, d casimir/c, where “c” is the normal value of the speed of light in vacuo, the linear probability density of virtual e+e- creation/annihilation events along an axis perpendicular to the plates and contained well within the geometry described by said plates (in order to be able to ignore electromagnetic “fringe effects) is enhanced above its free space value. So a real photon introduced from one end of the plate geometry with momentum, hf/c ’, directed perpendicular to the plates and possessing a frequency greater than hc/ where, again,  is less than twice the value of d casimir, shall, on account of the enhanced linear density of resonant e+e- virtual pairs

created and annihilated along the photon’s perpendicular path, reach the metal plate at the opposite end of the casimir geometry sooner than would have been implied by the simple equation, E= pc. This equation is, in fact, no longer valid within the modified vacuum of the volume described by the casimir plate geometry. But some equation reminiscent of E2 = m2c4 + p2c2. Only by introducing an imaginary mass component to the photon that is sufficiently, offsettingly large may the simultaneous increase (above that of “c” in vacuo) is permitted for the real photon’s velocity perpendicular to the casimir plates. Now it is suggested that performing a modification to the vacuum’s resonant structure opposite in sense to that described above, we shall succeed in imbuing the affected particle (that confined to the vacuum thus modified) with a real as opposed to imaginary mass! What symmetry is implied by the conservation of uncertainty - phase space graininess, perhaps? The kernel of a thought can travel from one mind to another at a velocity which is effectively faster than light, but the time taken for this kernel to develop into actionable thought would be tied to an implied observance of the above speed being “effectively c.” Decoherence of quantum states through entanglement interpreted as observation by the universal consciousness field. Why clones may not become fully conscious and fully in possession of a free volition explained in terms of the proprietary nature of brain quantum vacuum fields and there evolution in relation to the evolution of the universal consciousness field. Any interference with the vacuum within spacetime, which exceeds in the energy of its imparted impulse, Penrose’s one graviton limit, cannot be transmitted through (and perhaps ultimately absorbed by) this vacuum exclusively via nonlocal, virtual particle and field interactions. Here we might describe such an interaction with the vacuum as exceeding maximum energy uncertainty supportable free of momentum

exchanges between multiple components, i.e., the energy fluctuation of spacetime has exceeded the threshold of energy at which the quantum vacuum can manifest fluctuations of its momentum-energy as pure energy, as opposed to a mixture of energy and momentum fluctuations. Is this an example of time symmetry breaking and the loss of energy degeneracy through having exceeded the largest quantity of nonmeasurable energy? The necessity for energy fluctuations in the vacuum, exceeding the one graviton threshold, to manifest themselves as a collection of particles and fields. It is at or just beyond this energy threshold that the energy of the fluctuation must fragment into elements or structures forming a composite maintained by a sustained mutual interaction of the components- with this composite structure having necessarily now become “embedded” within spacetime as one of its really existing (as opposed to merely virtual) objects. It is only through the interference of wavefunction, either self or mutual interference, that the wavefunction takes on a physical meaning in terms of the probability of a physical, spacetime phenomena. Within quantum theory temporality manifests itself in two seemingly fundamentally distinct manners, deterministically through the evolution of the time dependent Schrodinger wave equation, non-deterministically via the discontinuous reduction of the state vector as a result of quantum measurement. The relativistic effects of Einstein’s special and general theories (of relativity) do not appear to make any such distinction of varieties of time. Only if the circuit elements of an artificial intelligence device are sensitive enough to a circle spectrum of energy fluctuations in the quantum vacuum, as well as these elements being adequately sensitive in their mutual interaction via the changing currents and fields sustained within the device’s circuitry, will an adequately responsive feedback obtain between this device and the embedding quantum vacuum that will enable the vacuum (or some spectrum of quantum fluctuations “within” it) to utilize the device circuitry to bringing about coherent and robust changes to the boundary conditions upon the vacuum’s self-interaction.

September 2011

Quantum entanglement provides the underlying mechanism for temporal feedback. Temporal feedback of this type exploits the degrees of freedom (quantum vacuum electromagnetic field fluctuationcorrelation structure) normally hidden from intersubjective awareness, i.e., measurement. So processes with energies smaller than the Heisenberg energy uncertainty of the system embedding these processes constitute an infrastructure supporting the engendering of quantum entanglements, as well as the reprocessing of quantum entanglements into causal sets of correlated quantum fluctuations. Although the wavefunction of a solitary system cannot be determined, this wavefunction may nonetheless possess causal efficacy, which might seem to support Bohm’s hidden variable hypothesis, but not necessarily so because on this view causal relationships have a fluctuationcorrelation substructure that is broader than any set of correlated fluctuations that may formally represent a causal relationship. Similar remark to that following are to be found elsewhere. Another way of looking at the interaction of the subjective state of the observer with the observed measured quantum state, which is responsible for state vector reduction, is that of the copresence of the newly observed system (upon observation) with everything else which the observer has in the concurrent state of awareness as constituting the irreversible entanglement of the newly observed system’s state with those of the other objects within the observer’s immediate environment. This would help to unify the two heretofore distinctly understood mechanisms of state vector reduction – that of observation by a conscious observer with the mechanism of state function decoherence via irreversible environmental entanglement. Here the consciousness of the observer performing a quantum measurement simply plays the role of irreversibly connecting link between the isolated quantum system and the outside physical environment. Another possible interpretation might be that of the individual consciousness of the quantum mechanical observer somehow alerting the “universal consciousness field” (UCF) of the presence of the particular system observed. The idea here is that the UCF notices the quantum state of various systems where no human

observer is present, if such systems are not small enough or, if large, not isolated enough to “escape its notice.” The actions of the human observer, say, in the laboratory, of utilizing measurement apparatus to either amplify the effect (upon the observer) of the states of system’s otherwise too miniscule or, to breach the heretofore isolation of these systems from “the world at large.” These actions render the states of systems known to a human observer and, hence, to the UCF or to consciousness at large. The possible importance of a hypothesized UCF is particularly implicated in those in which the mere fact that a quantum measurement could have been performed upon the system observable proves enough to cause state vector reduction. That which is responsible for sustaining the existence of all things would not itself possess a sustained existence. The above statement points up the fundamental distinction of the real versus the virtual. As perhaps alluded to above, the real is nothing more than a distinction within the virtual. In the formation of bound energy structures, e.g., atoms, molecules, etc., the application of focused, undifferentiated energy alone to the quantum vacuum is less than adequate and some mutual interaction of locally available (real) particles is additionally necessary for such bound structures to form, in other words, differentiated energy must be available.

1.

Important here is the positional uncertainty of these momentum fluctuations.

2.

Relative to the photon, all of the changes occurring during its movement between two (distinct points) take place instantaneously.

Travelling waves obeying the Schrodinger Wave Equation can always be represented as a superposition of standing waves within a closed spacetime manifold in which time is like, although not identical to, an extra dimension of space. When energy is conserved, the system

Hamiltonian operator must be able to be diagonalized. There must be a reference frame in which the system is in an eigenstate of the Hamiltonian. The masslessness of light is connected to the fact that it is a chain of momentum fluctuations in the quantum vacuum relative to which no uniform motion can take place in the direction parallel to the momentum of these fluctuations1. These fluctuations of which light is composed possess 0 energy uncertainty and hence, infinite time uncertainty. (this proposition needs to be reexamined more carefully) That is, relative to the vantage point of a photon, nothing takes place, i.e., energy does not fluctuate (no energy enters the hypersurface of simultaneity defined by the photon’s instantaneous reference frame?), anywhere in the Universe during the photon’s “flight.” The degenerate evolution of a quantum system’s wavefunction does not require any change in the system’s total energy and so interactions with such energy degenerate system by a “non-physical” agency would not violate conservation of energy. This goes also for changes in the kinetic and potential energies of the system separately when combined do not result in a change to the system’s Hamiltonian. Resonances (as Platonic forms) are dependent on the structure of boundary conditions, which are contingent and unforeseeable in their effects. An example of this is the superfluidity of Helium-4 produced and observed for the first time ever in a cryogenics laboratory! The fringe effects represented by the Gibb’s phenomenon of Fourier analysis as applied to quantum probability amplitudes represents the dynamical (and creative) interface between all (would-be) isolated quantum mechanical systems and the creative ground in which they find themselves embedded, and out of which they are necessarily (partially) constituted. Fringe effects are unavoidable within any artificial construct.

This is

the dual , onto-epistemological principle of the boundary (conditions) never becoming the master of the dynamic and substantive processes never being fully explicable in terms of relations on the set of their possible (epi)phenomena. (Gibb’s phenomenon as applied to probability amplitudes and quantum tunneling bears some consideration here) How does the distinction, real versus virtual, relate to the nature of superposition? Also, how is the phenomenon of Bose condensation related to superposition? Are “viral” memes exchanged between people? How is symmetry and degeneracy related? The interaction of two or more open systems would not merely be exchanging energy since energy is only property defined as such if it is a conserved quantity. There could be no time translation symmetry in such an interaction and some something altogether new must come out of this so that we then speak of the systems rather than energy. The 2 nd Law of thermodynamics does not encompass nonlocally connected systems. In a closed, dynamic system a quantity has it particular character as conserved substance by virtue of boundary conditions and topology. Such is not the case for “quantities” “occupying” an open-ended system. The resonant modes of vacuum field oscillation to which a crystal may be “tuned” are simply those defined by the frequencies for allowed transitions between crystalline energy levels. What is the function (“meaning”) of less than perfectly stable modes of excitation and resonance? The DeBroglie spacetime wavenumber may be aptly understood as the localized bandwidth for the access of a dynamic system to the “quantum

vacuum” CPU. Mutual interference of wavefunctions (or of eigenfunctions) does not constitute a bona fide “interaction” between the state functions in the absence of nonlocal connections obtaining between the functions. A function that back reacts, in the course of its (temporal) evolution (what are we to make of the notion of the “spatial evolution” of a wavefunction?), upon one or more of its independent variables, or whose independent variables act and react upon each other without merely being functions of each other, e.g., where the initially stated set of “independent” variables proves to be reducible to some smaller set, must be a nonlinear function (of a set of variables). Do nonlocal connections in the form of advanced wave solution components of particle or field propagators create a kind of backward in time feedback which is responsible for exchange resonances displayed by, e.g., fields never before in direct or indirect mutual contact? De Broglie waves for a translating particle have both energy (timelike) and momentum (spacelike) components, or, alternatively, particle-like and wavelike components, respectively. A particle’s DeBroglie frequency, if you will, is maximal when the particle is “at rest.” Upon translation, some of the particle’s rest frequency shows up as DeBroglie wavenumber. This constitutes quantum-based special relativistic effects for the “individual particle.” But if DeBroglie frequency and wavenumber are understood after the fashion of the unified quantity of momentumenergy, then we may speak of the DeBroglie spacetime wavenumber of composite matter as being a sort of conserved fluid. Propagation speeds of greater than “c” are possible so long as the

velocity of light in vacuo is not exceeded during the necessary phases of preparation of experimental apparatus at both ends (and everywhere in between) of the path of the, e.g., particle, field, or disturbance, etc. in question. If a supraliminal message is received, the time that must be taken to decrypt or decipher the message must be greater than t = d/c, where “d” is the distance between transmitter and receiver, and “c” is the speed of light. This suggests an objective relationship between “encryption hardness” and entropy (or, conversely) information content of the transmitted “script.” “Time . . . flowing like a river. . . “ Of course, if time is to be properly likened to a (conserved) fluid, then certainly the appearance of vortices within the linear flow of this fluid corresponds to an “equal and opposite” reduction in the linear current density of the fluid.

There is a shifting back and forth of current density between its linear and vorticular components, however, the overall current density of the system is conserved. Of course, the fluid is under acceleration within its vorticular component, but no work is performed by this component of the fluid if the pressures and stresses within the fluid are orthogonal to the vortices of the fluid. Is any energy dissipated by the vacuum in the mere sustaining of stable matter that is not currently undergoing any “reactions,” e.g., chemical, nuclear, etc.? Energy is dissipated by the quantum vacuum when a mass is accelerated. Is this energy dissipated because the vacuum must be continually “updated” on the current state of motion of the mass? What about in the case of gravitating masses? As the Schrodinger equation dictates the temporal (and spatial) evolution of a quantum system’s wavefunction, e.g., that of an accelerated particle, bound structure composed of multiple particles and fields, etc., any change in

the momentum-energy of some quantum mechanical system introduced from outside the scope of the system wavefunction, must induce a “collapse” of this wavefunction, as well as suddenly alter the uncertainties of both conserved and nonconserved system observables. So in each set of incompatible, conjugate observables, the action of measurement, environmental entanglement, or acceleration introduces either a decoherence of reduction of the state vector, resulting in an increase in the Heisenberg uncertainties of each of one set of observables along with a corresponding decrease in these uncertainties with respect to the set of conjugate observables of the system. So it appears that information must be taken up by the system as a result of a change in the system wavefunction. So differences between distinct system wavefunctions may be thought to ”contain” information, whereas a single, isolated wavefunction, not correlated or otherwise entangled with other systems, may not be supposed to possess information in an absolute sense. In other words, only relative differences between wavefunctions possesses information content. Locality and causality are merely abstract features of he physical world. How can form sustain itself in the absence of boundary conditions upon the dynamic. Standing wave structures possess boundary conditions at both ends (one dimensional case) while travelling waves only have one initial condition. Is relativistic (spacetime) symmetry violated here? Energy uncertainty without the necessity of vacuum fluctuations – superposition within a closed system. So here we have two types of fluctuation: that which is only definitional, i.e., fluctuations within a closed system, and the other which is inherently unpredictable, i.e., not part of any system behavior. So we may make the distinction of these two fundamental types of fluctuation thus: fluctuations that are real versus virtual perturbations. Temporality cannot subsist in virtual perturbations – real fluctuations must be present.

Is some kind of degeneracy and symmetry involved in the overdetermination of one’s interpretation of one’s own mental states? Causal connections as interpretations of correlations and causal entities as “beds of correlation.” The basis for the radical overdetermination of nature is the fact of its origin being an infinitely symmetric state. This infinite symmetric “initial state” was partially broken in the “moment of creation.” Therefore all of the symmetries observed in nature are partial ones described by subgroups of some original symmetry group. Strangeness of infinite sets: cultural polarization field, pattern recognition, and enhancement of patterns and metaphysical presence. Mentor-protégé’ relationship for all members of a set of student/teachers without entangling of levels. Recursiveness only causes entangling of levels of description in a finite field of elements. Now a given mass, accelerated to a velocity approaching that of light cannot so closely approach this delimiting value so as to become more massive than its own black hole mass. And the black hole mass is determined by the density of the mass having reached the delimiting value of the vacuum energy density/c2 for the particular volume occupied by the accelerating mass. Also, we know that the acceleration of the mass is just the 90o spacetime rotation of the mass original, purely timelike velocity. In this way the limiting velocity to which a given mass may be accelerated is a function of the energy density of the vacuum occupied by the accelerating mass. So we see now that the original, purely timelike four velocity of the mass (prior to acceleration) is itself a function of the density of the mass relative to the density of the vacuum energy coextensive with the mass’ displaced volume. But if the acceleration to light velocity is actually to be effected, the mass must

utilize its own mass energy as the “fuel” for propelling itself such that, upon actually approaching c, all of its starting mass has already been converted to photon (or other massless particle) energy. The fact that some of this fuel must come from the binding energy of the mass rather than from the positive mass energy itself suggests that the mass when a “at rest” already possesses a small quantity of spacelike momentum connected with dynamical processes within the mass responsible for the existence of this binding energy. A theoretical group describes a closed set of reversible operations with the elements of the group. What is closed is the set composed of the distinct operations; the number of distinct elements, which composes the domain, which the operations of the group take as inputs, may itself be infinite. When the symmetry of the group is “broken,” the operations of the group are altered and perhaps also new operations added, which no longer are reversible, singly or collectively. The discovery of a new mathematical group for the description of some physical phenomenon means that various manifestations of physical variables, heretofore treated as distinct, are now seen to be differing manifestations of the same, underlying entity/physical quantity. Changes in state to some subpart of a closed dynamic system which are wholly attributable to other, earlier changes in neighboring subparts of the overarching system constitute ceteris paribus reversible, symmetric interactions. However, the reactions triggered by these interactions may not be themselves symmetric and time-reversible. Any asymmetries of the system’s changes of state are ultimately traceable to input to the system wholly from outside it. The sense of “outside” intended here, one in which the system as a whole is not secretly a subpart of some overarching system, with perturbations to its outside transmitted to it and mediated by the overarching system’s matrix and originating within some other subpart of the crypto-overarching system. What we are really saying here is that asymmetrical interactions always are ultimately between the uppermost overarching system and its outside. Of course,

the uppermost overarching system in almost any physical setting is just the global spacetime continuum itself in which this system is “embedded.” Infinite degeneracy would mean that the wavefunction of the degenerate system could undergo transition between an infinite number of eigenstates on a continuous spectrum without measurable changes resulting to any of its quantum observables. Should Psi be understood as a knowledge representation rather than the most that can actually be known about the system? Since no energy is required to effect changes in the system’s quantum state from one to another of its energy degenerate eigenstates, free will and conscious thought may presuppose energy degeneracy. Also, there is not basis for assigning scales of physical time to energy-degenerate quantum transitions. Infinite symmetry may be understood as infinite sameness in which, no matter where the observer is and no matter what happens, no “objective” differences between here and there and no changes from now to then are in any sense evident. Now such a state of infinite symmetry in the absence of degeneracy (with respect to some set of as yet “unmanifest” parameters) is synonymous with an empty void or nothingness. Moreover, for there to exist a state of infinite symmetry, an infinite degeneracy must be present, that is, degeneracy with respect to an infinite number of distinct though still unmanifest parameters. But all this is to presume that there is some presently obtaining state, which represents physical reality (as a whole, in some sense) but which is both underpinned by and insulated against an infinitely chaotic flux of change to an infinite number of still unmanifest proto-physical variables (protoobservables?). A tremendous quantity of entropy is released as a result of the breaking of this state of infinite symmetry (one might suppose an infinite quantity for this entropy) so that the aboriginal state of infinite

symmetry is to be understood as possessing infinite order. The breaking of this infinitely symmetric, initial state results in a kind of “unpacking” of this state into an intricate, dynamic structure/continuum of ordered and disordered energy, i.e., some of the symmetry (order) of the initial state survives the transition to the broken, symmetric state and the remainder is “lost.” But a perfectly and infinitely symmetric state would possess no internal fluctuations in any of its group symmetric parameters outside of the spectrum of potential change for the parameters defined within the symmetry group, and so it is hard to imagine how such a symmetric system, heretofore everlastingly cut off from any outside (realm possessing foreign parameters or “off-scale” values of “domestic” parameters), could “spontaneously break,” that is, without having been “helped” from outside. If the Big Bang is simultaneous with the initial, abrupt phase of spontaneous symmetry breaking, then its continued expansion may perhaps be understood as a continuous further breaking of (global) symmetry in favor of the continued establishment of greater myriad’s of domains of local symmetry, interconnected through mutual exchanges of quantities of their local variables. We might suppose that the ratedensity of entropy production therefore is uniform throughout the Universe provided that one refers to the production of total entropy, local + global, i.e., that due to the local evolution of complex structures/systems + local contributions to the entropy production, exclusively due to the global entropy production occurring as a consequence of cosmological expansion. This means that the global rate-density of entropy increase is affected by the rates of change to the local entropy. The rate-density of global entropy may be understood, paradoxically seeming, as the local rate to time’s passage relative to changes in the cosmical time parameter. This cosmic time parameter is based upon changes in the total entropy of the Universe. Ambiguities of interpretation of fluctuations occurring near the vertex of the light cone. Ambiguities of the interpretation of quantum tunneling.

Can we have tunneling of particles across a timelike potential barrier? Can we construct an experiment to test this, say one which involves the tuning/detuning of some already well understood tunneling? The consistency of the notion of virtual gravity waves depends on the independent existence of spacetime fluctuations. At the event horizon of a black hole the space and time axes are in some sense reversed. This is because an object (or particle so we can neglect tidal effects) just outside of the event horizon possesses virtually all of its momentum in the direction of the hole’s center and relatively none of it in a timelike direction. But neither is their any “room” for internal spacelike momentum for this mass (in the form of binding forcemediating boson particle exchanges). All of the fluctuations of the vacuum are in the form of 3-momentum and none in the form of imaginary (timelike) 4-momentum. And so the mass is not so much torn apart as it is dissolved due to the hole’s sapping of the mass’ own binding forces. In the extreme case depicted here, gravity is not truly a “force,” but our projecting of our large, latent stores of common experience with everyday objects causes the phenomenology of gravitation to be naturally interpreted in terms of the action of a distance of a gravitating force. Gravitation is more accurately (or objectively) understood as the effects of mass upon a higher dimensional quantum vacuum that must, after the fashion of a cellular automaton, simultaneously parallel reprocess the data representing both matter and the colocated/coextensive 3-vacuum, and where this vacuum possess only a finite computational capacity. If the vacuum does not itself gravitate, then momentum and energy fluctuations do not directly cause spacetime fluctuations but only do so indirectly through the effects of these momentum-energy vacuum fluctuation upon matter itself. Fluctuations of momentum and energy, in other words, directly produce fluctuations in x and t of test particles that we conveniently interpret as the effects of fluctuations of x and t upon test particles. The problem here is that it we allow äx and ät to

affect and directly, then we also have to permit then to affect äp and äE directly, with the result that the vacuum itself must possess a gravitational mass. Perhaps the way to put time and space on an equal footing within a theory of quantum gravity should be not to try to make the time parameter into a bona fide observable, but to take away this status from the space variable, x. This reminds us of the expansion of a permutation group through the discovery that some members of this group are not simple, but @$ composite. Processing information means taking two pieces of information from two smaller, and heretofore never before directly connected, contexts, and bringing the pieces of information together in such a way that one now has new information concerning the broader context including all of the original “pieces.”

From my light reading on the subject of supersymmetry (SUSY), I gather that when The breaking of the spacetime symmetry of the quantum vacuum by mass is not the fundamental or absolute symmetry breaking that requires the engendering of a new gauge boson. This situation is quite unlike that where a broken global symmetry causes the creation of a gauge boson, which, by being exchanged between splintered symmetry domains, results in the restoring locally of the symmetry that was broken globally, e.g., the creation of the Higgs boson in the theory of electroweak symmetry breaking. Another reason that the breaking of the vacuum spacetime symmetry by mass is not fundamental is that mass is not an irreducible, conserved physical quantity, but is a phenomenon produced by the peculiar manner in which the components of the total (mass-energy + vacuum-energy) fluctuation stress-momentum-energy tensors mutually interact. April 2011 “5. Spin 1 photon field has positive

zero point quantum energy density. Spin 1/2 Dirac electron-positron field has negative zero point quantum energy density from spin-statistics connection. Ref: Peter Milonni "The Quantum Vacuum"”, c.f., Sarfatti’s ebook, “Destiny Matrix”. October 2013 Discoverer of the isotope effect that helped Bardeen, Cooper and Schrieffer formulate the theory of electrical superconductors as a quieting of the local randomness of the zero point fluctuations by the formation of coherent quantum superpositions of different numbers of nonlocally connected, or “real entangled” electron pairs. This violates, i.e., “spontaneously breaks” an internal “gauge symmetry” from hyperspace in the lowest energy “ground state”. The same idea works for the virtual quanta inside the “quantum vacuum” of the system. This new coherent phase ordered quantum vacuum state with a smaller amount of random zero point fluctuations (ZPF) has a slightly lower total energy than the normal state with a larger amount of random zero point fluctuations, c.f., footnote #104, Destiny Matrix (2012), 2nd Revised Version. October 2013

The notion that the universe is a kind of ancestor simulation, i.e., a projection from some future, vastly more technologically advanced time can be placed in Dr. Sarfatti’s context of back from the future retro-causal, holographic universe by invoking the notion of the conservation of quantum information, the black hole information paradox and the notion of how the black hole’s event horizon/surface codes for all of the information contained in the matter, which has fallen into the black hole. Prior to the breaking of the spacetime symmetry of the vacuum by mass, the spectrum of momentum fluctuations within the vacuum is just that defined in terms of the spectrum of virtual transitions allowed between the discrete energy levels of this global vacuum state. This is exactly the situation we should expect if the quantum vacuum can correctly be modeled as a four dimension array of coupled harmonic oscillators, i.e., as a four dimensional crystalline latticework. The additional 3momentum fluctuations, over and above those permitted in the symmetric state of this vacuum, correspond to those transition energies of the modified vacuum lattice which are now forbidden by the state of broken symmetry. After this symmetry is broken, the spectrum of vacuum 3-momentum

fluctuations becomes denser while that of the vacuum’s energy fluctuations, i.e., fluctuations in the imaginary component of the vacuum’s 4-momentum, becomes attenuated. Were this vacuum two dimensional, this change in symmetry could have been effected by a simple “rotation” of the fluctuation momentum-energy vector, i.e., a 2 nd rank tensor would have been required to describe the rotation, but not the end state, which could be adequately described in terms of a 2vector. And the dynamics of this rotation of momentum-energy within this 2d spacetime can be modeled in terms of the exchange of spin-1 gauge bosons. However, in four-dimensional spacetime, a 2 nd rank tensor is required to describe the vacuum’s end state – that post symmetry-breaking. Moreover, a 4 th rank tensor is necessary to describe this transformation of the vacuum caused by the breaking of its symmetry, as mentioned earlier. Consequently, a transformation of the fluctuation stress-momentum-energy tensor can be described in terms of time-varying probability current densities of both spin-1 vector gauge bosons and spin-2 gauge bosons. As the density of a given mass is increased, so increases the communications “bottleneck” between change within the mass, mediated by momentum fluctuations in the form of spin-1 boson exchange, and the temporality of the quantum vacuum. Since the modes of momentum fluctuation are determined (just as in the case of a crystal) by the available energy transitions between discrete energy levels of the (lattice) vacuum, simultaneous increases in momentum fluctuation density with corresponding decreases in energy fluctuations within the vacuum occupying the very same volume (as the mass in question), require that these momentum fluctuations become progressively more energy degenerate. Is this paradoxical? We must understand the relationship between the concepts of symmetry and degeneracy to answer this question. The nonlinearities exhibited by general relativity may only apply to the expectation values of all forms of energy and not to mere fluctuations in energy (that are grounded in Heisenberg energy uncertainty, that is). Is

gravitation a manifestation of the loss of spacetime symmetry? In other words, the spatiotemporal distribution of the wavefunction, which matters not to an isolated, single particle within an “empty” universe, in terms of when and where this particle is situated within this empty spacetime, becomes an important parameter for the momentum-energy (or 4-momentum) of this (test) particle, i.e., a degeneracy has been removed (and not here because of some specific force coupling having been introduced) – remember, gravitation is not a “force.” global symmetry is broken, one or more gauge bosons are engendered as a result. These bosons are necessary to restore this broken symmetry, but only at a “local” level. The continual mutual exchange of these gauge bosons between the appropriate fermions (those “feeling” the gauge force mediated by these particular bosons) constitutes the mechanism by which this local gauge symmetry is maintained. My understanding is that, in the case of all gauge bosons, with the notable exception of the Higgs, the fermions involved in the exchanging of these bosons acquire an effective mass component of their total mass. (Lorenz, by the way, had tried during the early years of the 20 th Century to demonstrate that all of the electron’s mass was electromagnetic in origin and was attributable to the electron’s electromagnetic self-energy. Lorenz’ attempt ultimately proved unsuccessful: it appears that even the great hunches of great minds do not always “pan out!”) Now the hypothesis for the gravity mechanism alluded to throughout these writings points to the mutual exchanges of gauge (vector) bosons as being materially important in understanding this mechanism as well as the mechanism of inertia – hopefully so since we would like to remain true to Einstein’s strong equivalence principle, the other postulate of general relativity being that of general covariance. Can we think of the loss of purely timelike 4-momentum, and this 4momentum being reconstituted into both timelike and spacelike components as representing a particularly simple form of symmetry breaking? An important question in this connection becomes does the

vacuum not gravitate because of a kind of mutual cancellation of its timelike and spacelike momentum fluctuation current densities? Or is this the case because the 4-momentum of the vacuum, in the absence of mass, is itself purely timelike? Supersymmetry, which requires the contributions to the vacuum energy from creation/annihilation of virtual fermion-antifermion pairs to contribute a negative component of this energy, also requires the contribution to this vacuum energy from the creation/annihilation of bosons to be positive. Moreover, SUSY requires that these two contributions from the two basic types of vacuum fluctuation somehow precisely cancel! Magnitude of the tensor as a kind of container for a conserved fluid which can have 16 distinct (flow?) components. Shuffling of component intensities is reversible. It has been stated many times by physicists that the existence of Heisenberg energy uncertainty implies the non-conservation of energy. Similar statements apply to the momentum. But with the unification of momentum and energy by special relativity into a conserved momentum-energy four-vector, and the concomitant unification of space and time into a symmetric, spacetime continuum, it becomes possible for both Heisenberg momentum and energy uncertainty to exist throughout spacetime without the necessity of net uncertainty of the fourmomentum throughout this spacetime. This appears possible if the vacuum fluctuations in 3-momentum are dynamically related to those of the energy so that the sum of these two yields a magnitude of the fourmomentum fluctuations of the vacuum which remains a constant 0 or, undetectably close to 0 such that a) the quantum vacuum does not itself act as a gravitating source and b) the spacetime maintains (for all practical purposes) its Lorenz invariance. The action of mass through the mechanisms of Pauli Exclusion (and “Inclusion”) upon the vacuum and, conversely, of this vacuum upon the mass, serves to disrupt this spacetime symmetry (of Lorenz invariance) causing an imbalance in the mutual cancellation of vacuum momentum and energy fluctuations. This imbalance, induced by mass on the vacuum, acts to give the

vacuum an effective mass just as this modified vacuum enhances the mass of test bodies introduced into it from outlying, virtual “free space.” Mass is enhanced in two distinct but closely related ways: the real time processing burden that increased momentum fluctuation densities (within vacuum occupied by masses) pose for the quantum vacuum that mediates them and the reduced computational resources available to this vacuum with which to perform this function. On this view, the density of vacuum energy that acts as a source of gravitation is only that component of the vacuum’s total energy density which fails to cancel with its momentum fluctuations. In this way, the effective vacuum energy density is determined by the density of mass in the universe. It is this tiny component of the total quantum vacuum energy density, which we should term the cosmological constant. The building-in of phenotype degeneracy may depend also upon quantum indeterminacy. Can the phenomenon of quantum degeneracy be related to that of classical, deterministic chaos, e.g., chaotic attractor theory, i.e., “quantum chaos?” So it is actually the tidal forces associated with a gravitational field that produce the acceleration of massive bodies. By virtue of the Bose principle (PIP), the enhanced binding energy of the vacuum associated with its enhanced density of 3-momentum fluctuations/suppressed energy (imaginary 4-momentum) fluctuations, induce a mirroring (of this shift in the magnitude of the components of its stress-momentum-energy fluctuation tensor) by the equivalent matter fluctuation tensor. This tendency of the structure of matter to imitate/ borrow from that of the sustaining vacuum energy is simply suggested by the distinction of real versus virtual, e.g., particle, field, etc. A11 A12 A13 A14

B1

C11 C12 C13 C14

A21 A22 A23 A24 A31 A32 A33 A34 A41 A42 A43 A44

=

B2 B3 B4

X

C21 C22 C23 C24 C31 C32 C33 C34 C41 C42 C43 C44

Contract each Cij with Bj to get the magnitude of the vector, then to get the direction of this magnitude, take four dot products with the basis four vector of the coordinate system, and contract vector with tensor. Táâ contracted with Ráâãä yields 16 dot products of 16 pairs of 2 nd rank tensors, or, contracting Tik with 16 metric tensor-like 2nd rank tensors to produce Táâ, a new 2nd rank tensor. Contravariant versus covariant tensors, vectors, etc.? =ik Tik = 0. T is a conserved quantity. What’s the underlying symmetry

at work here? Tik can be symmetric or antisymmetric, covariant or contravariant. The derivative of Tik is not a tensor, i.e., on a manifold with a metric of (+,+,+,-), i.e., nik – Minkowski metric. Tik must be spacetime manifold in order for this differentiation to produce a tensor. The spin-statistics connection is not necessary in nonrelativistic quantum mechanics, i.e, there is no necessary connection within this theory between the spin of a particle and the symmetry (or antisymmetry) of the particle’s wavefunction. This connection is however demanded by consistency requirements of relativity applied quantum mechanics. /\Q us the Heisenberg uncertainty, not the total uncertainty, which includes statistical and experimental uncertainties, etc. There is a distinction between the quantum uncertainty, /\Q, and the fluctuations in Q, i.e., Q for all quantum systems except that of the

quantum mechanical observer’s own brain. Effortless execution of what has been performed and practiced on many previous occasions is possible as we exploit the well-worn rut of a oneto-one, “onto” function. Effortless improvisation exploits an altogether different functionality. Sometimes it does seem as though we are getting some help in developing and ordering our thoughts somewhat after the fashion of a matching funds subsidy. This is somewhat after the fashion, again, that the poet’s leaps of insight and facilitated by the simultaneous striving after an appropriate sounding verse. Another related phenomenon is that by which certain conceptions, best expressed in a particular vernacular or dialect, are also more easily conceived – even when these conceptions are altogether novel to the person imitating a particular form or speech. It is not that faster than light influences do not exist, it is just that these supraliminal influences are not measurable. The influences would possess these normally conserved quantities in amounts less than the Heisenberg uncertainties of these quantities. These quantities are in this case not conserved and so, for example, spacetime symmetry is absent over spacetime regions of dimension “smaller” than /\x 0, i.e., /\t, /\x1, /\x2, /\x3. These quantities are, of course, /\p x, /\py, /\pz, /\E. The question arises whether such small momenta and energies are actually not conserved or, whether these quantities are just below the threshold of the measurability necessary to verify the conservation or these quantities. What this means is that there is a question about the origin of the nonconservation of the Heisenberg uncertainties of these dynamical quantities. The hypothesis advanced here is that the expectation values of these dynamical quantities are jointly determined by the observer uncertainties in these quantities and the magnitude of the vacuum fluctuations of these quantities. What is conserved is perhaps the vacuum fluctuation term component of the expectation value while the nonconserved component remains the quantum uncertainty itself. Perhaps vacuum fluctuation momentum and energy are only

nonconserved quantities only in the restricted sense of there being no measurable inputs of momentum and energy to the continuity equation of fluctuation momentum current density. Perhaps the expectation values of, for example, a system’s momentum or energy, are conserved quantities due to a special coordination between the observer’s uncertainties and the vacuum fluctuations in the system’s (matter + vacuum) momentum and energy. Our theory is in difficulty in regard to this one important point: we have maintained that the magnitudes of the fluctuations in the quantum vacuum’s momentum and energy combine together into a conserved four vector (in the case of an “empty” spacetime) and yet we are also maintaining that the gravitational field breaks the spacetime symmetry of this vacuum, say, by disrupting the phase relationships of the individual amplitudes in the vacuum’s momentum and energy fluctuations. There is another form of probability, of course, which is that of detector efficiency. conscious experience corresponding to each alternative possible outcome of an act of observation (of the state of a quantum system), therefore consciousness has nothing whatever to do with the selection from among these alternative possibilities. There is no basis provided for within Everett’s theory for the distinguishing of actual and possible quantum states. Everett’s theory depends upon the possibility of their being a complete quantum description of the Universe. Of course, a computation, taking place within the Universe, of the state of the Universe as a whole, is in principle impossible, unless, perhaps, one is only speaking of this whole as a kind of shell or outer form with inner states which remain undetermined. An interesting thought here is

that considerations of logic only tell us that something is per impossible, but leaves completely unexplained the why and wherefore of this impossibility. The question arises whether there is some meaning in asking why some thing or event, dictated by logic as an impossibility, in terms of limitations within a physical order. Consciousness is a structure of simultaneity, which is grounded in the integration of temporality. Does this imply that temporality can exist in an aboriginal, unintegrated state, and paradoxically only at a later time being brought into a state of greater integral wholeness? Isn’t a mere single dimension of time an inadequate domain from which the functions of integration are to take their arguments, i.e., independent variables? The temporal multidimensionality may be found within Everett’s Many Worlds Theory of quantum measurement, if integration of temporality is effected through the interaction of physical noncommunicating branches of the Universe (or merely of the individual mind’s universe). Conscious action may be defined within a quantum mechanical context as the organization of undetermined quantum states by thought. We might say that choice transcends quantum description because on the relative statistical weights are given for each eigenfunction within a give quantum superposition state, but if we do, we neglect the fact that however human beings choose to actualize the eigenstates of their quantum brain superposition states, over time these choices must collectively always be achieved in such a manner that the relative statistical weights are not violated. Does this suggest that if, unlike the case of pure, statistical probability of the classical world, the actualization of quantum brain states by the individual human person have continued to defy, if you will, what is otherwise indicated by the relative statistical weightings of the individual quantum brain eigenstates, that then some quantum potential must have all along been concurrently building up (in the quantum vacuum with which the

person’s brain is interacting or, perhaps, within that person’s brain itself), which strives (and ultimately must succeed) to redress this disparity so that the relative statistical probability weights remain in force. After all, Bohm’s coauthor, Basil Hiley himself routinely referred to the quantum potential as an information potential. The fundamental difference between the eigenstates of a superposition and those of a statistical mixture is essentially this: in a statistical mixture of quantum states there is one state among the states of the mixture that the system is actually in; in the case of a superposition the system is not secretly already in one of these possible states because this has yet to be determined by, e.g., observation or decoherence. The order of spacelike separated events is only determined within an individual consciousness. The observer can’t copy a quantum state, but can arrange so that the system and his own brain state form a joint quantum state. The dynamism of fragments resulting from a broken symmetry is convergent and evolutionary. The internal symmetry is broken and simple enough to fit into externality whereupon the original symmetrical, highly-ordered structure can be approximately reconstituted. This reconstitution is effected and sustained by a set of locally symmetric interactions, which can be contained within locality, i.e., spacetime. The breaking of the infinite, global symmetry of an infinite, unified consciousness produced the local gauge symmetric network of interacting (temporal) consciousnesses (minds). The order which began as infinite and nondistributed has been transmuted into finite and distributed order of intersubjective spacetime. Spacetime is the symmetry domain of momentum-energy.

What is the

symmetry domain for data-information? Gravitational redshift can be interpreted as a lengthening of the photon’s wavelength or as a reduction in the photon’s momentum, which in turn causes a redshift in the photon wavelength/frequency. We must distinguish changes in the energy of the crystalline lattice 3vacuum due to its interaction with the 4-vacuum versus changes in 3vacuum energy due to gauge interaction within this 3-vacuum. Classical GR schema: matter tells spacetime how to curve and the curvature of spacetime informs matter’s geodesic motion. Quantum GR schema: momentum-energy (of matter) affects the fluctuation momentum-energy of the quantum vacuum through their shared quantum statistics. And the structure of the quantum vacuum fluctuation momentum-energy in turn affects the expectation values of the momentum-energy. Here the effects of fluctuations in the positiontime, i.e., spacetime fluctuations are not fundamental, i.e., are not on an equal footing with momentum-energy fluctuations. In other words, each fluctuation in position or time (which under resonance produce nonzero alterations in the expectation values of x I and t) is derivative of its corresponding momentum or energy fluctuations. And so, on the view spacetime fluctuations do not themselves have any independent existence, i.e., virtual gravitons are fictional entities (even as virtual particles!) The virtual transition of energy between distinct levels of the crystalline vacuum lattice may be interpreted as virtual, timelike tunneling of fermions of the lattice to higher energy levels of the crystal followed by decay of these virtual, excited states. But this prevents the existence of real gravitons as mere excitations of the vacuum graviton field. Moreover, on this view, gravitational waves are an artifact of a purely phenomenological description of a peculiar dynamics of gravitationally perturbed matter distributions.

Such is the difference between a particle tunneling through a potential barrier versus tunneling over this barrier. Can we understand the quantum measurement process as an example of induced symmetry breaking, i.e., because the measurement of an observable of a complex quantum state always returns a real number that is quantum measured takes from the general linear, GL(n; C) to the general linear subgroup of GL(n; C), i.e., GL(n;R). If so, then what is the quantity that is conserved within GL(n;C), which is not longer conserved within GL(n;R)? The uncertainties in the observables commuting with H? The dynamism of fragments resulting from a broken symmetry is convergent and evolutionary. The internal symmetry is broken and simple enough to fit into externality whereupon the original symmetrical, highly-ordered structure can be approximately reconstituted. This reconstitution is effected and sustained by a set of locally symmetric interactions, which can be contained within locality, i.e., spacetime. The breaking of the infinite, global symmetry of an infinite, unified consciousness produced the local gauge symmetric network of interacting (temporal) consciousnesses (minds). The order which began as infinite and nondistributed has been transmuted into finite and distributed order of intersubjective spacetime. Spacetime is the symmetry domain of momentum-energy. symmetry domain for data-information?

What is the

Gravitational redshift can be interpreted as a lengthening of the photon’s wavelength or as a reduction in the photon’s momentum, which in turn causes a redshift in the photon wavelength/frequency. As the photon is parallel transported along with its simultaneity hypersurface (image) in which the imaginary momentum of the hypersurface is

increasing with total 4-momentum conserved. 02-14-02

We must distinguish changes in the energy of the crystalline lattice 3vacuum due to its interaction with the 4-vacuum versus changes in 3vacuum energy due to gauge interaction within this 3-vacuum. Classical GR schema: matter tells spacetime how to curve and the curvature of spacetime informs matter’s geodesic motion. Quantum GR schema: momentum-energy (of matter) affects the fluctuation momentum-energy of the quantum vacuum through their shared quantum statistics. And the structure of the quantum vacuum fluctuation momentum-energy in turn affects the expectation values of the momentum-energy. Here the effects of fluctuations in the positiontime, i.e., spacetime fluctuations are not fundamental, i.e., are not on an equal footing with momentum-energy fluctuations. In other words, each fluctuation in position or time (which under resonance produce nonzero alterations in the expectation values of x I and t) is derivative of its corresponding momentum or energy fluctuations. And so, on the view spacetime fluctuations do not themselves have any independent existence, i.e., virtual gravitons are fictional entities (even as virtual particles!) The virtual transition of energy between distinct levels of the crystalline vacuum lattice may be interpreted as virtual, timelike tunneling of fermions of the lattice to higher energy levels of the crystal followed by decay of these virtual, excited states. But this prevents the existence of real gravitons as mere excitations of the vacuum graviton field. Moreover, on this view, gravitational waves are an artifact of a purely phenomenological description of a peculiar dynamics of gravitationally perturbed matter distributions. Such is the difference between a particle tunneling through a potential barrier versus tunneling over this barrier. Can we understand the quantum measurement process as an example of

induced symmetry breaking, i.e., because the measurement of an observable of a complex quantum state always returns a real number that is quantum measured takes from the general linear, GL(n; C) to the general linear subgroup of GL(n; C), i.e., GL(n;R). If so, then what is the quantity that is conserved within GL(n;C), which is not longer conserved within GL(n;R)? The uncertainties in the observables commuting with H? Not only does the concentration of the nongravitational binding force interactions (i.e., virtual photon, w, z, gluon, etc. exchanges between real fermions) increase, but along with this, field energy from these increasing binding forces excite “unoccupied,” virtual fermion “vacuum modes,” resulting in the concomitant creation (out of this field energy) of real fermions, which then become part of the structure of the gravitationally collapsing matter distribution. And there is reason to believe (of course, also from the standpoint of symmetry considerations) that there obtains an equipartation of field energy (real fermions) and interaction or binding energy (virtual bosons). Do fermions and bosons provide boundary conditions for each other? Exchanging a fermion for an antifermion induces a sign change in the time. Exchanging a boson for an antiboson induces no sign changes in either space or time variables. Theta = (/\k*x – w*t) /\theta = /\k*x + k*/\x - /\w*t – w*/\t Oscillatory transmission coefficient for a barrier tunneling problem may be a good analogy for the Hubble recessional velocity periodicity of 72 km/sec/Mpc for the cosmological expansion.

Virtual gravitons are just stress-energy fluctuations of the quantum vacuum, which can also be understood, through a generalization of the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, as fluctuations in the coupling of space to time, i.e., as fluctuations in the strength in the coupling of momentum and energy fluctuations to the quantum vacuum. “Late time normalization” involves an accounting system, i.e., the conservation of probability (or probability density, tensor density, etc.), which subsumes (and may well essentially depend on) the action of nonlocal quantum influences. Nonlocal interactions seem to be necessary for a system described by a wavefunction. This is because the wavefunction perfectly mimics a particular class of random function although the physics underpinned by this functions dynamics is anything but random. Although the momentum-energy of the system of charged particles and electromagnetic fields do not each transform covariantly, the momentum-energy of the combined system of both does transform covariantly. /\Xuv x /\Tuv ¥ h2 (possible generalization of the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle?) But don’t we need a metric tensor, g uv, in front of the left-hand side of the above equation? So here we have fluctuations in Tuv, i.e., dTuv, related to fluctuations in Xuv, i.e., dXuv. We have already related fluctuations in 3-momentum to the exchanges of vector bosons within 3space and fluctuations in energy to the creation/annihilation of virtual fermion-antifermion pairs in vacuum. How are we to represent fluctuations in the stress component of the vacuum momentum-energy tensor, tuv in terms of the fundamental particle and field processes of the quantum vacuum? We mentioned earlier that these stress fluctuations

could be described in terms of the exchange of spin-2 particles, i.e., gravitons. Now the quantity, Tuv, in /\Tuv (above) must be a conserved quantity and so the quantity Xuv, in /\ Xuv, (above) must be an unconserved quantity. But then this means that Xuv cannot be properly quantized such that gravitons (as the spin-2 quanta of spacetime) cannot exist. Should scattering in vacuum be treated any different than scattering in a refractive or dielectric medium? A four-vector equation shows the relationship of two quantities, one of which is conserved. There should be a symmetry associated with the space defined by the unconserved quantity. Then there should also exist an uncertainty relation (of the Heisenberg variety) obtaining between the uncertainties in both the conserved and unconserved quantities. Can we speak of the symmetry space of the unconserved quantity as being “curved” or “warped” as a result of the action of the conserved quantity, say due to some dynamism taking place “within” the local symmetry space “occupied” by the conserved quantity? The gravitational field is the spacetime field, which exists against the backdrop of an infinite, Euclidean space? Topology is a consideration of quantum statistics because of the underlying transformation of the exchange of identical particles. Many different topologies can have the very same metric or is it that any given topology can possess myriad distinct metrics? Presumably the metric tensor varies throughout the spacetime of a gravitational field even though the topology of the spacetime manifold, i.e., its connectedness, remains a constant. Can we calculate the increase in entropy resulting from the breaking of a symmetry? Look at the interacting gas compartment model of the

entropy of mixing as a kind of reduction in symmetry. Fluctuation size as related to 1/ in occupation number formalism of quantum mechanics. The mathematics of thermal fluctuations adequately describes thermal phenomena only if a background heat reservoir is assumed. Rotation angular momentum-absolute system. /\/\L ¥ h.

direction-inertial

guidance

Phase relations disrupted by observation and by a gravitational field. Spin versus phase fluctuations. Special relativity requires spin statistics and general relativity mediated by spin statistical forces. epi=fcbk=

“Metaphor underpins the integral consistency of culture. It is because of this fact that we may meaningfully speak of revolutions occurring in numerous distinct fields of human endeavor simultaneously.” June 2013 epi=Culture provides a home for the mind of Man, however the infrastructure for said mind is provided by the dynamics of the Universe which is to say that of Being itself. If it is possible to move relative to an always greater fraction of the total vacuum energy density contained within a region upon which is impressed a gravitational field, this is due to the locally reduced value of the velocity of light within this region. Phase is determined by both frequency, f, and wavenumber, k. In other words, êsys is determined by the energy and momentum of the quantum mechanical system. Changes in the phase with time may be linked to fluctuations in the quantum mechanical system’s energy. While changes in êsys along coordinate intervals may be linked to fluctuations in the quantum mechanical system’s momentum. Are nondeterministic functions described by anharmonic Fourier expansions, deterministic by harmonic?

Performing a quantum measurement disrupts the delicate phase relationships between the orthogonal modes of the quantum mechanical system, i.e., between the system’s orthogonal eigenstates. Does quantum mechanical measurement abruptly introduce anharmonicity into the system? Does adiabatic change in the system mean merely a shift in the amplitudes of system’s eigenfunctions? In some gauge theories, the vacuum is defined by a field that induces a breaking of the vacuum’s symmetry (Higg’s mechanism) and giving particles their respective masses (as opposed to merely causing the already defined, potential masses for each type of particle of these particles from their status as heretofore latent and virtual to a new status as actual (or manifest) and real. On p. 152 of How is Quantum Field Theory Possible?, we read, “Quantum theories tell us there is no coherent formulation of nothingness.” All operators corresponding to quantum vacuum observables, e.g., spin, momentum, energy, etc., are expressible in terms of the creation and annihilation operators /\a+ and /\a. /\a+ and /\a are equivalent (in the case of small amplitudes of oscillation) to the excitation and deexcitation of the quantum vacuum normal modes of harmonic oscillation. Of course, for large amplitudes of excitation (and deexcitation, as well?), the distinct harmonics are no longer independent of one another, i.e., orthogonal. In this situation the vacuum has been excited into anharmonic oscillation. By what mechanism are we to model the induced interaction of the vacuum normal modes under the condition of anharmonicity? Does anharmonicity imply the occurrence of broken symmetry, e.g., spatiotemporal or in the intricate phase relations of these normal modes? Does the disruption of harmonicity imply the exchange of quantities of phase between the interacting normal modes and is the quantity of phase so exchanged itself quantized?

The comments about the accelerated electric charge pertain to freelyfalling charges. Are the energies of vacuum fluctuations blue or red shifted relative to an accelerated body – a body either being accelerated within free space or freely falling in a gravitational field? Or are the probability current densities of these fluctuations merely shifted in their distributions? Re-examine the question of gravitating quantum vacuum in light of the notion of metric degeneracy of spacetime topological fluctuations. Distance and time interval can be defined in terms of the line density of momentum and energy fluctuation events, respectively. Think about /\x and /\p in relation to double potential barrier height (in distinguishing the two interpretations of tunneling). This question of interpretation can be connected to another one where vacuum spacetime fluctuations are interpreted as either phenomenological or physically real. C.f., p. 247, Theoretical Concepts in Physics (Longair), “fluctuations in the field are of the same magnitude as the energy density of the radiation itself. (waves of random phase for a particular mode of oscillation). An electric charge moves in such a manner (when undergoing accelerated motion, that is) as to remain at the center of its “field emanations” so that it “appears to itself” to be at rest. This is an example of forces being induced by the breaking of a symmetric vacuum field. This would seem to imply that a component of this charged particle’s mass is electromagnetic in origin. We may make similar observations concerning the other components of the particle’s mass in

terms of it maintaining local symmetry as a source of other fundamental force fields, i.e., strong nuclear, weak nuclear, and perhaps also gravitational. Such a particle, while being accelerated in “free space,” disrupts the global spacetime symmetry of the vacuum electromagnetic field, along with the other global symmetries of this vacuum – those associated with the other fundamental forces. But then the particle proceeds to emit and absorb various force-carrying quanta, i.e., bosons, in such a manner, then, so that the local vacuum symmetries with respect to these fundamental fields is retained. A kind of “self-force” develops out of this tendency of the particle to maintain the symmetries of its local spacetime (vacuum), which acts in opposite sense to the acceleration. And it is these self-forces, acting in concert, which account for the inertia of the particle. In the case where this particle is bound up within the quantal structure of bulk matter, considered to be “at rest,” the fundamental fields now manifest themselves in the form of continual emission and absorption of force-carrying quanta. These are the same forces, which manifested themselves as the selfforces, described above for an accelerating particle. These forces are now mediated by the to-and-fro exchange of force-carrying quanta between the particle and its immediate neighbors (to which it is bound). These are the forces underlying the binding energies of bulk matter, which collectively engender its inertial mass. The sum of the momentum current densities, äòi, are at the expense, as explained earlier, of the imaginary component of the total 4-momentum current density, äòî, of the “free space,” quantum vacuum. In the absence of internal stresses and strains within this bulk matter, the fluctuation 4-momentum current density tensor is diagonal, containing only pressure and energy density terms. In the special case of the event horizon of a spherical black hole, the pressure terms are maximal and the energy density term is 0. In other words, at the event horizon of the hole, all of the fluctuation 4momentum current density is in the form of internal exchanges of fluctuation 3-momentum. The time-time component, as well as the

other timelike components of the fluctuation stress-momentum-energy tensor for the local vacuum (just outside the event horizon) is 0. So at the event horizon of a black hole, the energy uncertainty of the quantum vacuum is also 0. Notice that the fluctuation energy (as opposed to momentum) associated with all of the fundamental vacuum fields are each, individually, 0 (since there can be no mutual cancellation between the energies of distinct spin-1 fields). The duration of individual vacuum energy fluctuations is not what is altered by time dilation within a gravitational field, just the interval between these energy transitions and the current density of the vacuum fluctuations in energy relative to the increased momentum current densities within bulk matter. Similarly, the wavelength of individual momentum fluctuations is not contracted in the radial direction within a gravitational field, just the average distance between individual momentum fluctuation events. If this is a more or less correct interpretation, then how are we to explain the phenomenon of gravitational redshift? So would energy and momentum here be a collective phenomenon rather than absolute physical quantities, such that the momentum and energy of real particles are not absolute, for instance, but are merely change relative to the abstract representations of the vacuum’s momentum and energy grounded in this vacuum’s momentum and energy current densities? This interpretation is perhaps consistent with and helps to clarify the meaning of the notion of time being relative (rather than “absolute”). So it is actually the tidal forces associated with a gravitational field that produce the acceleration of massive bodies. By virtue of the Bose principle (PIP), the enhanced binding energy of the vacuum associated with its enhanced density of 3-momentum fluctuations/suppressed energy (imaginary 4- momentum) fluctuations, induce a mirroring (of this shift in the magnitude of the components of

its stress-momentum-energy fluctuation tensor) by the equivalent matter fluctuation tensor. The question arises that if the fluctuations in the momentum and energy in the particles of which the mass is composed are independent of these fluctuations of the local vacuum state, then interpreting either set of fluctuations as the Heisenberg uncertainties in momentum and energy and the remaining set of fluctuations as the fluctuation terms of these two quantities, then given that these two sets of fluctuations, matter and vacuum, are appropriately correlated, nonzero expectation values result for the momentum and energy for this matter. More specifically, negatively correlated sets of fluctuations will produce nonzero expectation values of the momentum or energy and positively correlated sets of fluctuations will produce zero expectation values of the momentum or energy. An important question here is: how are vacuum momentum fluctuations related to vacuum energy fluctuations (within the same spacetime “neighborhood”)? This tendency of the structure of matter to imitate/ borrow from that of the sustaining vacuum energy is most directly suggested by the distinction of real versus virtual particles and fields and physically realized through the action of PIP and the divergence free nature of Táâ, i.e., the fact that,

ï/ïáâTáâ = 0

where Táâ is the vacuum stress-momentum-energy fluctuation tensor and ï/ïáâ is a covariant derivative. The symmetry of real vs. virtual duality is broken in at least one important and perhaps, highly significant, sense: real particles possess mass both singly and collectively; virtual particles possess this property of mass only as individual particles. This is because the principles of PEP and PIP apply equally to the interaction of virtual with virtual particles as they do to the interaction of real particles with virtual

particles. The characteristic of massiveness does not extend to virtual particles collectively because virtual particles generally do not possess a continuous existence, i.e., existence through more than one “period” defined by Planck’s constant divided by the particle’s energy. In terms of the cellular automata (CA) model of vacuum and matter, the information processing capacity that must be respectively devoted to the computation of virtual versus real particle structures (individual and collective) and virtual versus real spacetime trajectories (evolution) surely must be of widely divergent magnitude. The difference in the computational resources required (on the part of the quantum vacuum) in order to continuous recreate a particle if the same type or class, according to a statistical rule, versus the computational resources that must be devoted to the task of continuously recreating a certain individual (individually labeled) particle, according to a deterministic rule, must be one of many orders of magnitude. This difference in order of magnitude may well approximate that between the vacuum energy densities predicted by quantum theory for the quantum vacuum and general relativity theory for the cosmological constant. In this manner, CA theory may allow a large step in the direction of reconciling these two fundamental and radically conflicting theories. The probability of throwing a “head” and a “tail” when tossing two coins is classically speaking ½. The quantum probability of throwing a “head” and a “tail” is just 1/3. In the first case, heads and tails are distinguishable; in the latter, they are indistinguishable. This is far less than an order of magnitude difference, if we carry this over from the context of simple probabilities to that of probability densities or probability current densities and probability rates. When distinguishing “throws” (which may be likened to creation/annihilation events), we note that, classically, when distinguishing coins (which may be likened to distinguishing particles), the probability of each possible “throw” is ¼ or 0.25. When not

distinguishing “throws,” which is what is required in analogy with the statistical requirements of the quantum theory, the probability of each possible “throw” is 1/3 or 0.33. So how can we, making use of this analogy between coins and particles and between “throws” and quantum “events,” a|at, to account for the fantastic order of magnitude difference between what are effectively the probability current densities of the vacuum in QM and GR? The ratio, [0.33/0.25]n with n ~ 1000 yields a factor of an order of magnitude of 10120. The computational resource requirements for a representation within the computational state space of the cellular automaton (CA) in relation to the total available computational resources available to the CA with which to compute this representation is the principle determining factor of the inertial mass exhibited by the representation (representational object). The information content of a state space configuration is very closely tied to the probability of this configuration relative to that of the other distinct configurations of the state space. When the degeneracy of a representation increases, its relative probability within the state space is enhanced. Within classical CA theory, there is no meaning in the notion of a degenerate state; degeneracy is always that of a representation within the state space with respect to some quantum observable; identical states are indistinguishable within classical CA theory (time-independent quantum state space, i.e., state space in which the total set of possible configurations is closed?). Representations may be degenerate, which comprise any number of distinct states. The degeneracy of an individual state would allow such a state to continue through more than one clock cycle of the CA’s CPU, which would imply the possibility of distinguishing identical states of the CA state space. In the case where individual identical states of the CA state space are distinguishable, (time-dependent quantum state space? – state space with memory?) then the probabilities of a given state are Alternatively, the divergence free nature of ï/ïáâTáâ is may itself be

understood to stem from the combined manifestation of Pauli Exclusion and Bose Inclusion, if you will (what we have been calling the Pauli Inclusion Principle). When the quantum uncertainties are expressed in terms of the creation and annihilation operators, a and a+ the causal indeterminacy underlying quantum mechanical phenomena is much more clearly discernible. All of the basic definitions of special relativity presuppose the concept of “event.” This concept is not clearly and unambiguously defined within this theory. The apparent standing contradiction of two otherwise “correct” theories, general relativity and quantum mechanics, in terms of these theories’ widely divergent predictions of the vacuum’s energy density, combined with the renormalization problem of Quantum Gravity theory as well as the corresponding absences of experimental observations of gravitational waves, strongly suggests that a SUSY theory in which both the quantum of the gravitational field and also a gravitating vacuum energy are absent, may bold much promise as a future successful theory that solves these problems as well as reconciling QM and GR. Mass skews the spacetime symmetry of the quantum vacuum via the Pauli exclusion mechanism (which, according to Feynman, applies equally to both real and virtual fermions) and, concomitantly, via the mechanism underlying the phenomena of Bose condensation, superconductivity, superfluidity, lasing, etc. The principle of the action of this mechanism we will term for convenience sake, the Pauli Inclusion Principle (PIP). This mechanism also applies equally to both real and virtual bosons. Because matter, through the Pauli Exclusion Principle (PEP), acts upon scalar energy functions of the vacuum, in the form of, e.g., virtual e +ecreation-annihilation events in a precisely converse manner to how matter acts via PIP upon the vector momentum fluctuations of this

vacuum, the overall effect of matter upon the momentum and energy fluctuations of the vacuum is to destroy the diagonality of the vacuum’s momentum-energy fluctuation tensor, effectively rotating (relative to some cosmic background spacetime, perhaps defined in terms of nonlocal energy fluctuations) the local space and time uncertainties experienced by, say, test masses within this modified vacuum. The result of this is that time dilation, length contraction (in the direction of the gravitating mass), are experienced by the mass in this vacuum simultaneous with the appearance of stress fluctuations terms within the momentum-energy fluctuations tensor. Push and pull forces are responsible for changes in the diagonal components of the momentum-energy fluctuation tensor, which are described in terms of virtual spin 1 particles (bosons). However, the mutual exchange of stresses within the mass’ bulk must be described in terms of the mutual exchange of virtual spin 2 particles (gravitons). The transformation of a 1st rank tensor is described, of course, by multiplication of this vector by a 2nd rank tensor. The transformation of a 2nd rank tensor (even where this tensor’s diagonal components are all 0) into another 2nd rank tensor must be described by a 2 nd rank tensor being multiplied by a 4th rank tensor. The structure of the spacetime fluctuation tensor (a mere phenomenological entity) may be related to the metric tensor of GR. The stress-energy-momentum fluctuation tensor of combined matter and vacuum may be related to the tensor Tuv of GR. The 4th rank tensor alluded to above may be related to the Riemannian curvature tensor of GR. The fact that weak gravitational fields in the vacuum correlate with a vacuum momentum-energy fluctuation tensor which contains negligibly small off-diagonal components, sensibly corresponds to a vacuum dominated by scalar and vector fluctuations in its stress, a case where a scalar-vector theory of gravitation such as that of Newtonian gravity stands as a more than adequate, approximate description of the

dynamics of mass distributions. Psi represents everything which can be known about the system described by Psi. But this is not correct in the unqualified manner in which this assertion is usually made. For Psi is always somewhere at some time, i.e., Psi = Psi(x,t). And although we cannot perform a measurement upon the system described by Psi(x,t) without inadvertently inducing a discontinuous change in its wavefunction (unless the system happened to already be in an eigenstate of the operator corresponding to the type of measurement of the system we are performing), the system itself is not destroyed by such a measurement being performed upon it, merely the quantum state of the system has been discontinuously changed. The transition from Psi(1) to Psi(2) where Psi(j) does not represent an eigenstate of the relevant operator could not, of course, have been predicted from Psi(1), nor could it have been predicted from the mutual interference of the wavefunction discerning the observer with the wavefunction, Psi(1). A more precise way of stating the fact of the relativity of time or the “rate of its passage” (a rather problematic notion, by the way) is to do this in terms of relative probability rates where the notion of quantum probability can only be rendered logically consistent by bringing in the notion of probability density. Density of what, of some kind of substance of events? And the answer here is both – the probability density of that which constitutes the substance of events as such. More specifically, the relevant quantity is the density of events within spacetime, rather than simply within space alone. This is because, although it is prima facie possible (on a deeper level within the context of general relativity, this can be questioned) for motion to occur along one spatial axis without the necessity of motion, however small, along perpendicular spatial axes, this is not true where “motion along the time axis is concerned. This is in part because relative motion in space (and its associated momentum) is dependent upon a borrowing during some earlier phase of kinetic energy associated with the erstwhile purely timelike motion of the starting masses.

Regardless of what happens to the wavefunction, one’s consciousness does not “come to a halt.” The wavefunction we are told represents the most that one can possibly objectively know about a quantum system that is in a pure state (with respect to some system observable). Of course, if the system is in a superposition state with respect to (wrt) one particular observable, it must be a so-called pure state with respect to each incompatible, or conjugate, observable. And this is just the basis of the uncertainty principle via the theorems of Fourier Analysis. Two question arise here – one for the moment appears to be merely secondary; the other more fundamental, although we might find (after that this situation is actually the reverse of this.) What does the quantum state of a given observer’s brain then represent? The most that that observer can know about the quantum state and evolution of this state, which his brain is presently in. For some reason, the entanglement of a given system’s wavefunction with those forming the system’s “sum of histories” does not trigger decoherence of Psi. One’s state of consciousness is thought by some to represent the continuous “self-measurement” by the observer of his own quantum state (that of his brain, at least – based on the theory that it is processes within one’s brain that constitute all that is relevant to consciousness). Somehow this continuous self-measurement does not cause any reduction of the brain’s Psi. This would suggest that the brain is in an eigenstate of the observable which is to continual subject of (self) measurement. Nothing to distinguish one alternate universe (in the superposition) from another without intention and awareness. The superposition possessed

temporal symmetry (time translation symmetry) so that energy was conserved. Energy uncertainty without the necessity of vacuum fluctuations – superposition within a closed system. So here we have two types of fluctuation: that which is only definitional, i.e., fluctuations within a closed system, and the other which is inherently unpredictable, i.e., not part of any system behavior. So we may make the distinction of these two fundamental types of fluctuation thus: fluctuations that are real versus virtual perturbations. Temporality cannot subsist in virtual perturbations – real fluctuations must be present. The basis for the radical overdetermination of nature is the fact of its origin being an infinitely symmetric state. This infinite symmetric “initial state” was partially broken in the “moment of creation.” Therefore all of the symmetries observed in nature are partial ones described by subgroups of some original symmetry group. Is some kind of degeneracy and symmetry involved in the overdetermination of one’s interpretation of one’s own mental states? Causal connections as interpretations of correlations and causal entities as “beds of correlation.” Now a given mass, accelerated to a velocity approaching that of light cannot so closely approach this delimiting value so as to become more massive than its own black hole mass. And the black hole mass is determined by the density of the mass having reached the delimiting value of the vacuum energy density/c2 for the particular volume occupied by the accelerating mass. Also, we know that the acceleration of the mass is just the 90o spacetime rotation of the mass original, purely timelike velocity.

In this way the limiting velocity to which a given mass may be accelerated is a function of the energy density of the vacuum occupied by the accelerating mass. So we see now that the original, purely timelike four velocity of the mass (prior to acceleration) is itself a function of the density of the mass relative to the density of the vacuum energy coextensive with the mass’ displaced volume. But if the acceleration to light velocity is actually to be effected, the mass must utilize its own mass energy as the “fuel” for propelling itself such that, upon actually approaching c, all of its starting mass has already been converted to photon (or other massless particle) energy. The fact that some of this fuel must come from the binding energy of the mass rather than from the positive mass energy itself suggests that the mass when a “at rest” already possesses a small quantity of spacelike momentum connected with dynamical processes within the mass responsible for the existence of this binding energy. A theoretical group describes a closed set of reversible operations with the elements of the group. What is closed is the set composed of the distinct operations; the number of distinct elements, which composes the domain, which the operations of the group take as inputs, may itself be infinite. When the symmetry of the group is “broken,” the operations of the group are altered and perhaps also new operations added, which no longer are reversible, singly or collectively. The discovery of a new mathematical group for the description of some physical phenomenon means that various manifestations of physical variables, heretofore treated as distinct, are now seen to be differing manifestations of the same, underlying entity/physical quantity. Changes in state to some subpart of a closed dynamic system which are wholly attributable to other, earlier changes in neighboring subparts of the overarching system constitute ceteris paribus reversible, symmetric interactions. However, the reactions triggered by these interactions may not be themselves symmetric and time-reversible. Any asymmetries of the system’s changes of state are ultimately traceable to input to the system wholly from outside it. The sense of “outside” intended here,

one in which the system as a whole is not secretly a subpart of some overarching system, with perturbations to its outside transmitted to it and mediated by the overarching system’s matrix and originating within some other subpart of the crypto-overarching system. What we are really saying here is that asymmetrical interactions always are ultimately between the uppermost overarching system and its outside. Of course, the uppermost overarching system in almost any physical setting is just the global spacetime continuum itself in which this system is “embedded.” Infinite degeneracy would mean that the wavefunction of the degenerate system could undergo transition between an infinite number of eigenstates on a continuous spectrum without measurable changes resulting to any of its quantum observables. Should Psi be understood as a knowledge representation rather than the most that can actually be known about the system? Since no energy is required to effect changes in the system’s quantum state from one to another of its energy degenerate eigenstates, free will and conscious thought may presuppose energy degeneracy. Also, there is not basis for assigning scales of physical time to energy-degenerate quantum transitions. Infinite symmetry may be understood as infinite sameness in which, no matter where the observer is and no matter what happens, no “objective” differences between here and there and no changes from now to then are in any sense evident. Now such a state of infinite symmetry in the absence of degeneracy (with respect to some set of as yet “unmanifest” parameters) is synonymous with an empty void or nothingness. Moreover, for there to exist a state of infinite symmetry, an infinite degeneracy must be present, that is, degeneracy with respect to an infinite number of distinct though still unmanifest parameters. But all this is to presume that there is some presently obtaining state, which represents physical reality (as a whole, in some sense) but which is both

underpinned by and insulated against an infinitely chaotic flux of change to an infinite number of still unmanifest proto-physical variables (protoobservables?). A tremendous quantity of entropy is released as a result of the breaking of this state of infinite symmetry (one might suppose an infinite quantity for this entropy) so that the aboriginal state of infinite symmetry is to be understood as possessing infinite order. The breaking of this infinitely symmetric, initial state results in a kind of “unpacking” of this state into an intricate, dynamic structure/continuum of ordered and disordered energy, i.e., some of the symmetry (order) of the initial state survives the transition to the broken, symmetric state and the remainder is “lost.” But a perfectly and infinitely symmetric state would possess no internal fluctuations in any of its group symmetric parameters outside of the spectrum of potential change for the parameters defined within the symmetry group, and so it is hard to imagine how such a symmetric system, heretofore everlastingly cut off from any outside (realm possessing foreign parameters or “off-scale” values of “domestic” parameters), could “spontaneously break,” that is, without having been “helped” from outside. If the Big Bang is simultaneous with the initial, abrupt phase of spontaneous symmetry breaking, then its continued expansion may perhaps be understood as a continuous further breaking of (global) symmetry in favor of the continued establishment of greater myriad’s of domains of local symmetry, interconnected through mutual exchanges of quantities of their local variables. We might suppose that the ratedensity of entropy production therefore is uniform throughout the Universe provided that one refers to the production of total entropy, local + global, i.e., that due to the local evolution of complex structures/systems + local contributions to the entropy production, exclusively due to the global entropy production occurring as a consequence of cosmological expansion. This means that the global rate-density of entropy increase is affected by the rates of change to the local entropy. The rate-density of global entropy may be understood, paradoxically seeming, as the local rate to time’s passage relative to changes in the cosmical time parameter. This cosmic time parameter is

based upon changes in the total entropy of the Universe. Ambiguities of interpretation of fluctuations occurring near the vertex of the light cone. Ambiguities of the interpretation of quantum tunneling. Can we have tunneling of particles across a timelike potential barrier? Can we construct an experiment to test this, say one which involves the tuning/detuning of some already well understood tunneling? The consistency of the notion of virtual gravity waves depends on the independent existence of spacetime fluctuations. At the event horizon of a black hole the space and time axes are in some sense reversed. This is because an object (or particle so we can neglect tidal effects) just outside of the event horizon possesses virtually all of its momentum in the direction of the hole’s center and relatively none of it in a timelike direction. But neither is their any “room” for internal spacelike momentum for this mass (in the form of binding forcemediating boson particle exchanges). All of the fluctuations of the vacuum are in the form of 3-momentum and none in the form of imaginary (timelike) 4-momentum. And so the mass is not so much torn apart as it is dissolved due to the hole’s sapping of the mass’ own binding forces. In the extreme case depicted here, gravity is not truly a “force,” but our projecting of our large, latent stores of common experience with everyday objects causes the phenomenology of gravitation to be naturally interpreted in terms of the action of a distance of a gravitating force. Gravitation is more accurately (or objectively) understood as the effects of mass upon a higher dimensional quantum vacuum that must, after the fashion of a cellular automaton, simultaneously parallel reprocess the data representing both matter and the colocated/coextensive 3-vacuum, and where this vacuum possess only a finite computational capacity. If the vacuum does not itself gravitate, then momentum and energy fluctuations do not directly cause spacetime fluctuations but only do so

indirectly through the effects of these momentum-energy vacuum fluctuation upon matter itself. Fluctuations of momentum and energy, in other words, directly produce fluctuations in x and t of test particles that we conveniently interpret as the effects of fluctuations of x and t upon test particles. The problem here is that it we allow äx and ät to affect and directly, then we also have to permit then to affect äp and äE directly, with the result that the vacuum itself must possess a gravitational mass. Perhaps the way to put time and space on an equal footing within a theory of quantum gravity should be not to try to make the time parameter into a bona fide observable, but to take away this status from the space variable, x. This reminds us of the expansion of a permutation group through the discovery that some members of this group are not simple, but composite. Processing information means taking two pieces of information from two smaller, and heretofore never before directly connected, contexts, and bringing the pieces of information together in such a way that one now has new information concerning the broader context including all of the original “pieces.” It has been stated many times by physicists that the existence of Heisenberg energy uncertainty implies the non-conservation of energy. Similar statements apply to the momentum. But with the unification of momentum and energy by special relativity into a conserved momentum-energy four-vector, and the concomitant unification of space and time into a symmetric, spacetime continuum, it becomes possible for both Heisenberg momentum and energy uncertainty to exist throughout spacetime without the necessity of net uncertainty of the fourmomentum throughout this spacetime. This appears possible if the vacuum fluctuations in 3-momentum are dynamically related to those of the energy so that the sum of these two yields a magnitude of the fourmomentum fluctuations of the vacuum which remains a constant 0 or,

undetectably close to 0 such that a) the quantum vacuum does not itself act as a gravitating source and b) the spacetime maintains (for all practical purposes) its Lorenz invariance. The action of mass through the mechanisms of Pauli Exclusion (and “Inclusion”) upon the vacuum and, conversely, of this vacuum upon the mass, serves to disrupt this spacetime symmetry (of Lorenz invariance) causing an imbalance in the mutual cancellation of vacuum momentum and energy fluctuations. This imbalance, induced by mass on the vacuum, acts to give the vacuum an effective mass just as this modified vacuum enhances the mass of test bodies introduced into it from outlying, virtual “free space.” Mass is enhanced in two distinct but closely related ways: the real time processing burden that increased momentum fluctuation densities (within vacuum occupied by masses) pose for the quantum vacuum that mediates them and the reduced computational resources available to this vacuum with which to perform this function. On this view, the density of vacuum energy that acts as a source of gravitation is only that component of the vacuum’s total energy density which fails to cancel with its momentum fluctuations. In this way, the effective vacuum energy density is determined by the density of mass in the universe. It is this tiny component of the total quantum vacuum energy density, which we should term the cosmological constant. The breaking of the spacetime symmetry of the quantum vacuum by mass is not the fundamental or absolute symmetry breaking that requires the engendering of a new gauge boson. This situation is quite unlike that where a broken global symmetry causes the creation of a gauge boson, which, by being exchanged between splintered symmetry domains, results in the restoring locally of the symmetry that was broken globally, e.g., the creation of the Higgs boson in the theory of electroweak symmetry breaking. Another reason that the breaking of the vacuum spacetime symmetry by mass is not fundamental is that mass is not an irreducible, conserved physical quantity, but is a phenomenon produced by the peculiar manner in which the components of the total (mass-energy + vacuum-energy) fluctuation stress-momentum-energy tensors mutually interact.

Prior to the breaking of the spacetime symmetry of the vacuum by mass, the spectrum of momentum fluctuations within the vacuum is just that defined in terms of the spectrum of virtual transitions allowed between the discrete energy levels of this global vacuum state. This is exactly the situation we should expect if the quantum vacuum can correctly be modeled as a four dimension array of coupled harmonic oscillators, i.e., as a four dimensional crystalline latticework. The additional 3momentum fluctuations, over and above those permitted in the symmetric state of this vacuum, correspond to those transition energies of the modified vacuum lattice which are now forbidden by the state of broken symmetry. After this symmetry is broken, the spectrum of vacuum 3-momentum fluctuations becomes denser while that of the vacuum’s energy fluctuations, i.e., fluctuations in the imaginary component of the vacuum’s 4-momentum, becomes attenuated. Were this vacuum two dimensional, this change in symmetry could have been effected by a simple “rotation” of the fluctuation momentum-energy vector, i.e., a 2 nd rank tensor would have been required to describe the rotation, but not the end state, which could be adequately described in terms of a 2vector. And the dynamics of this rotation of momentum-energy within this 2d spacetime can be modeled in terms of the exchange of spin-1 gauge bosons. However, in four-dimensional spacetime, a 2 nd rank tensor is required to describe the vacuum’s end state – that post symmetry-breaking. Moreover, a 4 th rank tensor is necessary to describe this transformation of the vacuum caused by the breaking of its symmetry, as mentioned earlier. Consequently, a transformation of the fluctuation stress-momentum-energy tensor can be described in terms of time-varying probability current densities of both spin-1 vector gauge bosons and spin-2 gauge bosons. As the density of a given mass is increased, so increases the communications “bottleneck” between change within the mass,

mediated by momentum fluctuations in the form of spin-1 boson exchange, and the temporality of the quantum vacuum. Since the modes of momentum fluctuation are determined (just as in the case of a crystal) by the available energy transitions between discrete energy levels of the (lattice) vacuum, simultaneous increases in momentum fluctuation density with corresponding decreases in energy fluctuations within the vacuum occupying the very same volume (as the mass in question), require that these momentum fluctuations become progressively more energy degenerate. Is this paradoxical? We must understand the relationship between the concepts of symmetry and degeneracy to answer this question. The nonlinearities exhibited by general relativity may only apply to the expectation values of all forms of energy and not to mere fluctuations in energy (that are grounded in Heisenberg energy uncertainty, that is). Is gravitation a manifestation of the loss of spacetime symmetry? In other words, the spatiotemporal distribution of the wavefunction, which matters not to an isolated, single particle within an “empty” universe, in terms of when and where this particle is situated within this empty spacetime, becomes an important parameter for the momentum-energy (or 4-momentum) of this (test) particle, i.e., a degeneracy has been removed (and not here because of some specific force coupling having been introduced) – remember, gravitation is not a “force.” From my light reading on the subject of supersymmetry (SUSY), I gather that when glo bal symmetry is broken, one or more gauge bosons are engendered as a result. These bosons are necessary to restore this broken symmetry, but only at a “local” level. The continual mutual exchange of these gauge bosons between the appropriate fermions (those “feeling” the gauge force mediated by these particular bosons) constitutes the mechanism by which this local gauge symmetry is maintained. My understanding is that, in the case of all gauge bosons, with the notable exception of the Higgs, the fermions involved in the exchanging of these bosons acquire an effective mass component of their total mass. (Lorenz, by the way,

had tried during the early years of the 20 th Century to demonstrate that all of the electron’s mass was electromagnetic in origin and was attributable to the electron’s electromagnetic self-energy. Lorenz’ attempt ultimately proved unsuccessful: it appears that even the great hunches of great minds do not always “pan out!”) Now the hypothesis for the gravity mechanism alluded to throughout these writings points to the mutual exchanges of gauge (vector) bosons as being materially important in understanding this mechanism as well as the mechanism of inertia – hopefully so since we would like to remain true to Einstein’s strong equivalence principle, the other postulate of general relativity being that of general covariance. Can we think of the loss of purely timelike 4-momentum, and this 4momentum being reconstituted into both timelike and spacelike components as representing a particularly simple form of symmetry breaking? An important question in this connection becomes does the vacuum not gravitate because of a kind of mutual cancellation of its timelike and spacelike momentum fluctuation current densities? Or is this the case because the 4-momentum of the vacuum, in the absence of mass, is itself purely timelike? Supersymmetry, which requires the contributions to the vacuum energy from creation/annihilation of virtual fermion-antifermion pairs to contribute a negative component of this energy, also requires the contribution to this vacuum energy from the creation/annihilation of bosons to be positive. Moreover, SUSY requires that these two contributions from the two basic types of vacuum fluctuation somehow precisely cancel! An individual random sequence of numbers may not possess any information. But what about two random sequences which are correlated? Computation can be represented in terms of the deterministic evaluation of Psi in conjunction with adiabatic changes in the boundary conditions to Psi. Thought, on the other hand, cannot be understood in this

manner, but must be represented by discontinuous changes in Psi with nonadiabatic irreversible changes in the boundary conditions upon Psi. If the boundary conditions to Psi are overdetermined (degenerate), then Individuality and unity go hand in hand. Not either/or but both/and. What is the precise relationship between degeneracy, e.g., energy degeneracy, and symmetry, e.g., with respect to time reflection. The interpretation of rotation in four spatial dimensions is unproblematic, but what about within four-dimensional Minkowski spacetime? Leonard Mendel’s 1991 optical-interference experiment in which the very possibility of determining which path the quantum particle takes through the double slit destroys the particle superposition state and the observable interference pattern at the phosphorescent screen. Possibility of knowledge has the same effect here as actual knowledge.

Contrast the reaction of a crystal lattice (closed system) to a perturbation or disturbance with the response of an open system to an “input.” Without any definite or determinable boundary between itself and its alterity, there is no possibility of either intentionally manipulative inputting into the system, nor of a chance, finite collection of inputs applied that would cause the system to change it state in a determinate or determinable manner. In such a case, the system cannot be understood or modeled as a kind of state machine, e.g., Turing machine. The “operation” of such a system is not therefore reversible. This is because, by back-reacting upon its embedding ground state, changing this ground state in a necessarily irreversible manner (because the ground state is an open system), the system’s own reaction to its altered ground state means there is not conceivable continuity of this system (against the backdrop of an irreversible change in its ground state). Consequently, there is no conceivable set of “inputs” (to the system from outside) that could have reproduced (really, alternately produced) the

system’s behavior (response). The input of power, i.e., the supply of energy over time to the system succeeds only in redistributing the probabilities or probability rates for fundamental fluctuations. The collapse of the wavefunction necessitates violation of energy conservation for if energy were conserved, the evolution of the wavefunction would have remained deterministic. Decoherence of the Psi function occurs when, we might say, the quantum system in question becomes more connected to (or “entangled” with) the local environment than with the nonlocal quantum vacuum state in which it originated. How can it be demonstrated, scientifically, that is, that the Psi function of some quantum system in a prepared superposition state can be “collapsed” via the influence of a physical measuring instrument alone, apart from the influence of any would-be “conscious observer?” Such a physical measuring device must be able to enter a classically describable physical state, e.g., experience a determinate deflection of an indicator needle of one of its analogue measurement dials. Is there any fundamental difference between the measurement apparatus collapsing Psi and the measurement approaches entering a superposition state of its own which is then collapsed by the conscious act of observation on the part of the experimenter reading one of the device’s dial indicators? The measurement apparatus, being apiece with the larger quantum mechanical state of which it and the observed system form but a small part, cannot effect collapse of Psiobs any more than it can collapse the overarching system state function. The conscious observer introduces the irreversible element by virtue of the fact that his mind is not, nor can

itself ever be, a quantum mechanical observable. The awesome potential for growth of large scale economies is rooted in one fundamental economic fact or principle: the collective wealth represented by a nickel in the hands of 50 million wage slaves is far outstripped by 2.5 million dollars in the hands of a few creative and dynamic entrepreneurs. /\x/\Px ¾ hbar  /\x/\(mvx) ¾ hbar  /\x(/\mvx + E/\vx) ¾ hbar /\x/c2(/\Evx + E/\vx) ¾ hbar  (/\Evx + E/\vx) ¾ hbar  (/\Evx + E/\vx) ¾ hbar To each observable there corresponds a quantum number so that the physical quantity represented by this observable is quantized. Such a physical quantity is conserved, implying that the quantity exhibits a certain kind of symmetry. Such observables are Hermitian, i.e., they may only possess real eigenvalues, and each of these observables commute with some and not with other observables, implying that this and every other observable participates in a Heisenberg uncertainty relation with at least one other noncommuting observable. Such observables may exist in various superposition states of their eigenfunctions – their Psi function undergoing state vector reduction, i.e., “collapse” when an observation is performed with respect to this observable. The deterministic Schrodinger wave equation can only consistently describe an isolated system and only such a closed system may enter into a superposition state. This is due to the Schrodinger equation being derived from a linear differential equation involving a Hamiltonian representing a conserved system total energy. As Wigner has forcefully point out, one system cannot induce Psi-function collapse of some other system if it is possible to describe the “observed” and “observer” systems as two components of a larger Psi-function separable into these and other component PsiI the product of which from which the original Psi may be simply constituted.

Can we say that consciousness (of the individual), if it can be treated as an observable in the first instance, is an observable that does not commute with itself. Are strange attractors in phase space also regions of dynamical resonance? Do e+e- virtual pairs suppressed by strong electromagnetic fields manifest themselves as the creation of real e+e- pairs? In Psi collapse, an action (rather than a “disturbance”) that is originally incommensurate with the vacuum or ground state within the spacetime region in question, is spontaneously “fitted” or “fused” or “grafted” to the local vacuum of the event, whether, decoherence, quantum measurement, etc. One way of doing this might be to “update” the local ground state initial conditions. Another way might be to suppose that the ground state or quantum vacuum is itself in a perennial near infinite superposition state. Does one quantum measurement wipe out all information about previous measurements? Quantum fluctuations mediate the closeness of coincidence of competing fermionic states. How is Pauli Exclusion and Bose Inclusion related to the phenomena of constructive and destructive interference. In the absence of the electron, the vacuum is free to experience a fluctuation in its energy, dEvac at the particular spacetime coordinate in question (well, really we must consider the values of /\ }, } = radius of a 3-sphere, and /\t for real fermions when applying the Pauli Exclusion Principle to both real and virtual particles). If a real electron is “present”, say within some crystal lattice, its energy of fluctuation, rather than manifesting itself as the brief appearance (and then disappearance) of a virtual e+e- pair, manifests itself as the raising and lowering of the real electron, already occupying one of the distinct quantum states available to the crystal, between two distinct energy

levels of the crystal and resulting in the exchange with the crystal of a virtual photon by the real electron. A generalization of the Pauli exclusion principle would be the following. Rather than just a given fermion totally excluding, i.e., excluding with a probability of 1.0, the simultaneous and coincident occupancy by an identical fermion of a quantum state characterized by a set of discrete eigenvalues with respect to a complete commuting set of observables, we would speak more generally instead of this exclusion falling between 0 and 1.0 along the spatiotemporal overlapping of the wavefunctions of the two fermions in questions. The undifferentiated position and time uncertainties say where a particle could be found but without providing information about the probabilities of the particle being found within various sub-intervals within these overall uncertainties. By accelerating we can shrink the spacelike component of the spacetime trajectory to our destination, but only by at the same time, of course, lengthening the timelike component of this interval. What we cannot do is the converse of this: change our state of motion in such a way that the spacelike and timelike components of my trip are lengthened and contracted, respectively. Teleportation, if it is not to be mere propagation in disguise, must be effectively the disappearance of an object at A and the reappearance of the very same object at B. But this seemingly defining requirement for teleportation cannot possibly be met for quantum particles which, if similar, must be indistinguishable in quantum theory. Because a teleported particle possesses no timelike component in its spacetime trajectory, the particle must in some important and relevant capacity already exist at point B just prior to the teleportation of the identical particle at A. January 2013 It is clear that the information that is teleported is that encoded in the spectrum of quantum fluctuations composing the Heisenberg quantum observables uncertainty transferred. Not

circumscribed by the limit on a speed of propagation of causal influences, i.e., speed of light, the kind of information transferred “during” quantum teleportation likely cannot be intersubjectively definable. This points up a metaphysical “no mans land” between objective and intersubjective, a kind of “interzone” in which the ineffable integrity of a unified self is maintained. So the teleportation of a particle does not entail the creation of a particle at B, merely that the required quantity of energy be available at B or within a region defined by the 3-sphere centered about B (/\},}/\h,}sinh/\v) within a time interval centered about the moment of the particle being destroyed at A – or rather, about the centroid of the uncertain time interval within which the event of the destruction of the particle at A actually took place. Duality  trinity Logic  dialectic Causal  historical We must make a key distinction here between teleporting, copying, and propagating. Two fundamentally distinct paradigms inform the question of teleportation, embodied in two very different methods – copying from the outside – in versus copying from the inside out. Any structure of higher resolution than that dictated by the Heisenberg uncertainty principle shall be imposed by the process upon the object to be teleported. In the method according to the 2 nd paradigm, the object imposes its fine structure, if you will, upon the teleportation process. A test particle at potential Phi(B) has angular momentum perpendicular to the x-ict plane (according to a right hand rule?) relative to the origin of a coordinate system based at a potential Phi(A). In what direction does this angular momentum vector point? What is the difference between a linear succession of virtual e+e- pair

creation/annihilation events which represents the propagation of a real photon from a similar linear succession of e+e- events that represents only the passage of a virtual photon? Light intro stuff: The thought of timelike vectors or vectors oriented along the time axis should easily make sense to the average person. We can look forward, for example, in time just as we look out into space. The time axis is aptly described as imaginary. Electrical interactions of particles on the spin [only in the relativistic regime], c.f., p. 230, vol. 3 of Landau and Lifshitz. This suggests that any electromagnetic basis for gravity is itself based in spin interactions. The very reason for the existence of spin is relativity. J = L + S. The, e.g., photon population in the final state stimulates the transition of more electrons/ positrons into this same state (resonance phenomenon here, e.g., lasing). This inclusion principle applies equally well to virtual photons and virtual electrons/ positrons. This implies that the vacuum does have, for example, a bound structure of virtual e+econtinually undergoing transitions in energy. Two mechanisms of exclusion (a la Pauli) are at work here, however. Decreased probability density rate of creation/ annihilation of e+e-‘s of particular arbitrary energy, and decreased availability of quantum energy states due to “occupancy” of these states by real fermions within bulk material. It is significant that all quantum mechanical operators may be alternately expressed as linear combinations of creation and annihilation operators.

2Evac = [-mc2]2 + [pc]2

2Evac = 2(mc2) + 2(pc) = {(mc2)}2 + {(pc)}2 = {(m)c2 + m2cc}2 + {(p)c + pc}2 Let c = 0 2Evac = (2m)c4 + (2p)c2 but Evac|spacelike  0; Evac|timelike  0 Let -(mc2) + (pc) = 0 -(m)c2 + (p)c = 0 (p)c = (m)c2 p = (m)c So the magnitude of spacelike momentum fluctuations is equal to the magnitude of the timelike fluctuations, if vac|four momentum = 0 In a Lorenz frame, vac|4-momentum = 0, But not in an in which nondiagonal components of the quantitiy T  become non 0. These are the stress terms of T(vac). If the vacuum has time to respond, i.e., adiabatically equilibrate itself during accelerations, then no nonzero stress terms in T(vac) develop and the momentum and energy uncertainties of the quantum vacuum

remain equal to the corresponding free space fluctuation values of these quantities. Free space fluctuations of momentum and energy cannot induce wavefunction collapse of any quantum mechanical system. The boundary conditions applied to the free space vacuum by a system of real particles (partons) and fields (bosons) alters the values of p vac and Evac so that and take on nonzero values, i.e., the uncertainties of each are such that, /\P > p and /\E > E /\p = Sqrt{ - 2} and /\E = Sqrt{ - 2} When a test particle is in free fall and following a spacetime geodesic, the stress terms in its local quantum vacuum are 0. The quantum vacuum is not a thermal system within any Lorenz frame and therefore possesses no definable entropy, only acquiring entropy within an accelerated frame. A thermal vacuum, i.e., an accelerated vacuum, can cause decoherence of a quantum superposition. By possessing entropy, the vacuum lacks certain information. Gravity  thermal vacuum  decoherence. Casimir pressure and Casimir energy density as spacelike and timelike manifestations of the vacuum’s momentum-energy tensor. Matter can be viewed as simply vacuum boundary conditions with the dynamics of a quantum system being that of the vacuum subject to boundary conditions supplied by the presence of real particles and fields.

Evac = E2 aa + P2ea

2Evac = 1/2m [ (imc)2 + (-imc) 2] + (pc)2c2

Because i2 = (-i)2 = (-1), the creation/annihilation of, e.g., e+e- virtual pairs, i.e., fluctuations in the quantum vacuum’s energy may be treated as a single imaginary momentum fluctuation in the vacuum and possessing a spin of 0. E2vac = [(imc)2/2m]2 + [(-imc)2/2m]2 + p2c2 If p = mc, i.e., if h/ = mc, then c = f and Evac = 0, If c > c0, then the photon possess an imaginary mass and mass is relativistically decreased as deduced from the inertia of mass exhibited during accelerations along a vector perpendicular to the casimir plates and Evac < 0. This relativistic equation remains to be worked out, but the standard relativistic mass equation certainly can be used as a guide in the construction of this equation. If c < c0, then the photon possess a real mass and mass is relativistically increased as deduced from the inertia of mass exhibited during accelerations along a vector perpendicular to the casimir plates and Evac < 0. Because an energy fluctuation in the form of a creation/annihilation of a virtual e+e- pair possesses spin 0, it cannot trigger an atomic transition involving a change in angular momentum if the atom is blocked from

emitting (spontaneously) a photon into a mode of appropriate quantum numbers if this mode (of electromagnetic oscillation) is one of the modes excluded from the modified, casimir vacuum. /\L/\ >= 1/2h/2pi Let /\L = h/2pi. However, the underlying mechanism for the above Heisenberg relation lies with the four-dimensional spin network that comprises both matter and vacuum. In times own reference frame, no time passes, provided that time does not interact with anything along its trajectory. A free photon is in an energy eigenstate. Quantum mechanics from General Relativity. Time-space versus here-now with each person having his or her own time line. Is there gravity for the subjective spacetime? We must remember that a mass, which falls in a straight radial line in three-dimensional space, is following a curved trajectory within fourdimensional spacetime. Moreover this curvature is by and large, entirely with respect to the time dimension. The mass’ instantaneous

velocity along its curved timelike trajectory has every thing to do with the timelike curvature “seen” by this mass. We state here as a hypothesis that the radius of timelike curvature experienced by a test mass falling toward the centroid of a spherically symmetric mass distribution can be simply calculated from the mass’ instantaneous velocity and acceleration. According to the equation below, R (timelike) = V (instantaneous)/|a|(instantaneous) So curvature isn’t uniquely defined independent of a reference frame being specified. Of course, inertial reference frames are defined in terms of the four velocity of a test mass. Although the form of ordinary human communication is largely after the fashion of an absolute, the substance thereof is by and large metaphorical. An idiom may be thought of as a latent metaphor expressed in the grammar current when the historical context of the idiom’s metaphor commonly understood. The irreversibility of time’s arrow may equivalently be described as the hysteresis of the Universe within the frequency domain. Reversibility is prevented when the underlying ground of change is itself back-reacted upon by change to the entities it creates and sustains, resulting in a global shift or change in it. Vacuum fluctuations vs. radiation reaction is related to Lorenz transformation of mass energy vs. Lorenz transformation of vacuum energy. The energy density of vacuum is Lorenz transformed, but not its mass. The curvature of a circular arc possessing a timelike circumference, resulting in a spacelike acceleration toward a centroid of a mass distribution. And so in this way we see gravitation as a kind of centripetal/centrifugal force. Perhaps the expansion of the universe or the repulsive force behind it) is normally in local balance with . . .?

The self-generative aspect (endurance) of matter is dependent upon the binding forces ultimately responsible for gravity. Persistence of a particle depends upon dilation of the particle’s local time. Binding problem and temporality of consciousness. The recursive nonlinearity of general relativity suggests that spacetime and matter were engendered together during the Big Bang. Momentum-energy exchanges in free space vacuum are symmetrical, implying that the net spacetime density of momentum-energy fluctuations is 0. A slight deviation of this density might be closely related to Einstein's cosmological constant. Perhaps the local imbalances in the density of momentum-energy vacuum fluctuations must be redressed for equilibrium's sake by an equivalent counteracting system of nonlocal, global fluctuations. This reminds us of Puthoff's zero-point field electromagnetic energy feedback loop between real particle produced ZPF and quantum vacuum electromagnetic fluctuations. @#Perhaps this is the reason for radiation reaction and vacuum fluctuations comprising the overall ZPF in equal parts. Only the timelike component of the momentum-energy fluctuation field connected with the "plus part" (relative to free space) will possess an approximately inverse linear spatial variation (weak field limit assumed here). The spatial component of the difference in momentum-energy fluctuation between "true free space" and that of the Universe's global spacetime, is what must spatially vary in order to produce a Newtonian inverse square field. Giving a particle a Lorenz boost changes the vacuum that the particle interacts with (and not just in the direction of motion), but does not change it in any way that is detectable/measurable within the particle,

that is, i.e., there is no measurable shift in the distribution of momentumenergy fluctuations within the particle (or mass). Perhaps a Lorenz boost causes nonlocal changes to the vacuum, say, in the form of timelike and spacelike shifts in the phase of Psi functions. Lorenz invariance depends on /\p and /\E of the vacuum with which a mass interacts, not on any /\p and /\E intrinsic to the mass itself. We must remember that vacuum statistics are Lorenz invariant. Spacetime is constructed from the disparities in local and global values of the uncertainties and fluctuations in momentum and energy. Momentum and energy must have an internal component - otherwise we cannot invoke their uncertainties and fluctuations in order to define spacetime. One must already have a spacetime in existence prior to defining a gravitational field - this is the notion of gravity atop a background metric - weak field approximation. Certainly what the spacetime is constituted from does not require the existence of spacetime metric for its existence, but the metric is simply a collection of initial and boundary conditions upon this transcendental vacuum field. The word "transcendental" is invoked because the vacuum here is understood to transcend any particular spacetime or spatiotemporality itself.

Symmetries are generally dependent upon the specification of initial and boundary conditions for some nonconserved field quantity, resulting in a new description for this field involving a collection of interacting fields, which together comprise a closed system of substrate, common denominator “stuff” for which there exists a continuity equation. The components of this conserved quantity, i.e., the “stuff” are reversibly inter-transformable and reactions between these components, i.e., the distinct field quantities, undergo time-reversible reactions with one another. Since the above boundary conditions are actually artifacts of

the nonconserved field and sustained by it, irreversible and noncomputable processes underlie the maintenance of the field components as static components of the total conserved, composite, and interacting field system. The component field quantities of the closed system construct, borne of the nonlocally connected, open system field (the field existing prior to the instituting of any initial and boundary conditions whatever), are thusly radically overdetermined. And so the “mother field” can temporally evolve independent of the temporal evolution of the field components existing as artifacts of the imposed closed system of fields. And there is no unique interconvertibility between the closed and open system field quantities. If spacetime is generated and sustained through fluctuations of vacuum energy, then the notion of vacuum fluctuation length, time, and mass is to “put the cart before the horse.” So is Psi really a function of vacuum momentum-stress-energy current/flux densities instead of the spacetime coordinates. Einstein did not include a term for external pressure in his cosmological field equations since he believed that spacetime could not actually “contain” vacuum energy, but included in these equations a term for “internal pressure.” There is not alteration in the mass of the energy and momentum fluctuations in the quantum vacuum, but only changes in their flux densities. The only way to reconcile the 120 order of magnitude discrepancy between general relativity and quantum theory's predictions for the energy density of the vacuum is to locate the underlying mechanism for gravitation within the dynamics of the quantum vacuum itself. This is to say that in this case the subatomic virtual process, which constitutes the phenomenon of gravitation as such, would not themselves be gravitational sources. A similar example of this line of reasoning might be the statement that the physical processes taking place within the brain, by which the perception of color is effect, do not

themselves possess color, but color is constituted out of these processes. Another example of this deductive/causal principle applies to artificial intelligence and the question of whether or not conscious thought might be formalizable in the form of a computer program: the process by which abstract categories are generally brought into being, or brought into being as such, does not itself submit to a complete description in terms of abstract categories, i.e., particular exemplars of what it is ultimately and generally responsible for producing. Discuss the difference, if any, between current and flux densities. Cellular automata theory provides an underlying mechanism for inertial mass, and hence, by the equivalence principle, for gravitation as well, hopefully. Current densities are dependent upon the velocity of some substance, i.e., conserved quantity, obeying a continuity equation. The flux density is not dependent by definition upon the velocity, as is the current density, but rather upon the number of particles penetrating a surface, or hypersurface, for that matter, per unit time. The asymmetry of lower dimensional interactions can be compensated for within a higher dimensional space/continuum. We are saying that the uncertainties in x, t, p, and E obey Lorenz covariance as components and Lorenz invariance when together comprising tensorial quantities. But we are also saying that the dynamics of the interaction of these uncertainties, specifically, through the interaction of the fluctuations comprised by these uncertainties, does not itself conform to Lorenz covariance/invariance. So this suggests that a time asymmetry appears as a result of the correlation/interference of fluctuations in momentum-energy which accounts for the fluctuations not themselves being gravitational sources, but themselves intimately related to the thermodynamics of black holes and the vacuum as manifested in such phenomena as Hawking radiation, spontaneous emission, and the Davies-Unruh Effect, as well as the phenomenon of wavefunction collapse.

The reason that the velocity of light is reduced in a gravitational field (relative to the free space field) is that the velocity of time is reduced in such spacetime regions. This in turn is due to a reduction by a similar fraction in the density, or rather, the current density of the quantum vacuum’s energy. The vacuum is not unified, but there is a plurality of nonlocal vacua, which interact with one another. Momentum exchanges are defined by virtual energy transitions between these nonlocal vacua. Reduction of uncertainty is information. But there is reduction of uncertainty of distinct nonlocal vacua. Interference of energy eigenstates creates energy uncertainty. Interference of nonlocal vacua creates information. The nonlocal quantum vacua through there mutual interference constitute spacetime. The temporal evolution of the amplitude, Psi = Psi x exp(iwt), is an oscillation or cycling through a periodically connected continuum of degenerate Psi-i. This temporal evolution of mere amplitudes itself does not translate into a temporal evolution of any physical observables. Only through interference of this amplitude temporal evolution with other such temporally oscillating amplitudes will translate into a physically measurable temporal evolution of some density function with respect to some physical observable. Two dimensional time: @$the rate at which a mass reconstitutes itself out of the quantum vacuum (the other) and the rate at which the mass reconstitutes itself out of itself. February 2012 So can time dilation be more intimately related to absolute 3 + 2 structure of spacetime in which local temporality is governed by shifting in the components of 2d time within a time plane? Is each time component weighted after the fashion of the orthogonal components of a 2d wavefunction? On this view, extending this notion of a model of hyperdimensional spacetime, the spatial hypersurface would be structured by a sufficiently rich n-dimensional temporal space, e.g., each gik in the metric tensor corresponding to a

distinct dimensional of absolute/simulation time. Momentum fluctuations with energies identical to the transition energies within the vacuum lattice. Apparently, with the exchange of virtual bosons between real fermions occupying quantum states within the vacuum. This exact correspondence between momentum and energy fluctuations is broken. What symmetry is broken by the gravitational field here? So are virtual energy transitions decreased in density allowing a higher current density of momentum fluctuations in the form of boson exchanges? In special relativity, spacetime is a closed system, but due to the irreversibility and nonlinearity of general relativity and the nonlocality of gravitational energy, gravitation opens up spacetime as it breaks its Lorenz symmetry. Information is not a function of a closed system and so is not a conserved quantity. Does this mean that an infinite amount of information exists. Certainly an infinite quantity is not conserved. This would only not be true if information is a component of some larger quantity that is conserved. When we say that a quantity is not conserved, we might mean either that it passes away or can be destroyed or that it can be created or that it keeps “coming back,” i.e., spontaneously reappearing – that it fluctuates in an unpredictable manner. Interference of orthogonal Psi-I leads to energy uncertainty. Interference of nonorthogonal Psi-I leads to momentum uncertainty. Does the introduction of a gravitational field into the environment of a quantum superposition of orthogonal energy eigenstates cause a shift toward nonorthogonality of these energy eigenfunctions, say, through the “curving of time?” And the concomitant “curving of space” in a contrary manner to the dilation of time resulting in suppressed energy exchanges and enhanced momentum exchanges?

The sixteen g(i,k) and the coordinates of the 16 dimensional phase hyperspace. Sum(i)/\Xi/\E + Sum(i)/\t/\Pi = /\**2 F(x,y,z,t). These 16 dimensions are defined by the orthogonal phase uncertainty planes, (/\x, /\Px), (/\y, /\Py), (/\z, /\Pz), (/\ct, /\Pct). Just as four orthogonal lines form a four-dimensional space, four orthogonal planes form a 16 dimensional phase uncertainty superspace. Can this information can be recovered by considering the angular momentum uncertainties matrix? But there are only 12 distinct components (at first glance) within in this matrix. Does this imply that there are four equations, which can be found for the parameters of the phase uncertainty superspace given above? There are, of course, the four Heisenberg uncertainty relations between /\x and /\Px, /\y and /\Py, etc. Each of the above uncertainty planes appears to possess an area of Planck’s constant units of angular momentum. Does this suggest a cellular automata analogy for spacetime? Or maybe these 16 parameters may be functions of points within a four-dimensional space since /\x and /\Px are just related by a constant, h? This does sound somewhat more reasonable than invoking 16 separate dimensional of a superphasespace. After all, the g(i, k) are defined on spacetime. In other words, we expect to be able to recover both the spacetime curvature information and the dynamical geodesic motion information from the /\Xi and /\Pi. Virtual particles are phenomena of one’s own vacuum state. Real particles are the product of the interaction of nonlocal vacua, i.e., personal ground states. Virtual particles are “off mass shell.” Is this related to the question of whether virtual particles have a real mass at all? As is well understood in conventional, i.e., Copenhagen interpretation, of quantum theory, the amplitude or wave function does not itself possess any absolute physical meaning, but only the square of this quantity. Just as the cross term of two distinctly different, but nonorthogonal wave functions is interpreted as a correlation of these two wave functions, the square of any given amplitude may be understood as

self-correlation of this wave function. And it is this self-correlation which can be measured and which possesses a definite physical meaning. Self-correlation, i.e., |Psi x Psi*|, if Psi is in an eigenstate with respect to the energy, results in a purely spatially varying density distribution function. Any correlation of nonorthogonal eigenfunctions which is not an autocorrelation will generally give a density function which is both spatially and temporally varying throughout some region of space time. So even though each eigenfunction is in an eigenstate of the energy and so is not temporally varying in an absolute sense, the correlation of these two eigenfunctions, which is its interaction density, is temporally varying. Is there a single, mathematical function that connects all possible numbers, e.g., real, imaginary, matrix, fractal, surreal, etc., . . . ? One integrates the differential of the functional representing the Lorenz transformation along the geodesic path of the test particle to transform from frame A(x`,y`,z`,t`) to frame B(x``,y``,z``,t``) within a gravitational field. The steady state response of the system is, under certain conditions (boundary and initial), the infinite sum of all of its possible transient responses. Of course, each of the system’s transient responses may be alternatively represented in the frequency domain via Fourier analysis. The reason that the velocity of light is reduced in a gravitational field (relative to the free space field) is that the velocity of time is reduced in such spacetime regions. This in turn is due to a reduction by a similar fraction in the density, or rather, the current density of the quantum vacuum’s energy. The vacuum is not unified, but there is a plurality of nonlocal vacua which interact with one another. Momentum exchanges are defined by

virtual energy transitions between these nonlocal vacua. Reduction of uncertainty is information. But there is reduction of uncertainty of distinct nonlocal vacua. Interference of energy eigenstates creates energy uncertainty. Interference of nonlocal vacua creates information. The nonlocal quantum vacua between themselves constitute spacetime. The temporal evolution of the amplitude, Psi = Psi x exp(iwt), is a continuous oscillation through degenerate Psi-i. Two dimensional time: the rate at which a mass reconstitutes itself out of the quantum vacuum (the other) and the rate at which the mass reconstitutes itself out of itself. Momentum fluctuations with energies identical to the transition energies within the vacuum lattice. Apparently, with the exchange of virtual bosons between real fermions occupying quantum states within the vacuum. This exact correspondence between momentum and energy fluctuations is broken. What symmetry is broken by the gravitational field here? So are virtual energy transitions decreased in density allowing a higher current density of momentum fluctuations in the form of boson exchanges? In special relativity, spacetime is a closed system, but due to the irreversibility and nonlinearity of general relativity and the nonlocality of gravitational energy, gravitation opens up spacetime as it breaks its Lorenz symmetry. Information is not a function of a closed system and so is not a conserved quantity. Does this mean that an infinite amount of information. This would only not be true if information is a component of some larger quantity that is conserved. When we say that a quantity is not conserved, we might mean either that it passes away or can be destroyed or that it can be created or that it keeps “coming back,” i.e., spontaneously reappearing.

Interference of orthogonal Psi-I leads to energy uncertainty. Interference of nonorthogonal Psi-I leads to momentum uncertainty. The sixteen g(i,k) and the coordinates of the 16 dimensional phase hyperspace. Sum(i)/\Xi/\E + Sum(i)/\t/\Pi = /\**2 F(x,y,z,t). Virtual particles are phenomena of one’s own vacuum state. Real particles are the product of the interaction of nonlocal vacua, i.e., personal ground states. Virtual particles are “off mass shell.” Is this related to the question of whether virtual particles have a real mass at all? As is well understood in conventional, i.e., Copenhagen interpretation, of quantum theory, the amplitude or wave function does not itself possess any absolute physical meaning, but only the square of this quantity. Just as the cross term of two distinctly different, but nonorthogonal wave functions is interpreted as a correlation of these two wave functions, the square of any given amplitude may be understood as self-correlation of this wave function. And it is this self-correlation which can be measured and which possesses a definite physical meaning. Self-correlation, i.e., |Psi x Psi*|, if Psi is in an eigenstate with respect to the energy, results in a purely spatially varying density distribution function. Any correlation of nonorthogonal eigenfunctions which is not an autocorrelation will generally give a density function which is both spatially and temporally varying throughout some region of space time. So even though each eigenfunction is in an eigenstate of the energy and so is not temporally varying in an absolute sense, the correlation of these two eigenfunctions, which is its interaction density, is temporally varying. The circular motion, feedback through 3-momentum exchanges, is converted to linear 3-momentum directed along a single axis. When the

propellant is in its “inert” form, 3-momentum is virtual and directed along all three spatial axes. When a mass is accelerated from rest to some velocity, v, its mass and length locally, relativistically change, but the quantum vacuum undergoes a global relativistic change in its energy density (during the acceleration). A Lorenz transformation has no effect upon the energy density of the quantum vacuum, as can be mathematically demonstrated for a vacuum with energy density proportional to frequency**3 (f3). It appears at least superficially that the density of mass is increased by a factor of gamma**2 as a result of a Lorenz transformation. How do we explain the single gamma factor involved in time dilation, given the proposed cellular automata model or relativity, in this case? Since the vacuum does not obey the Lorenz symmetry group, we might say that gravitation breaks the Lorenz symmetry of the quantum vacuum. We must conclude that the momentum-energy density of the vacuum is unaffected by a Lorenz transformation, in agreement with what theory predicts for an energy field with a directly proportional frequency**3 dependence. Clearly the vacuum possessing a gravitational field loses it’s the proportional to frequency**3 energy density dependence! Hence, the gravitational field is at least partly based in spatial or spatiotemporal variations in the vacuum’s energy density. There is nothing remarkable about coincidences from a probabilistic standpoint as they inevitably happen given sufficient number of distinct settings and a sufficient amount of time. A Lorenz transformation causes a specific, coordinated change in both vacuum frequency and wavenumber. The strict proportional to frequency**3 dependence is lost due to presence of a new proportional to wavenumber**3 component. All of the vacuum’s momentum is timelike and none of its momentum is spacelike, hence the lack of

wavenumber dependence. A gravitating body must possess some spacelike momentum (in the form of exchanges of force-mediating virtual bosons) and this costs the mass some of its timelike (or imaginary) momentum. This prevents the energy density of the vacuum from being purely dependent upon the frequency since this dependency presupposes a constant relationship between frequency and wavenumber through the constancy of the speed of light. However, the speed of light is not a constant within general relativity, i.e., where gravitational fields are present. In other words, saying that the energy density of the vacuum is directly proportional to the cube of frequency is, in Minkowski or “flat space” that this energy density is proportional to the cube of the product of the velocity of light and the wavenumber. In a gravitational field, the velocity of light is not a constant, but can vary spatially throughout the field (and by the relativity principle, the velocity of light should also vary temporally since there is no objective decomposition of spacetime into separate space and time components). A given frequency of vacuum electromagnetic field fluctuation is given in free space (in the absence of a gravitational field) by just the velocity of light multiplied by the wavenumber of the fluctuation. In a gravitational field this frequency is given by the product of three factors: the speed of light in vacuum, c, the wavenumber of the fluctuation, 1/lambda, and dimensionless functional with a spatial (and perhaps temporal, as well) dependence which is determined by the spatial (and perhaps, temporal) dependence of the 16 gravitational potentials, i.e., the metric components, specified by the Einstein field equations. A Lorenz transformation alters frequency and wavenumber in a complementary manner to which it alters time and length. So although a Lorenz transformation alters the vacuum’s frequency, it also alters the vacuum’s wavenumber producing a null net effect on the energy density. So in a gravitational field the density of the quantum vacuum is proportional to the cube of the vacuum electromagnetic field fluctuation frequency provided that the above functional is itself invariant under a Lorenz transformation. This is only possible if the multiplication of this functional generally represents a transformation, which forms at least a subgroup of the Lorenz transformation group. This is not possible

because the Lorenz group is itself a subgroup of the Diffeomorphism group of general relativistic coordinate transformations. Clearly the timelike momentum of objects on a spacetime surface is connected with its motion through and along this hypersurface. Compare the oppositions of prepositions “on” versus “by” with “through” versus “along.” Time dilation and Hubble constant contraction is determined by the ration of mass to black hole (perhaps also “vacuum”) density. Reconcile this with a H**2/8piG cosmic mass density. Black hole entropy suggests that black hole density should be proportional to 1/R**2 or to black hole surface area, c.f., cellular automata-based theories of relativity. The matter and vacuum momentum current densities are reduced by this time dilation or Hubble frequency contraction factor. To calculate the binding energy of nuclear matter, one must perform a partial sum of an infinite number of infinite terms, yielding a finite result. We can look at the ordering relation between matter and vacuum in two possibly related ways. The structure of matter mirrors that of the vacuum because it is constituted out of and sustained by this vacuum – from what other source could matter have derived its structure? Alternatively, we can assume matter has an existence somehow independent of the vacuum. Here matter resides in this vacuum and the structure of the vacuum is perturbed by the presence of matter, more specifically, the structure of matter imposes the pattern of its structure upon that of the vacuum or upon the structure of its pattern of fluctuating. Clearly the timelike momentum of objects on a spacetime surface is connected with its motion through and along this hypersurface.

Compare the oppositions of prepositions “on” versus “by” with “through” versus “along.” Time dilation and Hubble constant contraction is determined by the ration of mass to black hole (perhaps also “vacuum”) density. Reconcile this with a H**2/8piG cosmic mass density. Black hole entropy suggests that black hole density should be proportional to 1/R**2 or to black hole surface area, c.f., cellular automata-based theories of relativity. The matter and vacuum momentum current densities are reduced by this time dilation or Hubble frequency contraction factor. It has been suggested that the ubiquitous and collectively enormous energy fluctuations of the quantum vacuum are scattered echoes, virtually infinite in number, of the initial scattering, or shattering, explosion of the Big Bang, itself thought to have originated in a vacuum fluctuation of statistically infinitesimal probability. The density of the quantum vacuum is calculated within the present quantum theory to possess a density of approximately 10**95 kg/cm**3. This is what is called the Planck density of matter. But for matter this density can only exist for a particular smallest spatial dimension, i.e., roughly 10**-35 meters, and for virtual matter, at this same spatial dimension but for the most fleeting instant of around 10**42 seconds. The difference between real and virtual Planckions here is that in the former case all of the fluctuations are in the form of 3momentum exchanges whereas in the latter they are entirely in the form of 4-momentum exchanges, imaginary, and exclusively along the time dimension. Between these two forms of Planck matter there subsists a 90-degree hyperspatial rotation in accordance with the symmetry of the Lorenz group. There is a similar relationship obtaining between rest mass and the collection of photons yielded up when this “inert” mass is 100% converted into energy, in accordance with E = mc**2. The reason that energy possesses mass when subject to spatiotemporal boundary conditions is that is that some of the energy is necessarily converted into mass as a result of the boundary conditions imposed upon this otherwise totally free energy. The reason that the black hole state

equation, if you will, places such a tight restriction upon the relationships of mass and length or, rather, density and length, in this case, whereas this restriction is utterly absent in the case of vacuum energy, is no doubt owing to the imposed boundary conditions. We may then think of mass as just vacuum energy with suitably imposed boundary conditions, the dynamics of matter and vacuum being otherwise essentially the same. A tangled network of feedback loops of quantum vacuum fluctuation momentum-energy constitutes the structure of matter. Feedback necessarily involves the action of memory. There is feedback within a given data/information system and then this feedback is itself continually being updated through nonlocal feedback with some global, distributed system. This updating of the system’s internal, dynamical feedback structures may be thought of as the feedback of that component of the system which is globally unified with itself at different times. In nonrelativistic physics, any linear momentum can be transferred away via an appropriate Galilean transformation. This is not the ease with angular momentum because this is motion not taking place within an inertial frame. In relativity, the 3-momentum can only be transformed away while preserving the total 4-momentum. /\x/\py + x/\Py + y/\Px + /\y/\Px + /\x/\Py = /\Lz Use superposition to express Lz in four-dimensional spacetime. Necessity of quantum mechanics within relativistic physics. /\f/\g = h/2pi, where either f or g must be a quantum number and the other term represents a nonconserved quantity. In the paper, The Mystery of the Cosmic Vacuum Energy Density and the Accelerated Expansion of the Universe, it is stated that the effective cosmological constant is expected to obtain contributions from shortdistance physics, corresponding to an energy scale of at least 100 GeV.

All conserved dynamical variables are purely timelike in free space. Inertia and gravitation are phenomena associated with the projection of these timelike four vectors into spacelike components. An important question here is whether there is a conserved four potential. Does the creation of spacelike components of four potential induce a change in the timelike four potential so that the sum of time and spacelike components of some new four potential vectorially sum to produce a new four potential with the same magnitude as the inertial free space four potential. Re: Todd Desiato’s Probability Wave Dispersion Interpretation of Relativity. To include inertia use the analogy of an RLC circuit. The “L” and “C” components of the circuit mediate time/energy and the “R” component, the position/momentum component of the Heisenberg uncertainty. We must remember that a mass, which falls in a straight radial line in three-dimensional space, is following a curved trajectory within fourdimensional spacetime. Moreover this curvature is by and large, entirely with respect to the time dimension. The mass’ instantaneous velocity along its curved timelike trajectory has every thing to do with the timelike curvature “seen” by this mass. We state here as a hypothesis that the radius of timelike curvature experienced by a test mass falling toward the centroid of a spherically symmetric mass distribution can be simply calculated from the mass’ instantaneous velocity and acceleration. According to the equation below, R (timelike) = V (instantaneous)**2/|a|(instantaneous) So curvature isn’t uniquely defined independent of a reference frame being specified. Of course, inertial reference frames are defined in terms of the four velocity of a test mass.

A mass moves as though it has a conserved four-momentum within a (+ ++-) signature four-dimensional spacetime. Time axis as direction of centripetal/centrifugal force makes the notion of local spacetime concrete. The irreversibility of time’s arrow may equivalently be described as the hysteresis of the Universe within the frequency domain. Reversibility is prevented when the underlying ground of change is itself back-reacted upon by change to the entities it creates and sustains, resulting in a global shift or change in it. Vacuum fluctuations vs. radiation reaction is related to Lorenz transformation of mass energy vs. Lorenz transformation of vacuum energy. The energy density of vacuum is Lorenz transformed, but not its mass. The curvature of a circular arc possessing a timelike circumference, resulting in a spacelike acceleration toward a centroid of a mass distribution. And so in this way we see gravitation as a kind of centripetal/centrifugal force. Perhaps the expansion of the universe or the repulsive force behind it) is normally in local balance with . . .? We cannot predict individual quantum events, but only the probabilities of those individual events occurring. Similarly, we cannot predict a given particle’s momentum, generally speaking, but we can generally predict the particle’s momentum uncertainty. Hypothesis: only conserved quantities can be predicted; if the value of a non-conserved quantity can be predicted, it is by way of some conserved quantity to which it is connected. We imagine the photon passing in front of us and unreflectingly suppose that although relativity states that no time passes for the photon, we see

that time does not pass for the photon “from our point of view” in which we imagine the photon moving at the speed of light “through space” and “across our visual field.” But for no time to pass for the photon, it must not interact with anything along its path for to do so would mean that less than 100% of the photon’s action is directed along its direction of motion. The scattering of the photon away from its original trajectory involves an exchange of energy along other spatial directions but which is secretly an exchange of i-momentum, say for energy and then an exchange of this energy for j & k momentum, say. Exchanges of 3momentum are always at the expense of exchanges of energy and quantum spin is the index of the distribution of the components of stressmomentum-energy of the three types of vac-vac, mat-vac, mat-mat exchanges. The components of angular momentum (generalized) are each composed of commuting observables where one observable which is conserved and possesses a quantum number (and so subject to quantum selection rules) and the other with which it is paired to make up the angular momentum component is not conserved. In an abstract and formal way, contracting /\Px will result in a sympathetic expansion of /\x via the simple Heisenberg equation, /\x/\Px >= h/2pi. However, the underlying mechanism for the above Heisenberg relation lies with the four-dimensional spin network that comprises both matter and vacuum. In times own reference frame, no time passes, provided that time does not interact with anything along its trajectory. A free photon is in an energy eigenstate. Quantum mechanics from General Relativity. Time-space versus here-now with each person having his or her own time line. Is there gravity for the subjective spacetime? We may speak of mass as energy in its purely spatial aspect or mode. Conversely, we may speak of energy as mass in its purely temporal aspect. Gravitational energy cannot be included with all other energy into a tensor: this quantity must be described in general relativity as a pseudo tensor, which is an unconserved quantity. It is for this reason that gravitational energy cannot be localized within GR theory.

An object with mass cannot, according to the theory of general relativity, be indifferent to the passage of time. Even photons are not totally indifferent to the passage of time provided that they traverse a space in The notion of substance necessarily involves indifference to the passage of time of substances. Do we see a way of deriving quantum mechanics from general relativity, say, through a stochastic dynamic principle, i.e., where time is ineradicable within general relativity because of the way this theory necessarily treats the concept of mass? The nonlocality of quantum mechanics is strongly suggested by the essential nonlocality of gravitational energy within general relativity theory. Is locality produced by the collective mutual interference of quantum nonlocal systems? Eigenfunctions of the same Psi do not mutually interfere because all are mutually orthogonal, but how can two independent nonlocally connected quantum fields? Your argument for a wrong potential energy term in the Schrodinger equation seems based on the notion that imaginary velocity is meaningless. You must know that imaginary velocity is a staple notion within special relativity theory, e.g., the current density of electric charge of a charge "at rest" is just Rho*(ic) where current density is defined as density time velocity. Moreover, during quantum tunneling a charged particle possesses an imaginary momentum. If it were not possible to accurately measure the potential barrier through which the charged particle is tunneling, it might be conceivable to say the particle does not actually possess an imaginary velocity, but that the potential through which it moves must have a, say, frequency structure, which allows the particle to harmonically penetrate it (or something similar). If you do some more basic research, you will see that the notion of imaginary velocity is widespread in modern

physics and doesn't appear to land physicists in contradictions or absurdities. Think of a spherical shell of arbitrary thickness expanding outward at the speed of light from some origin. If the speed of gravitation is c, which is somewhat in doubt (c.f., Tom Van Flandern Internet postings c/o www.deja.com), then the gravitational field of this spherically symmetric distribution of photons will also be moving outward at the speed of light. The photon shell's gravitational field is comoving, if you will, with the photons. But if the gravitational field comoves, as it were, with the photons, then the notion of the photons being the "source" of this gravitational field becomes highly problematic, as you can see if you stop to consider the gravitational field at points at rest ( "at rest" in the sense of null red- or blue- shifting of the photons relative to this point) within the expanding photon distribution. There is, of course, no gravitational field outside the photon distribution. It is much less problematic to view the comoving gravitational field of the photon shell as a retarded potential expanding outward at the speed of light and stemming from a *matter distribution” existing just prior to its being converted into energy, i.e., photons, than to contemplate an instantaneous (as opposed to retarded) gravitational (potential) field generated by the photons in real time, if you will. It appears that if the speed of gravity is only c, then the gravitational field is separable from its source upon this source being converted completely into energy, i.e., photons and other massless particles. Does the independence of the spin quantum number from Lorentz transformations imply that there is no substance interaction, i.e., in the sense of producing dynamical effects, between spin and “flat

spacetime.” Dynamically interacting vacua, each of which is an open system. How do these vacua mutually interfere constructively with one another in the absence of a closed system of feedback? Within a closed system of feedback there is a back and forth exchange of energy, but no “communication.” However, in the interaction of two or more open systems, stable and persisting structures can only be created and sustained through communication and cooperation between these various systems. The individual fluctuations of energy which collectively comprise /\E may not be thought to be evolving in time as /\E is what determines /\t, which, in turn, defines the time scale of dynamical processes within the system. Spacetime is a projection based upon the expectation values of time and position. The field equations relate the expectation value of the spacetime curvature to the expectation value of the momentum-energy density. This is a formal relationship, which is concretely underpinned by the physical connection between the fluctuations in momentum and energy to the fluctuations in position and time. Fluctuations in time are not merely fluctuations in the position in time at which a particular event occurs. Otherwise, an absolute time would have to be assumed and which would served as a backdrop for these fluctuations in the timing of events. Mass is conserved in pre-relativity physics. In relativity theory mass and energy are interconvertible. But energy is conserved in relativity theory( special theory, at least), while energy is not conserved in quantum theory. The question perhaps arises here, “into what is energy interconvertible which “accounts” for the breakdown of conservation of energy within quantum mechanics?” Everett’s relative state interpretation of quantum measurement seems to invoke the existence of a kind of “hypertime dimension.” Just as the integration of the time dimension with those of space explained the nonconservation of mass, perhaps the incorporation of Everett’s

hypertime dimension with that of four dimensional spacetime accounts for the nonconservation of energy. Real particles as solitons in the locally connected quantum vacuum momentum-energy field. By viewing virtual particles within the vacuum as being themselves solitons in the nonlocally connected vacuum field, we are admitting the existence of forms of matter and energy more fundamental than the particles and fields treated in the “standard model” of particle physics. What is the quantum conjugate quantity, which should be paired with information, conceived as a physical quantity? And is information the conserved quantity of such a conjugate pair? With the other conjugate quantity serving merely as a bookkeeping or accounting variable? What is the meaning, if any, of nonlocally connected influences “propagating?” To trigger the manifestation of nonlocal connections is to back-react upon the ground of the phenomena of the physical system concerned – perhaps even to back-react upon one’s own ground. Time may be likened to a CPU clock while motion of coherent structures is a combination of linear and feedback, i.e., “circular” binary calculations. The competition between binary and CPU operations (by which coherent structures are “refreshed” or updated – the CPU clock rate constitutes the “refresh rate” for non-cohesive “pixel sets;” for cohesive pixel sets, the refresh rate for the structure is less than the CPU clock rate) may be likened to special and general relativistic effects, respectively. Higgs boson as a particle physics metaphorical particle. Photon mass determined by gravitational size, i.e., black hole radius of the Universe and would be related to the breakdown of perfect Lorenz invariance.

What type of new conservation principle is pointed to by supersymmetry? Dynamical symmetry breaking requires a composite Higgs particle, perhaps virtual Cooper pairs of fermion/ antifermion pairs. Supersymmetry entails several Higgs bosons, perhaps all of the various types of virtual fermion/antifermion pairs which are manifestations of the fundamental energy fluctuations of the quantum vacuum. Spin appears to be the most ubiquitous property of particles, both matter particles as well as the particles responsible for mediating all of the fundamental forces of nature. Spin is an essential consideration in all interactions among subatomic particles. So the equivalence principle should be consistent with a spin-based theory of quantum gravity, rather than an electromagnetic-based theory such as that put forward by Haisch, Rueda, and Puthoff. “In fact, the spin of a planet is the sum of the spins and angular momenta of all its elementary particles. But can angular momentum itself be ultimately reducible to subatomic particle spins? (c.f., web=cit=www.sciam.com/askexpert/physics/physics10.html – page 2) Spin, circular motion, accelerated motion, spin networks, symmetry of rotation (not just in space, but in spacetime), symmetry and conservation laws (of interaction) Loops in space interwoven with loops in time in an elastic, dynamic network of interactions. A maximum density of momentum exchanges in matter would imply a minimum current density of imaginary 4-momentum exchanges. Is a time interval being so small that time “looses its meaning” the same thing as quantized time? Is vacuum lattice gravity theory related to spin network gravity theory?

Obviously, if the energy density of the quantum vacuum is on the order of 10**95 kg/cm**3, matter cannot actually pass “through” this medium, but must traverse it by moving “atop” this hyperdense medium. Continuous reformation/reconstruction of particles and fields at successive locations of spacetime appears the only viable means for matter to have motion within the vacuum. A ready analogy here is the software icon appearing on one’s computer desktop. This icon possesses only so much continuous existence as is permitted by the limited speed of the electron gun which is continually “repainting” the desktop. CPU processor speed may also play somewhat of a role though. The apparent repulsive and attractive forces involved in the collective behavior of particles in accordance with the quantum statistics of fermions and bosons operate in the absence of exchange particles mediating the three or four fundamental forces of nature. These “statistical forces” operate in addition to the fundamental “exchange forces.” These two types of quantum statistical forces, those described by the Pauli exclusion principle and exemplified in the phenomenon of Bose Condensation, when each operates independently of the other, manifests its action at a local level usually confined to the subatomic scale. However, these non-exchange forces may prove to be of a more fundamental nature than those forces dubbed as fundamental, i.e., the electromagnetic, strong, and weak nuclear forces. And this might prove to be particularly evident where these two statistical forces are strongly interacting with one another all the while that they are acting upon particles of matter. The existence of geometrodynamic theories of quantum field fluctuations of the vacuum in accordance with these quantum statistical laws, may describe how these fluctuations underpin,

in turn, fluctuations and stability of spacetime topology. Spacetime topology is itself necessarily presupposed as initial and boundary conditions by Einstein’s field equations of the inertio-gravitational field, which suggests that the energy density of the vacuum field may fall outside of the purview of the Einstein stress-momentum-energy tensor. This tensor general relativity treats as the complete source of the gravitational field. This further suggests that such quantum statistical laws may be turned to for an explanation of the physical mechanism by which the efficacy of the field equations are realized – in short, these quantum statistical laws may hold the key to understanding the underlying dynamics of gravitation, fleshing out, if you will, the abstract formalism of general relativity. Although gravitation may not be an “exchange force” in the standard sense of its being mediated through the exchange of a specific forcecarrying boson, as in the case of the other three “fundamental forces,” this force may nonetheless be aptly described as an “exchange force,” however, one of the most general kind conceivable so as to properly account for both universality of gravity’s influence while opening the way to solving the heretofore intractable Cosmological Constant Problem. Since gravity is not merely a force acting in three dimensions, as is very much the case with the other three fundamental forces, when they are not operating within a sufficiently strong gravitational field, that is, we expect gravity to be a force which is at least partially mediated through particle exchanges which take place along the local time axis. Such a very general type of exchange might be effected through the two basic types exchanges of stress-momentum-energy - those which take place between real matter and virtual matter, i.e., between matter and the quantum vacuum, and those which take place between this vacuum and itself. One might ask what interpretation is to be made of an obvious third category of “exchange,” that occurring between real matter and itself. This would be the component of force which is mediated by specific exchange bosons operating within a 3-dimensional hypersurface. This component would be combined, as alluded to earlier, with the purely timelike exchanges of momentum-energy (which we are

saying are somehow intimately associated with the action of the gravitational field.  An exchange particle would appear to only be necessary in cases where the action of the fundamental force in question was only between particles of a particular type, e.g., photons interact via the electromagnetic but do not interact via the strong nuclear force, gluons do not interact via the weak force, etc. Since the action of the gravitational force is supposed via the equivalence principle to be truly universal, and we can only be assured of a complete correspondence between real particles and fields and their virtual counterparts, rather than supposing a universal force interaction, i.e., "correspondence" to somehow be maintained through the action of a specific exchange particle, we expect the total symmetric/ antisymmetric/ nonsymmetric quantum vacuum field to be the logical candidate for mediating the "gravitational force." The problem with the quantizing of the gravitational field then is that action of the gravitational field is via the equivalence principle supposed to be truly universal on the one hand, whereas gravitation is mediated through the action of a specific exchange boson, i.e., the graviton.

Loose speculation concerning the relationships of gravity, topology, and degeneracy: So long as continuity of action is maintained, the selfsame topology remains in effect. Is it possible to have a degenerate metric, that is, with respect to multiply distinct topologies? Would this imply that changes in topology might be without gravitational effect? What might be termed here as gravitational equivalence classes of topology? There

might be transitions between distinct wavefunctions in the absence of changes in energy such that we may speak of atemporal changes in a quantum mechanical system.

Each order process in a perturbative expansion of the vacuum state must be composed of all topologically distinct ways that fermions can interact. Neither does general relativity distinguish between topologically equivalent spacetimes so that the interaction of topologically degenerate spacetimes as well as the mutual transformation of topologically degenerate spacetimes are types of interaction occurring outside the scope of general relativity theory. Phonons are an example of bosons. The mutual exchange of phonons binds together quasiparticles. Quasiparticles and phonons are artifacts of the mean or effective field model of quantum particles and their interactions.

Time lag in the exchange of force-mediating bosons? Does this figure in the mechanism of inertia? Convergence of elements from different points in one’s biography to form a more meaningful and coherent history. Concerning the possibility of true singularities: /\E = 0 is inconsistent with the requirement of Lorenz-invariance of the ground state. This is connected with the nonexistence of true energy eigenstates, due to the fact of the universe being an open system and continually exchanging energy with the virtual particles and fields of the quantum vacuum through the existence of the /\E.

Concerning the end state of the Hawking radiation process: Conservation of information problem. Actually, this is a question of the conservation (or nonconservation) of data. Information is only definable on an open system, whereas entropy is only definable on a closed system ( just as the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics only applicable to closed systems). Is a black hole an open or a closed system? Eigenstates are not definable within an open system. This may explain the indeterministic change in the wavefunction, Psi, as a result of measurements performed by a “conscious observer.” The lynchpin point of incompatibility between general relativity and quantum mechanics is that posed by The Cosmological Constant Problem. Can Psi constitute spacetime while being defined within a particular spacetime? Nonlinearity problem? Energy cutoff in the quantum vacuum that is gravitationally effectual. The assumption that the equivalence principle applies to vacuum energy is perhaps holding back the development of a workable quantum gravity theory. Degeneracy with respect to various quantum numbers. One becomes confined to a subgroup of the original larger symmetry group. Invariance, covariance, symmetry, quantities/quantum numbers.

conservation

of

physical

Reduction in the number of distinct eigenstates. Degeneracy is when the same eigenvalue can be associated with different eigenstates.

If the source of inertia lies outside the spatial boundary of the object then the “object” is only a system representation – like an icon on a personal computer desktop. Some mechanism which prevents directed dispersion of Psi packets, i.e., acceleration of Psi packet. Ontological priority of state space description over that of the spacetime manifold. The energy of a nonlocally-connected field cannot gravitate without a modification of the field’s equations being required. Deficit of vacuum energy may act as the gravitational source term due to the vacuum possessing a negative energy. In this case, only differences in the density of vacuum energy would be significant for gravitation. Perhaps a negative vacuum energy density would drive cosmological expansion, resulting in a local time-varying metric against a background of constant spacetime topology. Torsion of spacetime is determined by vacuum spin currents which are conserved, but which determine the momentum and energy uncertainties of a given local volume of spacetime ( local 3-hypersurface). Vacuum spin structure dynamics ~ the torsion of spacetime. Pauli and Bose vacuum statistics which are determined and evolve via this vacuum spin structure/dynamics. To include inertia use the analogy of an RLC circuit. The “L” and “C” components of the circuit mediate time-energy and the “R” component, the position-momentum components of the tensor uncertainty. x/\Py + y/\Px + /\xPy + /\x/\Py + /\yPx = [(/\Lz)**2]/(h/2pi) We can, of course, choose (x,y) = (0,0), if we interpret them as expectation values, that is, so that

/\xPy + /\yPx + /\x/\Py + /\y/\Px + /\Lz + [(/\Lz)**2]/h/2pi) Px and Py can be defined as zero by appropriate choice of equivalent inertial reference frame, provided we interpret Px and Py as expectation values so that /\x/\Py + /\y/\Px = /\Lz + [(/\Lz)**2/(h/2pi) Intuitively, the dimensions of this “equation” do not balance with respect to the degree of the uncertainty, /\, if “/\” is interpreted as an operator. Of course, operators possess special properties and one must perform a proof of the operator property of “/\” in order to sustain this part of the discussion. But if “/\” in the above does, indeed, function as an operator, then we may drop the term, “/\Lz” and say the following: /\x/\Py + /\y/\Px = [(/\Lz)**2]/(h/2pi) The generalization of which might be, Sum(j = 1 to 3) x Sum(i = 1 to 3) x {1 – DiracDelta(i,j)}[/\Xi/\Pj] = [(/\Lk)**2]/(h/2pi) Where, of course, DiracDelta(i,j) = 1 when i = j. Notice that the above tentative formula is nonrelativistic. How would one generalize this formula to 4 dimensions of spacetime? This would require use of the notion of “rotations about the time axis” – something which is surely demanded by relativistic spin 0 (scalar field) such as that presented by the vacuum energy fluctuations in the form of creation and annihilation of virtual Cooper pairs. September 2012

Although a doubly-spinning sphere or ball is difficult to visualize, a doubly-spinning ring can be visualized relatively easily. If one can convince oneself that arbitrary angular momentums are not

substantively different from orthogonal angular momentum components, then there is no reason to believe that adding or decomposing angular momenta in the case of an arbitrarily spinning sphere or ball is substantively different than in the case of an arbitrarily spinning ring. What is the term for a simplification of an insoluble problem that does not take away any of the relevant features of the problem, but which makes the original problem relatively intuitive and easy to solve? All conserved dynamical variables are purely timelike in free space. Inertia and gravitation are phenomena associated with the projection of these timelike four vectors into spacelike components. An important question here is whether there is a conserved four potential. Does the creation of spacelike components of a, say, hyperspherical four potential induce a change in the original pure timelike potential so that the sum of time and spacelike components of some new four potential vectorially sum to produce a new four potential with the same magnitude as the initial free space four potential? Could there be a preferred reference frame defined by that 3-hypersurface slice of spacetime possessing the greatest timelike four potential, or, alternatively, that 3-hypersurface slice possessing no spacelike components of the four potential? But the four potential may be a function of mass, length, and time in such a manner that merely translational motion at constant velocity does not result in a reconfiguration of the space and timelike components of the four potential, i.e., the four potential is Lorenz-invariant. Obviously, if the energy density of the quantum vacuum is on the order of 10**95 kg/m**3, matter cannot actually “pass through” this medium, but must traverse it by moving “atop” this hyperdense medium. In a sense all particle motion is tunneling through a potential in the sense in which a “particle” which tunnels through a potential barrier (in the conventional quantum tunneling sense) must some how merge with the energy of the field composing the potential barrier. Tunneling possesses three distinct cases, E > V, E < V, and E = V. Continuous reformation/reconstitution of particles and fields, either in or out of resonance with each other (perhaps there is a special case where the

particle is at “near resonance” with the energy field composing the potential through which it is tunneling ) at successive locations of spacetime appears the only viable means for matter to have motion within the vacuum. A ready analogy here is the software icon appearing on one’s computer desktop. This icon possesses only so much continuous existence as is permitted by the limited speed of the electron gun which is continually “repainting” the desktop. CPU processor speed may also play somewhat of a role although F(cpu) > F(electron gun). Dirac point particles which are fermions do not perturb the fermi-dirac statistics of the quantum vacuum without simultaneously perturbing the bose-einstein statistics of the vacuum, as well. Do isolated Dirac point particles (fermions) have an individual gravity field? The role of the Higgs boson may be fulfilled by virtual fermion/antifermion “Cooper pairs.” Do these Cooper pairs , i.e., “pairons,” confer mass to particles? Systems (mesons) with different spin are different particles with different masses. “Indeed vacuum energy is modified in a space curved by the gravitational field. “ (c.f., quant-ph/9801071, Relativity of motion in vacuum.) Action-reaction principle here – modified vacuum manifests itself as gravitation. The Euler/LaGrange formulation of the field equations of gravitation describe the dynamics of continuously existing particles in which kinetic and potential energy (which go into the definition of the Lagrangian and Hamiltonian). High density vacuum field comes from a gauge transformation of the Psi associated with the cosmological constant. If spin is for a fermion formally similar to polarization for a photon, then several questions at once arise. Can this similarity be extended to other vector bosons? If a lower limit can be placed on pseudo gravitational effects caused by

the interaction of mass and vacuum quantum statistics large enough to observed so that no deviation from geodesic motion is observable, then this mechanism must be the one underlying gravity itself. In other words, if the predicted effects are large enough to be observed but are not in fact observed, then the theory is an alternate account for effects already familiarly observed. The vacuum must possess a spin 2 gauge symmetry such that the presence of gravitons remains latent or is rendered unnecessary. Normally, the spin ½ and spin 1 wavefunctions cannot be superposed and therefore cannot interact. Symmetry breaking, phase transition, vacuum decay, gauge bosons, etc. Matter perturbs the symmetry of the vacuum. The fact that composite matter cannot exist as virtual particles suggests that it is only ocmposite matter, i.e., matter possessing a binding energy over and above that of the vacuum constituting the elementary particles separately. This fact suggests that the particle “vacuum fields” do not, in isolation, possess distinct gravitational fields. Relative versus absolute spacetime rotations are important in connection with spin statistics. During uniform acceleration, the space and time axes are displaced by twice the angle relative to one another as does each axis displaces angularly relative to its former position. The future crystallizing until it becomes the present. Then does the present moment decay? Like an excited atom or radioactive isotope? Crystallizing into an excited state of something else? Does the vacuum possess a gauge symmetry which makes the spin 2 exchange particle unnecessary?

Supposing that the quantum vacuum itself can be the source of a gravitational field leaves no quantum mechanism available to mediate gravitation. Certainly the positive definite signature (+,+,+,-) of the Minkowski metric is intimately related to the symmetry and antisymmetry of the wavefunctions describing fermions and bosons. Because topology is constituted by spin statistics of virtual particles, the energy of the zero-point field (ZPF) falls outside of the scope of general relativity. Because energy uncertainty drives temporal evolution and gravitation can only manifest its power by deflecting timelike four vectors so that they acquire spacelike components, it follows that the underlying dynamism of gravity must be the energy fluctuations of the quantum vacuum. Because an object’s energy is, even if only in a tiny part, reconstituted from out of its own enregy, the object cannot move along its own time axis at the speed of light. An antiparticle can be consistently described as a particle travelling backwards in time. The process of the creation of virtual particle/antiparticle pairs is a reversible process, according to quantum mechanics. We might imagine more complex virtual structures, i.e., composite particles, such as simple molecules, being reversibly created out of the vacuum (along with their “anti-molecules”) in that they are immediately destroyed again (return to the quantum) within a exceedingly brief period of time specified by the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. Perhaps virtual bosons are exchanged between both real and virtual fermions in a completely indiscriminate fashion.

080799 Of course, strictly speaking, this type of creation/annihilation is only possible if the virtual molecule/anti-molecule pair collectively constitute a spin zero “particle.” (It may be possible to understand “spin 0” as being spin about the particle’s local time axis and “spin 1” being spin about an axis oriented in some way in the 3-dimensional space to which the local time axis is orthogonal). Such tiny systems could be consistently and exhaustively described with quantum theory by some finite set of quantum numbers, being in this way indistinguishable from any other system defined by the same quantum numerical set. These quantum numbers, as such, index observables, which are conserved physical quantities. But we know that at some point reversibility is lost and this must take place when the structure can no longer be produced from out of the vacuum “in a single go,” but must be “cobbled together” from a number of such vacuum-engendered particles which are to exist in some kind of bound structure maintained through exchanges of momentum between all of those particles (which emerged from the vacuum in a single step). This might well be due to there being no definable “anti-entity” with which the “entity” can annihilate so as to return the pair to the quantum vacuum from which they had originated. We may suppose that it is here that physical processes describable in terms of nonconserved quantities come into play. Is it at this point that the phenomena of inertia and gravitation emerge or become significant? Do irreversible structures participate in more than one distinct vacuum state? Or do they just possess some kind of independence from a single vacuum state, preventing the vacuum from “anticipating” an antistructure? It is interesting to note that irreversibility creeps into those systems that cannot be maintained by the same processes by which they were originally engendered. It is at this very same stage where physical processes within the system are no longer directly, but only indirectly supported by quantum vacuum processes.

We do not expect nonlocal energy distributions to possess inertia or to be sources of gravitational fields. Inertia and gravitation are phenomena based in the distribution and dynamics of the distribution of momentum and energy within four dimensional spacetime. An individual vacuum fluctuation possesses only an uncertain momentum energy which therefore possesses no determinate composition of momentum energy. This is based on the hypothesis, derived from statements of David Bohm in his work, Quantum Theory, that all causal relationships between the expectation values of physical quantities are constituted out of correlations of fluctuations in the values of these physical quantities. In other words, it is only coherent networks of interrelated momentum energy fluctuations that exhibit the back-reaction of inertia. 080599 The construction of “squeezed states” in which the momentum uncertainty along a particular axis is decreased at the expense of increases in this uncertainty along other orthogonal axes supplies tangible proof that the spacetime components in quantum mechanical momentum-energy uncertainty form with one another a conserved four vector. If this is true, then it should be possible to construct a squeezed state in which the energy uncertainty of a system is increased due the construction of squeezed states in which a component of the 3momentum uncertainty is decreased. Through a Lorenz transformation the expectation values of all components of 3-momentum can be adjusted to zero so that the quantum uncertainties in the components of 3-momentum are wholly constituted by the respective momentum fluctuation terms. The question arises as to whether the timelike component of the 4-momentum can likewise be “transformed away” through such a simple operation as a Lorenz transformation? In the absence of accelerated motion or gravitational fields, the velocity of light is a universal constant. To transform away all of a mass’ timelike momentum would require that one utilize a frame of reference which is itself moving at the speed of light within some 3-hypersurface.

There is a kind of symmetry between the spacelike and timelike components of an object’s momentum: no component of a massive object’s spacelike velocity may reach the speed of light and, the object’s timelike velocity can never reach zero. Now from previous discussion we are aware that no massive body actually possesses a timelike momentum such that its velocity through time is actually 100% of the speed of light (in vacuum). The symmetry underlying momentum-energy would be broken, if we allowed what is permitted in free space, namely a Lorenz transformation wherein an object is given a component of 3-velocity which, though still less than the velocity of light in free space, is nonetheless greater than the timelike velocity of the object. The structure of spacetime within the 3hypersurface surrounding the object must have been altered so as to prevent the acceleration of an object to velocities within this part of the hypersurface which are greater than the timelike velocity of co-located objects at rest relative to the chosen coordinate system. @$The appearance of tidal forces responsible for the initial acceleration of objects released in a gravitational field is easily explained in terms of conservation of four momentum in conjunction with the spatially varying local velocity of light, c.f., “For it cannot actually be "rigid" due to these tidal forces; in fact, the concept of a "rigid body" is already forbidden in special relativity as allowing instantaneous causal actions. Secondly, such a rod must indeed be "infinitesimal", i.e., a freely falling body of negligible thickness and of sufficiently short extension, so as to not be stressed by gravitational field inhomogeneities; just how short depending on strength of local curvatures and on measurement error” (Torretti (1983), 239), c.f., Early Philosophical Interpretations of General Relativity (Nov 28, 2001). “…Reichenbach's analysis of spacetime measurement treatment is plainly inappropriate, manifesting a fallacious tendency to view the generically curved spacetimes of general relativity as stiched together from little bits of flat Minskowski spacetimes. Besides being

mathematically inconsistent, this procedure offers no way of providing a non-metaphorical physical meaning for the fundamental metrical tensor gμν, the central theoretical concept of general relativity, nor to the series of curvature tensors derivable from it and its associated affine connection. Since these sectional curvatures at a point of spacetime are empirically manifested and the curvature components can be measured, e.g., as the tidal forces of gravity, they can hardly be accounted as due to conventionally adopted "universal forces". Furthermore, the concept of an "infinitesimal rigid rod" in general relativity cannot really be other than the interim stopgap Einstein recognized it to be. For it cannot actually be "rigid" due to these tidal forces; in fact, the concept of a "rigid body" is already forbidden in special relativity as allowing instantaneous causal actions”, c.f., Ibid. A hollow sphere filled with electromagnetic radiation, i.e., photons, possesses an additional mass equal to the total energy of the photons divided by the speed of light squared, solely due to the impulsive forces and accelerations experienced by the photons as they bounce around inside the sphere. Of course, from the DeBroglie relation, p = h/, and the red shifting of photons moving in the direction of the sphere’s motion and the blue shifting of photons moving in the direction contrary to this motion, we can easily deduce that when the sphere is uniformly accelerated, there will result an increasing differential of impulsive momenta developing between the red and blue shifted photons. In other words, the instantaneous change in this momentum differential with respect to time will correspond to a force, F = d(/\p)/dt, which will oppose the acceleration of the photon-filled sphere. This force divided by the acceleration of the hollow sphere will, of course, yield the effective mass of the photons. Note that it is only because the photons change direction through interaction with (impacting against) the hollow sphere that the photons collectively acquire an effective mass. Hypothesis: when  is in any eigenstate of the Hamiltonian, a superposition state of  with respect to purely time-varying eigenfunctions fully accounts for the uncertainty in the lifetime. I was

just trying to say that, (x,t) = (0)(x) x exp(iwt) for  whenever  is in an eigenstate of H. A Theory of Everything would be able to determine the true Hamiltonian, H, for any system, including for “the whole Universe”. Such a theory would render any energy fluctuation term in H, H(fluc), a mere phenomenological artifact of our previous ignorance of the correct refinement of quantum theory, A “TDE” would convert the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle into a purely epistemological principle. Such a system would possess no fundamental fluctuations because it would possess no indeterminate “outside” with which it could be in the process of dynamically exchanging energy. In such a situation, the “power input” to the Universe as a whole would be identically 0. It is hard to conceive of how anything could ever happen within such a “zero power input” device. In short, It is hard to conceive how a Universe with zero power input could be rightfully said to possess any real temporality, beside endlessly repeating patterns of interference between a closed set of time-independent eigenfunctions. If in an attempt to accelerate by mechanical means a perfectly spherical mass leads not to a change in the location of this body’s center of mass in the direction along which we would attempt to make it move, but instead, to a supefluid-like streaming of its composite material around the hand and between the fingers which together would urge it forward, then despite this action having lead to a redistribution of the body’s mass, no energy may be supposed to have been expended (is there a question of degeneracy here?) throughout the course of this operations. Such a strange object may be said to possess not inertia. It is hopefully obvious from what has been considered thus far that, were it but for the absence of all internal binding forces within this “mass” (as opposed to the notable case of a “superfluid”), at least some small acceleration of the body’s center of mass would have been effected in the direction along which one’s hand was attempting to urge it. We note the absence,

in the case considered above, of all compression forces in the direction of the body’s would-be acceleration. The opposite-directed tension force is likewise zero, as the matter distribution was still prior to our attempting to move it. Moreover, all shear forces within the mass were similarly zero. Now it is but a simple and reversible linear transformation of spacetime coordinates connecting the representation of a matter distribution as possessing pressure, energy density and stress (relating to the presence of shear forces within the body) to another representation of this distribution as one possessing only energy density and pressure but without any stress due to shear forces. In other words, locally at least, shear forces can always be transformed away through an appropriate choice of spacetime coordinates. October 2011 The generalization of conservation of momentum to the conservation of stress-momentumenergy in general relativity means that the metric responds to inertial forces in just such a manner that the time rate of change (with respect to “proper time”) in some important quantity proportional to f(guv, Tuv) = 0 But it is clear that a mere change in coordinate system will have no effect whatever upon any actual physics – this is merely a somewhat informal restatement of the principle of general relativity. So any mass distribution not possessing off-diagonal terms in its energy tensor in one system of coordinates, may be represented within some new coordinate system as having an energy tensor possessing such off-diagonal terms (stress terms) and owing to the existence of shear forces within the body. Now it is the binding forces within a body which are responsible for that body possessing forces of compression, tension, and shear. The question which faces us now is this: might a body possess an energy tensor with only a term with this being true for all possible transformations of the spacetime coordinates? Is there some component of the energy tensor which cannot be, locally at least, transformed away? Now a transformation of the spacetime coordinates can always be found which allows us to locally transform away a body’s gravitational field.

What are we to make of the Gibb’s phenomenon in the case of waves of the probability distribution of quantum states? Might we expect extremely counter-intuitive behavior by quantum systems at the spacetime boundaries of their system wavefunctions? For quantum tunneling, /\x >= /\x(0) and/or (both?) /\E >= /\E(0). It is only nonzero expectation values of momentum-energy which may possess gravitational mass/inertial mass equivalency. The expectation values may always be derived from a combination of fluctuation terms and uncertainties. The fluctuation term for the energy may be wholly attributed to the vacuum whereas its uncertainty in its energy to the effect of the fluctuation energy upon our energy-measuring apparatus – what perfect calibration cannot eradicate (in principle). Mass-energy is a result of an imbalance in these two energy terms. In this way particles are seen to be not flux-stabilities in themselves, but structured alterations in the flux-stabilities as a result of the influence, penultimately of our energy-measuring devices-ultimately per von Neumann – upon the influence of not the individual mind per se but the consciousness fundamental in nature, which is structured through the complex system of boundary conditions upon the quantum vacuum field being measured (in essence) constituted through the operation of the observer’s brain, since the existence of the brain as a mass-energy system, would otherwise presuppose, if identified with the observer’s individual consciousness, the existence of that which its observations are potentially constituting. If all topological transformations of spacetime at the quantum level may be reducible to successive or collective symmetric and antisymmetric topological transformations grounded in virtual boson and fermion particle exchanges, then spacetime topology would be determined by vacuum quantum statistics. So this spacetime topology, about which general relativity is undecided, would be determined by the quantum statistics of the quantum vacuum. On this view, gravitation and inertia

would necessitate “preloaded” quantum vacuum boundary conditions. So gravitation, in particular, could no longer be treated as possessing its own, unique and universal quantum field, but would be particular in that gravitational fields would simply be vacuum fields + particular boundary conditions supplied for this vacuum. Of course, the zero-point energy field is responsible for inertia since matter remains at rest, i.e., continues travelling at near the speed of light along the time axis, due to its energy being continually replenished from out of the vacuum energy. All vector quantities are conserved. If a vector quantity does not appear to be conserved, this is only because the vector is merely a component of some higher dimensional vector quantity. For instance, although neither time nor space are conserved physical quantities, and therefore neither conserved nor quantized quantities, they are collectively when combined together into a spacetime four-vector. The velocity of light is the velocity of time. Velocity through space is always at the expense of velocity through time and vice versa. The parameter by which this exchange of motion (between space and time directions) is mediated, such that the law of (probability) conservation is upheld, is that of mass. The particular manifestation of probability conservation, which is relevant here, is that of four momentum conservation. A question which is relevant here is whether fourmomentum fluctuations are conserved. If such fluctuations are conserved, then given the conservation of the expectation values of four momentum, it would immediately follow that the Heisenberg uncertainties in each component of the three momentum and in the energy themselves conjointly form a four vector of Heisenberg uncertainty in four momentum. In such a situation we expect a generalized and relativistic statement of the Heisenberg Uncertainty Relation of the following form. The dot product of the four momentum uncertainty vector with the spacetime uncertainty vector must be greater than or equal to 2h/pi, i.e., >= 4h/2pi. In the absence of “bound energy,”

i.e., free space (where “no gravitational field” is present), this dot product would be between the four momentum fluctuations of the quantum vacuum and the “fluctuations of the spacetime interval.” There is obviously a connection between quantum mechanical three momentum fluctuations and energy fluctuations, i.e., timelike component of the four momentum fluctuations, which tends in the right direction due to the property of bosons and fermions obeying “opposite Pauli principles.” We are perhaps implying a kind of double-counting by speaking of fluctuations of both the four momentum and the spacetime interval. It may be that there is no physical meaning in the concept of spacetime interval fluctuations for such fluctuations would also be present within any spacetime measuring apparatus/devices which we might attempt to measure them. We cannot directly “grapple with” the space and time variables, but only indirectly, through the manipulation/use of momentum/energy. So how is the manipulation of momentum energy systems, e.g., matter, by other momentum energy systems, i.e., people, not an example of the latter systems (people) pulling themselves up by their own bootstraps. Relevant considerations here are the ghost in the machine paradigm, free will and determinism, collapse of the wavefunction, contrast of local and nonlocal interactions, etc. The only way that nonlocality can be consistent with special relativity would be if the instantaneous determination of spins (for oppositely “spun” particles) were instantaneous not just in the experimenter’s frame of reference, i.e., laboratory frame, but in all possible reference frames! The present astrophysical observations indicating a general acceleration of the cosmological expansion would seem to imply that a hyperspherical potential does, indeed, exist. This potential possesses a

gradient along the local time axes at every point within spacetime. Might gravitational potentials ultimately derive from the local hyperspherical potential through the peculiar interaction of massive particles, or more generally, energy in bound form, i.e., binding energy, with this potential? The balance maintained between the current density of 3-momentum fluctuations/exchanges and the current density of energy fluctuations/exchanges accounts for the trend of cosmological expansion in its 2nd time derivative. So if the expansion rate of the universe is accelerating (within observable 3 dimensions), then there must be a shift in the momentum-energy distribution of the vacuum such that the density of its 3-momentum exchanges is decreasing (bodies are becoming less massive) and the density of its energy increasing. The dynamics of the cosmological expansion, whether it is overall accelerating or decelerating, is attributed to the relative strengths of the cosmological constant (the vacuum energy density) and the gravitational energy of the universe. The sort of “force” that changes the distribution of momentum-energy without altering the magnitude of the four momentum is one with a four force magnitude of 0. Is probability conserved in the dispersion equation? Psi’s are Minkowski spacetime solutions to Dirac’s equation. So gravity is considered as a mere perturbation of Minkowski spacetime. So this theory only applies to the weak-field limit and is a linearized gravity theory. The metric remains Minkowskian, only spatiotemporal variations in polarizability can be represented consistently as a (merely phenomenological) variation in this metric on the Minkowski manifold. Are all Psi polarizable? Particle-wave duality. The wavefunction for a photon (particle) is just its electromagnetic wave description. But what

about a Psi which describes some macroscopic system? It is as though, in the absence of mirrors to interact with, the vacuum fluctuations have “nothing to push against”. The parallel mirror configuration suppresses the density of momentum fluctuations normal to the mirror planes. This results in a decrease in the plane-normal component of the momentum uncertainty and hence induces the mirrors along the plane-normal axis connecting their plane centers. This change in /\X (normal) is independent of the masses of the mirrors. Apparently the x,y,z components of momenta are related to the timelike component of momentum, but not to each other, at least not in flat spacetime, that is. EPR in curved spacetime and “dispersion” of probability distribution eigenfunctions. Within this fluctuating spacetime is somewhat of an inconsistent phraseology as the spacetime metric does not specify a unique spacetime topology. Schrodinger’s Cat Paradox: long chain superpositions may not be possible if objects further up the chain possess greater energy uncertainty than the link immediately preceding. Unitary evolution does not apply to macroscopic objects. Spacetimes cannot superpose because of ill-defined boundary conditions. No spacetime-free superpositions are admissible, in other words. “Live” and “Dead” cat do not constitute, however, different states of the same system. But isn’t that what is really required in order for a superposition to exist? The concept of universal wavefunction is inconsistent with relativity theory. X(Psi(x,t)) = X; T(Psi(x,t)) = T. No such thing as an object at rest is treated within relativity theory. This

is also a perhaps more essential truth of the quantum theory. Only if time is understood as a rate rather than a dimension like an extra spatial dimension can the idea of a spatiotemporal variations in spacetime, i.e., gravity waves, be rendered self-consistent or coherent. The appearance of infinite quantities, such as mass, length, time, density, etc., points to the breaddown of the relativistic description of reality under extreme boundary conditions. Inertia may perhaps be explained in a more unified manner as stemming from resistance to changes in 4-angular momentum. Coherence as the essence of a gravitating body possessing inertia. Two random fluctuations patterns, each individually containing no information, but in which the two fluctuation patters are correlated by virtue of both belonging to the same quantum system described by a single state function, . Information does not add because  = 1 + 2 and P = * = ||**2 = 1*1 + 2*2 + 21*2. Data can be combined additively. Information cannot be so combined. Correlations arise through the cross term, 1*2. Data are abstracted from the density functions, ||**2, and information is abstracted from the wavefunctions, (I). Fluctuations which appear local, may always contain contributions from nonlocal correlations. For example, = = = + + . The last term may be the nonlocal correlation of momentum functions. Directionality of time dilation as due to relative velocity – proof of spacetime structure? The speed of time which is the magnitude of its velocity (known as proper time) is always c. The component of velocity of an object along the direction of my time axis is based on the

projection of its time axis upon mine. Aperiodic functions such as are treated by chaos theory, cannot be represented as a superposition of periodic functions. As noted already, periodicity is only possible within a closed dynamical system. So the existence of chaos is an indication that “outside influences” are at work. The temporality of the past: the past when present did not possess enough time to “crystallize.” On the hypothesis that only “pure energy” can be spontaneously created within a Euclidean or “flat” quantum vacuum, e.g., virtual fermion/antifermion pairs, it followed that bound energy structures, e.g., atoms, molecules, etc., are “unanticipated structures.” Such structures which cannot be predicted from the flat quantum vacuum can, indeed, be engendered with a curved spacetime which necessarily itself possesses some kind of bound structure after which a momentum-energy fluctuation may pattern its own bound structure. Perhaps the curved vacuum may be decomposed into two disjoint components: a purely “flat” and a purely “curved” one. The vacuum momentum-energy fluctuation, when engendered within a curved spacetime, may be thought to produce a back-reaction upon the vacuum state from which it is engendered, at least upon its “flat part,” which cannot anticipate the appearance of such bound structures. Could this be simply because energy and three momentum are normally orthogonal to one another with a flat spacetime? Why do we expect the kind of back-reaction alluded to above? Because the vacuum state prior to the appearance of the bound structure fluctuation cannot, at least in its purely flat component, continue in a parallel phase space evolution with it. There is also the possibility that newly engendered bound (momentum-energy) structures possess access to alternative vacuum states altogether disjoint from the vacuum states originally producing them as fluctuations! This would account for a continued back-reaction of bound energy structures upon a chosen unitary vacuum state. On this view, bound momentumenergy structures connect multiple vacuum states. Moreover, gravitation

(and inertia, as well) may be a function of the interaction of multiple, heretofore, uncommunicative vacuum states. Also, a curved vacuum state, i.e., a curved spacetime, should be modeled as an interference pattern of multiple vacuum states, previously disjoint. If the hypothesis that mass is simply “bound energy” is correct, then we would expect a shift in the balance between momentum and energy fluctuations to take place ( in favor of increased momentum fluctuations and decreased energy fluctuations) as a mass approaches a gravitating body. This shift, of course, would go hand in hand with a contraction in the positional uncertainty and increase in the time uncertainty. A vacuum state described by a curved spacetime may produce complex , bound energy structures. Of course, when energy is supplied to the vacuum from outside as in the case of high power lasers, linear accelerators, strong electric fields, etc., any number of bound energy structures may be produced. Quantum numbers accounting must be obeyed, however. The expectation value of all quantum numbers within the vacuum is zero. . No possibility of synchronization, timing or reference frame without an embedding dynamic substrate. Another proof of the necessity of antiparticles might be given in terms of the application of the law of conservation of four momentum to vacuum fluctuation energy. Similarly, the explanation for the Pauli and Bose principles may be derived from the same application of this law of four conservation to fluctuations of quantum vacuum momentum-energy, or the application of the continuity equation to virtual particle current densities. But if such a conservation law applies to vacuum fluctuations (virtual particles), then this would imply the existence of nonlocally connected (and interlocked) matter and force fields. Perhaps momentum conservation only applies to the vacuum expectation values, not all components of which being zero within a nonvanishing gravitational field. Is subvocalization just the by product of social conditioned

response or is the mute part of the brain able to hear and understand the subvocal utterance of the left? It seems that the only way that equipartation of momentum-energy can be maintained (with regard to expectation values) is if there is some embedding medium for interacting gas particles in which stresses and strains can be developed and exchanged. It appears that there is a thermodynamic requirement for a vacuum stress-momentum-energy field. Spontaneous emission, for example, is necessary for thermodynamic laws to be upheld during exchanges of energy between excited atoms and an electromagnetic field. Because the vacuum fluctuations do not themselves possess inertia as individual particles, this may possess collective inertia through nonlocal connectivity. Is backreaction an inertial characteristic? Can nonlocally connected quantum fields be connected to locally connected “causal,” classical fields? Changes in energy along a continuum of degenerate energies, i.e., changes in the absence of changes in the system wavefunction may constitute a kind of 2 nd dimensional time. The statistics of real particles and fields is taken bodily from the statistics of the quantum vacuum. Vacuum statistics are determined by spin. The other quantum numbers constitute constraints upon those statistics embodied in the quantum mechanical selection rules. Investigate the meaning of a gravitational field itself (independently) altering the Heisenberg uncertainties in /\x and /\t. Don’t /\p and /\E, alone, adequately account for /\x and /\t? So then, does matter distort /\x and /\t directly at the quantum level or indirectly through matter’s gravitational field? When a mass is accelerated, it not only accelerates in a spatial direction but also it decelerates along the time axis. So the mass exchanges less

energy with the vacuum and more energy (in the form of 3-momentum) with itself. So fluctuation momentum density increases in the exact same proportion as does the fluctuation energy density decrease. Fluctuation momentum and energy current densities form a form vector which is transformed through a 2nd rank tensor. The speed of light is a limiting velocity in vacuum because c in reality represents “the speed of time” in that, when an object is “at rest,” i.e., in 3-d Euclidean space, it is being reconstituted from energy (vacuum energy) at a maximum rate (this is for the time being, not to take any exotic “squeezed states” into consideration) along a fourth dimensional spatial axis. Of course, to some tiny degree the mass is reconstituting itself from its own energy store ( the basis for inertia and, more subtly, gravitation, as well. Because of the identity of all quantum particles of similar type, there can be no substantive distinction between one such particle at one place (or time ) from another such particle at another place (or time ). It is interesting to note that in special relativity there is no such thing as a pure matter or charge density; only matter currents and charge currents are treated within this theory. A matter density is only conceivable within special relativity if an infinite time dilation is permitted. So from this standpoint, flux is the primary substrate of reality in relativity theory and energy takes precedence over matter, since matter is not conserved within special relativity although energy is supposed to be a conserved quantity. This trend away from the notion of substance and toward that of flux is much further advanced within the quantum theory and still more within relativistic quantum field theory, in which, as noted elsewhere, even energy itself is no longer treated as perfectly but only approximately conserved, that is, on the average, i.e., over sufficiently large time intervals. One might well wonder what indeed is the relevant conserved quantity within quantum field theory, if it is not to be energy, that is, what serves as the conserved substance within this theory. This conserved quantity is probability.

We should note here that neither is energy strictly speaking conserved within classical general relativity (as gravitational energy is not localizable within this theory) so that no consistent energy continuity equation can be written down as a tensor differential equation; only a pseudo tensor equation of continuity may be written down for the total energy - an equation which is, therefore reference frame dependent. . The sychronization of causally connected events is not as subtle as that of nonlocally connected events. Since superposition effects are required for objects to possess macroscopic properties, we do not expect such objects to be capable of forming superposition states themselves. This is similar to the argument against the existence of spacetime constitutive processes taking place within a particular spacetime continuum. Quantum indistinguishability and the identity of particles of like kinds is perhaps related to the distinction between the unitary evolution and the objective reduction of the wavefunction. The hydrogen atom is the only atom on the periodic chart for which an exact solution for Schrodinger’s equation exists. At what level in the hierarchy of matter does the identity of individuals of a kind break down? The very identity of all electrons, protons, neutrons, and other “fundamental” particles strongly suggests that these particles are not real, but mere abstractions. We cannot give the concept of conservation any coherent formulation for open, unbounded systems. Neither can any continuity equation be given for the underlying processes constituting the boundedness of closed systems, that is, for the process of the system's initial manifesting of itself. The whole notion of quantity itself must be altogether thrown out when radically open systems are under consideration. Permanence, continuity, conservation principles, causality, substance, probability, entropy, even modality at its most general - such physical concepts may only be conventionally or provisionally defined for closed systems, for all systems are ultimately open, and it is only the severity of approximation which determines the extent of a system's closedness. There is no such consistent concept as global modality. In other words,

necessity and possibility are system dependent concepts. Now an open space-time cannot possess a determinate spacetime topology, by arguments presented elsewhere. The appearance of stable topological structures, therefore, must be sustained through patterns of fluctuation in spacetime topology which are engendered from outside any spacetime. Each particular global topology, itself a closed system of spacetime though extending, perhaps, billions or tens of billions of light years, must possess its own unique configuration energy, just as transitions from one topology to another have their characteristic energy differences. Since both Schrodinger's wave equation of motion, as well as Einstein's gravitational field equations, presuppose an already given spacetime topology, transitions from one topology to another will not be describable by the wave equation, nor will the characteristic energy of a particular topology, i.e., the power input required to sustain this topology in existence for a period of time, be included as a gravitational source term for the field equations. Clearly, gravitational source terms interact according to general relativity only if they are contained within the self same topological manifold and so fluctuations in the sub-microscopic topology of spacetime, or the energy intrinsic to such fluctuations, must not be included in the gravitational source term, Ti,k, of the Einstein field equations.

02/98 Now fluctuations in the energy of the quantum vacuum must be extremely violent before expecting any gravitational effects. In other words, the energy of the vacuum fluctuations must approach the Planck energy before we are forced to give consideration to Quantum Gravity theory. But again, it is at precisely this stage at which spacetime topology begins fluctuate non-negligibly and potential source terms for Ti,k begin to "slip through the cracks." Considerations such as this may

provide a natural explanation for the alleged high energy cutoff of the gravitational source term within theories such as Sakharov's. QQ: Is establishment of the global spacetime metric equivalent to the establishment of a spacetime topology? No. 1/98 6/97 Because causal relationships are always describable in terms of sets of differential equations, these relationships must be supposed to inhere within a continuously differentiable manifold of determinate topological structure. Alterations in the topology of a continuously differentiable manifold cannot be described by a set of differential equations definable on the original manifold. This is why we do not expect that the energies of the submicroscopic topological fluctuations may comprise a contribution to a gravitational source term in the Einstein field equations. A supermanifold must ground the transformation of one topology into another nonequivalent topology such that this topological inequivalence is ultimately reducible within the supermanifold of higher order topological structure which remains constant throughout the lower order topological transformation. The formalism of General Relativity is not equipped to describe such a topological supermanifold. 7/97 This reminds us of attempts to ground the discontinuous change in the wavefunction which in between measurements evolves deterministically according to the Schrodinger equation of motion in terms of some nonlinear time-dependent version of the S-eqn. Notice that the transformation of one topology into a nonequivalent one necessitates a breaching of the original topological manifold introducing discontinuities which prevent the existence of any bridge functions being defined mediating the transformation which possess continuous differentiability. No consistent solutions to a given set of differential equations exists if the only possible solutions are functions which are themselves not continuously differentiable. All topological transformations must be described in terms of bridge functions which

cannot be defined on the manifolds being transformed and so all topological transformations must be mediated from outside all manifolds of determinate topological structure taking part in the topological transformations. Since a metric presupposes an embedding topological manifold, geometrodynamic fluctuations in spacetime topology cannot be described within general relativity theory. Projections of topological transformations in a given space onto a subspace may present the appearance of nontopological transformations within the smaller space. If a chance event yields meaning and significance, it is only because of a common, underlying (concrete) ground of the two things connected. The truly concrete, that is, the ultimate ground of Being, cannot be divided, but can only appear so. To entertain the notion of two separate grounds, themselves possessing no underlying and still more ultimate ground connecting them in the sense of making them, one with the other, (substantially) continuous, is to set up definitions in a manner which invites self-contradiction. We know that the action by which the continuum of space and time are constituted presupposes a kind of temporality, but one without scale or direction in which the connectivity of the pre-phenomenal is internal but at once without boundaries. July 1997

Delayed choice experiments discussion here.

. The point is that this idea leads to an infinite regress if we assume that the brain represents a closed system. A so-called state can only possess a concrete, as opposed to a merely abstract, significance if it is placed within an open context, itself not consistently treatable as a state or superstate, if you will. The attempt to impose a state description upon a temporally evolving dynamic, i.e., a open system, leads to a system which changes its state nondeterministically. The origin of the fluctuation Hamiltonian of a quantum mechanical system owes generally to describing the system with a merely approximate Hamiltonian leading to an approximate system wavefunction. The system undergoes transitions between its various approximate eigenenergies due to the

outside influence of the fluctuation Hamiltonian, H fluc. The quantum system with its fluctuation Hamiltonian is just an abstraction from the open-ended energy context of the quantum vacuum field itself, for when all sources of real particles and fields have been taken into account in the construction of the system Hamiltonian, a certain small fluctuation term remains which cannot be absorbed into the system Hamiltonian so as to define a purely time-independent system. This fluctuation term is owing to the existence of a quantum vacuum zero-point energy field. It is this term, what we will call, Hzpf, which prevents any quantum system from ever existing in a true energy eigenstate with , =

e-i

0

And this is why we have been saying that the fluctuations in vacuum energy are the cause of the time-dependent evolution of quantum systems generally. Local causal interactions obtain between the expectation values of given physical observables. Nonlocal causal interactions obtain between the instantaneous values of physical observables, i.e., is responsible for the existence of correlations between fluctuations. Expectation values of an observable can only be defined when the wavefunction in question, from which these values are derived, is bounded in space and time. Measurement of a quantum mechanical observable presupposes the presence of boundary conditions on the wavefunction representing the system in question. In this case, the wavefunction may be represented as a finite superposition of eigenfunctions of that observable. If a wavefunction is unbounded, then is must be represented as a continuum of an infinite superposition of eigenfunctions. July 1997

These eigenfunctions of such an infinite superposition cannot be individually normalized without the artifice of the delta Dirac function being included within the normalization integral. In other words, the eigenfunctions within a superposition continuum cannot be represented

within a Hilbert space. Consequently, Hilbert's action minimalization integral cannot be computed for a system represented by a continuum of eigenfunctions, i.e., for an unbounded wavefunction, and so such a system cannot be described by Einstein's gravitational field equations, since the field equations and the Hilbert action integral are precisely equivalent. We are saying that the stress-momentum-energy tensor, Ti,k,may only be nonvanishing provided that this tensor's associated eigenfunction is spatiotemporally bounded. The fundamental fluctuations in the vacuum's momentum-energy represent just the sort of unbounded action for which an action minimization integral cannot be defined. December 1997

An important observation in this connection is the fact that the gravitation energy in General Relativity cannot be localized in the specific sense that when one attempts to include the gravitational energy in the total stress-momentum-energy tensor of the field equations, a pseudotensor results which is not generally covariant. The energy of this pseudotensor is only conserved in certain specific coordinate systems, such as in harmonic coordinate systems. Parallel transport of a small volume in which the total energy is defined by this pseudotensor is not generally reversible and we do not here have a conservative force. It has been said that the inverse-square law breaks down in strongly curved spacetimes. This fact may well be related to the problem of the localization of gravitational energy within the theory of General Relativity. Thermodynamically, the vacuum momentum-energy field constitutes an exemplar par excellence of a thermal heat bath, the interaction with which by any other energy system will result in the appearance of irreversibility within this system's temporal evolution. We note here that the temporal evolution of the Schrodinger equation is, strictly speaking, reversible. Also, we noted elsewhere the very close similarity between the Schrodinger and Diffusion equations; more particularly, that a mere substitution of it = t' within the Schrodinger equation transforms it into the Diffusion equation.

An example of the sustaining of a phenomenal form against a continual change in the underlying ground is the degenerate wavefunctions. The wavefunction represents the most that can be known about a quantum system, but when degeneracy of the wavefunction exists, it is possible for the wavefunction to undergo temporal evolution while one or more of the observables grounded in the changing wavefunction persist unchanged. Q: Does the fact that a quantum system is in an energy superposition state presuppose that the system is undergoing fluctuations in its energy? A: In representing the wavefunction of a complex quantum system in terms of an approximate set of eigenfunctions, one necessarily introduces virtual transitions between the approximated eigenvalues of these eigenfunctions as a way of representing the influence of the relatively small fluctuation component of the Hamiltonian of the system. This is because an open system cannot be partitioned into dual disjoint sets which together descriptively exhaust the system. And so the system, not able to be unified at a purely formal level, must always manifest forms as dynamically changing if it manifests them at all. The system, in other words, will always possess a middle which cannot be excluded by any logical juxtaposition of formal, that is, dually opposite, categories and from out of which utterly novel forms will always be emerging in a way not explicable in terms of the forms which have been previously manifested by the system. This is, for example, why a perturbative analysis of a quantum mechanical system always yields a system which cannot be validly represented in an energy eigenstate. Still more, all three laws of thermodynamics are contradicted when the influences of the open system of the vacuum energy field are taken into account. The 1st Law of Thermodynamics: this is just the standard energy conservation law and energy is not conserved in virtual quantum processes. The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics: the entropy of all closed thermodynamic systems must increase as a result of processes taking place within this system. The quantum vacuum is not a spatially closed

system since its very action constitutes any local spacetime. Moreover the temporal evolution of all physical systems is reducible to changes in system energy, discretely or continuously. If the system is in an energy eigenstate, then only the phase of the system’s wavefunction evolves. But the absolute phase of a quantum mechanical system has no physical meaning within quantum theory - only relative phases have physical meaning. But if the two systems with a relative phase difference can be consistently described as a single system with a unique wavefunction, then the relative phases of the two “component” subsystems cannot be known without interacting with the system through some third system. So a quantum system in an energy eigenstate possesses no genuine or physical temporality. The 3rd Law of Thermodynamics: the energy of a perfectly ordered crystal at 0 degrees Kelvin is zero. The quantum vacuum possesses an ineradicable temperature. It also possesses an entropy and this vacuum is in continual interaction or energy exchange with all objects in spacetime. No crystal could exist in a "perfectly ordered" state so long as it exchanges energy with a thermal reservoir possessing entropy such as the quantum mechanical vacuum. Reversible systems therefore, contain data but do not actually contain information; however, such systems do potentially contain information, but not information with a predetermined content, or reference. There is a confusion of the direction of time with the temporal evolution of physical processes to states of progressively greater entropy. We are either referring to a global or cosmic time when we speak of the 'direction of time" or we are only speaking in this way metaphorically. But a global time is only definable if reality is a closed system. But since there is no place for irreversibility within a truly closed system, the notion of a direction of time makes no sense in either the case of a closed or an open cosmic system. The notion is incoherent in the case of an open system because of the incoherence of any notion of there being a global time which then might be supposed to be irreversible. In the case of a closed system, there is simply no possible basis for irreversibility within a system possessing a finite and unchanging number of discrete states.

Mathematically speaking, a minimization integral does not "exist" if the integral, or various parameters of its argument, i.e., of which this integral is a function, do not satisfy certain boundary conditions. In other words, it is only by virtue of nonlocal quantum correlations that this system might unify itself so as to possess an objective simultaneity. But correlations within a system imply convergent temporal evolution of the systems component processes. There is, however, no place for the phenomenon of convergence within either deterministic computational statespaces, nor within an ergodic dynamical system. Information is not here a conserved physical quantity and so if in some context energy and information are inter-definable, this is because within this context the principle of the conservation of energy does not strictly hold. March 1998

Conservation laws only apply to what may properly be termed substances. Prior to the advent of atomic theory in the 19th Century, matter was thought to be a substance and therefore a conserved quantity. With the advent of the theory of Special Relativity and Einstein’s' famous equation, E = mc2, matter was seen to be not conserved in some physical processes because of its interconvertibility into energy, itself thought to be the physical quantity which was truly conserved. But in light of advances of quantum theory, particularly within the subfield of relativistic quantum field theory, which treats of virtual particle/field reactions, it is known now that not even "energy" is conserved and so can no longer be considered to be the ultimate underlying conserved substance or reality. To what substance can modern physics point which is interconvertible with energy and which obeys a conservation law, qualifying as the substance of physical reality, if you will? March 1998

Because energy is ultimately not conserved, there is a profound difficulty in making the notion of objective space and time coherent. For space may only be objectively defined operationally in terms of the spatial relationships of bodies composed of some conserved substance. Moreover, time must be also operationally defined if it is to be understood as a genuinely objective concept, that is, in terms of the more

primitive notions of simultaneity, temporal order, and duration. Since there may be no underlying permanent substance to render the existent objectively real, space and time must be reduced to being merely relative and phenomenal. Another reason to believe that a physical continuity equation does not apply to information is that information appears to reside in between the discrete energy levels of crystalline, or quasi-crystalline quantum systems, and so information is not here really localizable, in principle. Any functionalist theory of mind must run up against mental states for which it cannot supply corresponding functional states. This is because, in essence, identically prepared quantum mechanical states, themselves constituting the most exacting definition of functionalist brain states, frequently produce a wide variety of outcomes whenever measurements are performed on them with respect to observables incompatible with that observable with respect to which the quantum system was prepared. It is not possible to define a deterministic trajectory in phase space if the phase space of the system is expanding, say, due to the expansion of the Universe. This is because no non-arbitrary one-to-one functions of the phase space variables can be defined to represent the deterministic evolution of the system through the expanding phase space. In other words, there is no non-dynamical embedding "superstatespace" in terms of which the evolution of the trajectories with respect to the state space variables of the expanding state space may be defined. We always gain knowledge of a system's behavior through the positing of a determinsitic model of the system, but at the expense of relegating understanding of the motive mainspring of the system to the mysterious. Kinematics ignores the dynamics which sustains the illusion of the permanence of the entities with respect to which the kinematic variables are defined: Time cannot be captured within a formal description. EXPERIMENT: If very sensitive spectroscopic observations can be made of the deflected stellar images predicted by general relativity to

occur during a total solar eclipse, then chromatic dispersion of the various optical wavelengths may be observed indicating that the true mechanism of gravitational light deflection is not on account of spacetime curvature produced by the Sun's mass, but due to the refraction of the starlight on its passing through a vacuum of radially decreasing zeropoint energy density. We would expect the zero-point density of 3momentum of the vacuum to actually increase in step with the radially decreasing vacuum energy density. Since we assume that in free space the fluctuations in vacuum four-momentum (which are either 0 or fall outside the scope of Ti,k ) are equipartatively distributed among the four distinct four-momentum components, any decrease in the density of energy fluctuations in the vacuum would be expressed in an equal increase in each of the 3-momentum components (if geometry, i.e., curvature, is not taken into account) equal to the cube root of Evac Now it is the geometry of the matter distribution as well as its density distribution which determines the geometry of the redistribution of the vacuum’s four-momentum fluctuation components. 06/98 DISCUSSION: This is due to the general properties of refractive media where wavelengths of different energy (different size ) traversing a refractive medium must follow slightly different trajectories with shorter wavelengths being refracted more than longer wavelengths. Since the vacuum's zero-point energy is the zero-calibration of all energy measuring instruments, it is expected that the energy of a photon passing through a vacuum of increasing zero-point energy will experience an apparent shift in its observed energy ( gravitational redshift ) commensurate to the change in the zero-point energy between the point of its emission and the point of its absorption ( by an energy measuring instrument ). Gravitational time dilation is also explicable in terms of the proposed vacuum mechanism of gravitation. EXPERIMENT: Observed decreases in the barrier tunneling probabilities within a "de-tuned" resonant cavity. This cavity would enclose the potential energy barrier and will possess a specific geometry

such that vacuum electromagnetic field fluctuations are suppressed which possess an energy approximating the difference in energy between the tunneling particle and the potential barrier. EXPERIMENT: Set up a series of Casimir capacitor plates in which the separation between the plates is changed by a discrete amount as one moves in line from one plate to the next. Starting from the end of the series where the plate separation is smallest, project a coherent beam of photons through the series of plates and observe the shift in the beam's frequency. The fractional change in the vacuum electromagnetic field energy density should give the fractional change in the frequency (energy) of the coherent light beam. The beam may also be projected through the series of Casimir plates at a small angle and the amount of refraction of the beam measured. There is a practical problem concerning the interpretation of the energy uncertainty of unstable "elementary" particles. Physicists do not seem to have convinced themselves as to whether this energy uncertainty which is responsible for the eventual decay of all unstable particles is to be understood as being inherent in the structure of the particle itself, or as inherent in the energy structure of the vacuum which perhaps induces the decay of the particle through perturbing energy fluctuations of a fundamental nature. The fact that a particle possesses an uncertainty in its energy, however arbitrarily small, implies that there is a nonzero finite probability that the particle will experience a fluctuation in its energy large enough to induce decay of the particle. According to Milloni, a preeminent thinker on the subject of the quantum vacuum, the energy uncertainty of an unstable excited atom, for instance, is owing not only to the perturbative influence of the vacuum electromagnetic field, but also to what is called "radiation reaction." Both of these components play a formally equal role in composing the overall energy uncertainty, /\E, of the unstable atom. Of course, the uncertainties in any observable, not just in the energy, are, we might well say, radically overdetermined. This is because, for example, in the case of the energy uncertainty, there is a truly indefinite number of different admixtures of eigenenergies which, if superposed, will sum together to give one an energy uncertainty of

precisely /\E, whatever /\E happens to be for the system one is considering. /\p x /\x >= h and the tunneling of a particle across a potential energy barrier can therefore be interpreted in two complementary ways: one may suppose that the tunneling particle possesses a positional uncertainty which is greater than or comparable to the width of the barrier, or one might suppose, contrariwise, that the momentum uncertainty of the particle is such that there is a likelihood that the particle will experience a momentum fluctuation strong enough to "boost" the particle "over" the potential barrier. Either interpretation seems to adequately model the particle's tunneling across the potential barrier. The first interpretation relies on the positional uncertainty inherent per the wave description and the second interpretation on the momental uncertainty per the particle description. In the first case we are thinking of a momentum fluctuation of a wavelike entity with positional uncertainty whereas in the second we are thinking of a fluctuation in the particle's position to which is associated a momentum uncertainty. We may say that the momentum uncertainty of a particle is inherent in the particle while its positional uncertainty is induced by the attendant fluctuations in its momentum whereas the positional uncertainty of a wave is inherent while its momentum uncertainty is induced by the attendant fluctuations in the wave's position. 07/98 In the Fourier expansion of a function of x and t, f(x,t), which possesses discontinuous endpoints, we find that no matter who many harmonics are added together, there will continue to exist at these endpoints both an undershoot and an overshoot. This is what is called Gibb’s phenomenon. Interestingly, the magnitude of the overshoot is unaffected by the number harmonics one adds together to construct the Fourier transform, F(w). In order for the function to be “properly” expressed in terms of F(w), either we must deviate from perfect orthogonality of the energy eigenfunctions which we are summing together to approximate f(x,t), or we must not permit f(x,t) to be truly discontinuous. This

suggests that an interaction of amplitudes corresponding to extremely low probabilities underlie the dynamics of quantum tunneling phenomena.07/98 Spacetime fluctuations are related to momentum-energy fluctuations in the sense that the more violent the spacetime flux, the more calm becomes the momentum-energy flux. The most precise spacetime trajectory would them be determined by fluctuations of momentumenergy of the greatest possible violence! A serious problem for general relativity presented here is that violent momentum-energy fluctuations should normally be associated with equally violent gravitational field fluctuations, i.e., gravitational waves or great energy, but this is inconsistent with mild fluctuations in the spacetime metric. 07/98 12/96 No massive body can travel faster than the velocity of light because there is no stable, continuously existing medium, as in the case of the "still air" for sound, which supports the propagation of light. Rather, the quantum mechanical vacuum, specifically the quantum vacuum electromagnetic field, "supports" the propagation of real electromagnetic waves, i.e., real photons, in the particle description. This medium supportive of the transmission of light is composed of vacuum fluctuations of momentum-energy otherwise known as zeropoint fluctuations of the vacuum. This quantum vacuum cannot serve as an absolute reference frame relative to which an observer could move at some finite velocity, and this is why the velocity of light must always have the same value, c, regardless of the state of motion of any observer. What prevents the vacuum from being seized upon as an absolute reference frame is the fact that it is composed of energy fluctuations which possess a positional uncertainty, /\x, and a time uncertainty, /\t, such that /\x//\t = < c >. We say , < c > instead of c because locally, that is, over submicroscopic distances, the velocity of light can be exceeded within "submicroscopic times." This is all to say that, the velocity of light, c, = < c > over distances, x, > /\x over times, t, > /\t. This suggests

that the Minkowski light cone representation of spacetime must begin to break down as one approaches the vertex of the light cone - the boundaries between the tiny region, absolute past/here-now/absolute future, and the elsewhere region must lose its neat rectilinearity as one approaches spacetime dimensions, x,t < /\x, /\t. It is as though spacetime possessed a kind of "granularity" made up of three dimensional "cells" of minimum dimension, /\x, and lifetime, /\t. The lifetime of a given cell may be re-expressed as a frequency, 1//\t, so that we may think of each "cell" as being continuously recreated or reformed at frequency, f = 1//\t, where /\t is, again, the lifetime of the cell. The energy, /\E, of each cell is constantly being absorbed by the vacuum and recreated at the frequency, f, described above. An analogy with one's personal computer will serve to help us understand how what has been said thus far bears on the problem of the origin of the finite, not-to-be-exceeded value of the speed of light, c. It is obvious upon a moment's reflection that if one "grabs" an icon on the left hand side of one's computer screen by "clicking on it" once and "dragging" this icon across the screen that one cannot move the icon in this way arbitrarily quickly, but there is some precisely definable limit to how fast any object represented on the screen can move across it. This limit, if one is talking about an "icon" the size of a single pixel, is determined quite simply from two easily ascertainable parameters, the width of a "pixel," i.e., the minimum image length scale or resolution of the computer screen, and the clock rate of the computer's CPU, or central processing unit. For example, if the clock rate of the CPU is 100Mhz, that is, 100 million (108) cycles per second, and the pixel (assumed to be square) dimension is, say, 100 microns ( 10-4) meters, then the theoretical limit to how fast a pixelsized "represented object" may move across the computer monitor is about 108 x 10-4 = 104 meters/sec. This is an extremely high velocity, and the actual practical limit is probably several orders of magnitude smaller than this figure, say, around 10 meters/sec for an average sized icon. The reason for this difference in the theoretical and practical limits in the "represented object," velocity, or the "representational velocity" for a particular computer monitor we will go into in greater detail a little later. Suffice to say here that the crux of the problem of the finite limit

on propagation speed has everything to do with the fact that the "objects" which we have been considering are, in reality, not objects at all, but are merely "represented objects," or "object representations." As long as one supposes, perhaps unreflectingly, that "physical objects" are hard and massy, composed of some simple, undifferentiated "stuff" which persists through time indefinitely because quite indifferent to the "passage of time," and as long as one conceives of space as a "veritable emptiness" through which matter may indifferently pass, then the idea of an absolute limit to the velocity of masses through "the void" must seem as arbitrary as the gravitational action between masses separated by an empty void seems inherently mysterious. But according to modern quantum theory, all operators corresponding to physical observables are decomposable in terms of two fundamental operators, `A and `At, the annihilation and creation operators. This is what is called the 2nd quantization formalism, and this theory supplants the semi-classical, "old quantum theory" of Bohr, Rutherford, and Planck. The so-called "solar system" model of the atom which is still being taught in high schools throughout the advanced, industrialized world is an outstanding artifact of this early version of quantum theory. Thus far, the analogy with the computer strongly suggests the type of mechanism which may lie behind the universal speed limit represented by the velocity of light if one associates the pixel length and (clock rate)-1 with the inherent length and time scales of spacetime, /\x and /\t, if, indeed, these exist. This would be possible if the energy and momentum uncertainties, /\E and /\p, which engender /\x, /\t, could be traced to the fluctuating momentum-energy of the quantum vacuum itself. We may argue in favor of this in the following way. There are two ways to interpret the decay of an unstable nucleus through the ejection of an alpha particle. The traditional approach is in terms of the positional uncertainty of the alpha particle which is "ejected" This particle has a nonzero probability of being found outside the nucleus due to positional uncertainty of the particle, /\r. An alternative approach is to think in terms of the energy uncertainty of this ejected particle. By virtue of a nonzero energy uncertainty, there is a

small probability that the particle will experience an energy boost, /\E, greater than the nuclear binding energy associated with the strong nuclear force binding the particle to its nucleus. Traditionally, this energy fluctuation was thought to have originated within the nucleus itself. It is more likely that this fluctuation energy is supplied by the quantum vacuum in which the unstable nucleus is embedded and with which it is in continual interaction ( momentum-energy exchange. Call the energy of an energy fluctuation, Ex , and call any fluctuation in energy larger than Ex, Ez. If the energy uncertainty, ^E, is thought to be associated with a particle itself, then we face the serious problem of a nonlinearity in the probability distribution function describing the spectrum of energy eigenstates which comprise the energy uncertainty of the particle. This is because the occurrence of an energy fluctuation, Ez > Ex, implies that no fluctuation in energy, Ex < E < Ez, has already been experienced by the particle, for this would have meant the previous dissolution of the particle, whereupon the probability of energy fluctuation, Ez, of the particle's intrinsic energy would become 0. So we see that the probability of the occurrence of perturbation energy, Ez > Ex, i.e., P(Ez), must be modified so that the new probability, taking into account the interdependence of all perturbation probabilities for energies, Ez > E > Ex, that is, P'(Ez), becomes, [ 1 - S(dP(E)) on [E0 to Ex] = S(dP'(E)) on [Ex to E ] This situation does not lead to a discontinuity in the perturbation energy probability function, however, as [ 1 - S(dP(E))], is exactly zero at the "cusp" where the modified probability function, P'(E), begins and the original probability function, P(E), ends, in the composite function, which is given below,

P = P(E), P = [1 - S(dP(E))],

for 0 < E < Ex for E > Ex

However, if the original probability function, P(E), is normalized, then the new, modified probability function, P'(E), cannot be normalized. If, on the other hand, we normalize this new function, we then find that the predicted probabilities for each of the energy eigenstates, which together comprise the total energy uncertainty of the quantum mechanical system in question, will no longer conform to the results of experiment because the original probability distribution function, P(E), is now no longer properly normalized. This is because the original wavefunction, upon which the perturbation energy probability function is based, is, in fact, the correct wavefunction - the modified probability function, given above, is simply false: very simply, we must not interpret the energy uncertainty of, e.g., unstable subatomic particles, as residing with the particles themselves, but with the quantum mechanical vacuum state with which these particles continually interact, via constant energy exchange with this vacuum; more accurately, the particles, themselves, are constituted by various energy exchanges between the vacuum and itself and the particle is continually being reconstituted out of the continual transformation of this vacuum energy. It is the organization of this vacuum energy into a form represented by the particle which more or less possesses permanence or persistence through time that we normally think of as intrinsic to a particle as such, not the vacuum energy itself, since it is the cyclic replenishing of the particle's energy out of this vacuum which itself marks the passage of time for the particle. This argument for the vacuum as the origin of particle energy uncertainty follows from the assumption that the products of the spontaneous disintegration of the original particle are collectively described by the original particle's wavefunction even after the components have separated into which the particle has disintegrated. Here we have a situation which is quite dissimilar in principle to the abrupt change to the structure of the Hydrogen atom's ground state

energy induced by the sudden switching on of a magnetic field in its vicinity. The Hamiltonian of the Hydrogen atom is altered through the sudden addition of the energy of the magnetic field, however, and this, in turn, precipitously alters the wavefunction of the Hydrogen atom which is calculated from the Hamiltonian function via the time-independent Schrodinger equation. Quantum physicists will say that the energy levels of the Hydrogen atom were degenerate with respect to the spin quantum number until the switching on of the magnetic field coupling to the atom's spin altered the Hamiltonian, and, hence, its attendant wavefunction. The origin of the discontinuous change in the Hydrogen atom's wavefunction is as much due to the intrinsic spin structure of the atom as it is to the sudden appearance of a magnetic field to which the spin couples. In the case of the spontaneous disintegration of the unstable particle, no new term need be added to the particle's Hamiltonian to account for the disintegration event which was not already present prior to this event and this is why no change in the particle's wavefunction, discontinuous or otherwise, is observed, but, as we indicated already, the very same wavefunction suffices to describe the products of the disintegration as were sufficient to describe the particle during the moments leading up to this inherently unpredictable event. It is simply that the original Hamiltonian describing the total energy of the unstable particle all along contained an energy term which was unaffected by the disintegration event. This energy term must not have been associated with the original atom, but was independent of it and equally present both before and after the disintegration took place: the vacuum energy term of the Hamiltonian. The influence of the vacuum energy term of the Hamiltonian is probably generally responsible for the phenomenon of entanglement of widely separated quantum states which had previously interacted. The nonlocal connectivity of the local vacuum energy terms in the Hamiltonians of the quantum states, considered separately, may provide the mechanism for such entanglement of quantum states. 01/97 Perhaps the same wavefunction describes the products of the disintegration because the total energy of the products remains the same

as that of the particle just prior to the disintegration event and what makes this possible is a change in the vacuum energy term of the Hamiltonian which compensates the changes to all the other energy terms, conserving the total energy. Or perhaps, rather, the change in energy "causing" the disintegration, because h and ^p^x > h. We know that within a curved spacetime, say, in the vicinity of a massive spherical body, there is a general relativistic length contraction along the spherical body's radial direction while at the same time there is relativistic dilation of time. If we are considering virtual particles, then the > sign appearing in the two formulas, above, may be replaced by an = sign so that a dilation and a contraction in the variables, ^t and ^x, respectively, must be coupled with an inversely proportional shrinkage and dilation in the dual variables, ^E and ^p, respectively. In this way, the energy of the vacuum decreases as one moves into regions of increasing gravitational potential while the momentum of the vacuum, if you will, increases along this direction. If the vacuum momentum is correctly described by a four-vector of conserved magnitude, then the vacuum momentum may only increase with increasing strength of local gravitational potential at the expense of a compensating decrease in the vacuum's momentum along an orthogonal direction. It is the decrease in the vacuum's momentum in the direction orthogonal to the radius of our spherical massive body with which we must associate the decrease in the vacuum's energy along the body's radial direction. So we obtain what perhaps appears to be a trivial result: the momentum of the vacuum along a certain direction may only be increased by utilizing the energy of the vacuum itself associated with its momentum in directions orthogonal to the direction of increasing momentum, so that local mass distributions do not, themselves, provide the energy required to support the existence of a local gravitational field; the effect of mass is merely to redirect the vacuum momentum, utilizing the locally available energy of the vacuum itself; to put this in the language of Einstein: mass does not produce spacetime curvature, it locally alters the global curvature of spacetime.

This may all seem like an exercise in splitting hairs, but there is an important difference in these two interpretations in the relationship of mass to spacetime curvature: if mass, or what amounts to mass, alone, is responsible for the existence of spacetime curvature, then an "empty" universe may not possess a globally curved spacetime. On the other hand, if mass merely locally alters the background spacetime curvature, then there is nothing to prevent the existence of so-called empty, curved spacetimes. It is not correct to say that energy and information are interdefinable so that if energy is a conserved quantity, then information is also a conserved quantity. A simple counterexample suffices here. It is possible for transitions to occur, within a gas, say, where both the entropy and the energy of the gas are conserved, even though the different configurations between which the transitions occur may be thought of as representing different quantities of information so that information is not itself conserved. The notions of energy and entropy are separable from the notion of information because the former are only definable with respect to a closed system of a finite number of distinct state space configurations while the latter is always defined with respect to something outside the system in which its coded configuration is defined. It is not possible for one thing to represent another unless there be at least two distinct levels of description available to the system within which the representation is to be constructed. If we waive the requirement of an "external" observer who is to give different meanings to the different configurations, then information and energy are not interdefinable. Another reason for not equating the two, i.e., energy and information, is on account of the existence of energy degeneracy. Since different wavefunctions may possess the same associated energy eigenfunctions, it should be possible for a quantum mechanical system possessing energy degeneracy to undergo arbitrary transitions from one degenerate eigenfunction to another without the changes beiing associated with changes in any definable QM observables.

If the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics is essentially correct, i.e., where the wavefunction is a probability wave representing the state of an observer's knowledge so that it is indeed the consciousness of the observer which is responsible for collapsing the wavefunction and not the physical disturbance to the wavefunction provoked by his measuring device, then it should be possible to carry out a "delayed choice" type experiment : a standard two slit interference set up is constructed where two video cameras are substituted for two conscious observers, one "viewing" both slits (camera A) and another camera "viewing" the backstop where either an interference pattern or a random "buckshot" pattern of photon strikes appears. If this experiment is performed in the absence of a human observer and then afterwards, perhaps years later, the film in the back of cameras A and B are examined it will be found that the order in which the films are examined will make a difference in whether the film from camera B contains recorded on it either an interference pattern of photon waves or a "buckshot" patter of photon "bullets." In other words, if the film in camera A is examined first, then an observer possesses knowledge as to which slit each photon passed through so that the wavefunction of the paramagnetic particles coating the surface of the film in camera A undergo a collapse from the previous superposition state leading to an interference pattern to a positional eigenstate leading to the "buckshot" pattern of photon "strikes." On the other hand, if the back of camera B is opened up first and the film examined, then one finds that an interference pattern has been recorded on the film. But what now for the film in the back of camera A which had been set up to "view" and record events at the double-slit? Should not the series of images recorded on this film be smeared out just enough to prevent us from telling which photons traveled through which slits? p44If this is the case, then the images stored on the film of camera B may be used to tell us whether camera A in fact did of did not record the "actual paths" taken by the photons, though the double-slit superposition state associated with the photon interference pattern does not require any unique and mysterious influence of human consciousness upon the results of the experiment,

but amounts to nothing more than the effect of camera A in blocking the "pilot waves" traveling through the slits through which the photons are observed not to be traveling. 3/97 This preposterously counter-intuitive thought experiment can be defused if one requires that merely the possibility of an observer gaining knowledge about which slit the electrons went through would be sufficient to collapse the electron position wavefunctions so as to produce the "buckshot" pattern of electron strikes on the phosphorescent backstop. This is actually what has been demonstrated by several ingenious "delayed-choice" experiments which have been performed during the 1990's. And it is the position of the camera relative to the slits which, of course, determines this. But what if we could assure nature, as it were, that despite the appropriate positioning of the camera in front of the double-slit, the observer, or any observer, would be unable to take advantage of the appropriate physical arrangement of the camera in order to determine which slit the electrons go through. I believe that, in this case, then the interference pattern would, again, reappear on the phosphorescent backstop! If this were true, then the observer would regain his mysterious status with respect to wavefunction collapses. One must, to wit, assure, first of all, that it is possible to establish a closed system within which the experimental apparatus is to be contained, in order to, in turn, assure that, no matter how large a physical arena this quantum experiment is performed in, the observer will not possess the possibility of knowing the trajectories of the electrons. Not all closed experimental situations can assure this, but it is just that a closing off of the experimental setup from the rest of an open reality must be achievable to assure the inability of the observer to draw on hidden resources to divine the trajectories of the electrons from their source to the backstop. This suggests that the observer's ability to collapse the wavefunction consists in a peculiar connection which he is able to make with an open-ended reality, a reality which, as alluded to earlier, is therefore indeterminate, i.e., nondeterministic. It is interesting to note that it is only within a closed physical system, where the boundary conditions of the vacuum field are changing only nonadiabatically, that a

superposition state may be supposed to exist. Presumably, the closed system cannot adequately accommodate the phenomenon of the observer's consciousness, which is what disturbs the system resulting in a collapse of the superposition state which heretofore existed within it, and this, just by virtue of the mere possibility that the observer may obtain knowledge of the system's state with respect to the superposition observables. Throughout this discussion, we must not lose sight of the fact that the wavefunction itself does not actually represent anything physically real or measurable, and so all purported interactions occurring between wavefunctions must be realized in terms of the interaction of their associated probability density functions. A superposition state is only defined where each of the component superposed wavefunctions has an associated probability via the square of its amplitude although here the assignment of unique probabilities to both the interference pattern - a turn of events which, on the Copenhagen interpretation, is determined solely by the decision of the conscious observer as to which camera, A or B, he/she opens first. Remember that in the theory of quantum mechanics a particular event only possesses a probability of 1 if it has already occurred. It is in this sense in which we speak of the superposition state as a combination of quantum states, no one of which is real in itself. The pre-Socratic philosopher, Parmenides, was of that philosophical tradition which considered the ultimate metaphysical question to be "Why is there something rather than nothing?" And he is noted for having proclaimed "Nothing does not exist." But he considered that all real change necessarily involved the instant by instant creation of new attributes ex nihilo. Parmenides concluded from this that change was, itself, impossible and the universe; being cannot come from nonbeing, therefore the universe is a static and indestructible closed system; time was for Parmenides a kind of tenacious illusion. In the present day, owing to the advent and development of the Quantum Theory, the suggested reformulation of this most fundamental metaphysical question

is: "Why is there Information rather than Chaos?" For those persons for whom the question, "why is there something rather than nothing," is meaningful, belief in the existence of a transcendent reality beyond space and time, and what is more, beyond the most general dichotomy, the dual opposite categories, existence vs. nonexistence, the granting of the being of Deity is theoretically but a small step. Such persons merely have to be convinced of the necessity of Will within the realm beyond Representation. For other persons, this most fundamental metaphysical questions is, as Martin Gardner points out, "cognitively meaningless." This reformulation constitutes, almost by itself, the answer to its precursor: the pre-Socratic question "Why is there something rather than nothing?" is insoluble in its demand for a relation between being and nonbeing apart from their mutual exclusiveness whereas the modern counterpart to this question does not at all demand from us the impossible as there are many examples, both empirical and mathematical, where chaotic systems acquire order through selforganization or ordered systems become chaotic through an increase in entropy. But what, you may ask, is contained within the Quantum Theory which suggests this reformulation? Very simply, the Quantum Theory does not treat the vacuum as a veritable emptiness, but rather as a medium of chaotic fluctuations of positive and negative energy which cancel each other, averaging out to zero net energy over distances larger than an atomic diameter, say. Subatomic particles, the penultimate constituents of matter come into existence when energy fluctuations over a small region of the vacuum respond to each other's presence through the accidental formation of feedback paths among themselves. These feedback structures may remain stable for only extremely fleeting periods of time or they may become robust and persist against their chaotic backdrop for longer periods permitting the formation of more complex hierarchical structures. In terms of information theory, the vacuum is filled with an infinite number of messages crossing it to and fro from every direction; material particles are constituted by more messages being exchanged within this region than between this region and the "outside" of this region. On this interpretation, matter does not

respond instantaneously to accelerations (possesses inertia) owing to a communication bottleneck existing between its interior and the surrounding vacuum; matter cannot respond to the world in "real time," but must take time out to "process" the coded instructions which it receives from its "inputs." One need here only compare the ease with which a single gnat can change its direction in flight ( to avoid an obstacle, say) to the difficulties involved when an entire swarm of gnats, ore a swarm of swarms of gnats, for that matter, attempts to perform the same maneuver based on the intelligence ( in the military sense) of a small group of harbinger gnats. These chaotic fluctuations of vacuum energy are a manifestation of the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. this principle states a numerical relationship between the dual physical quantities position / momentum and time / energy. The bridging constant between these dual quantities is Planck's constant, h, and the exact expression of this relation is: X*P = h/2pi or T*E = h/2pi, which is derived from Planck's older relation, E = h * f; where E is energy (Joules), f is frequency (hertz), X is distance (meters), P is momentum and T is time (seconds); h is, of course, Planck's constant which has units of Joule-seconds. There is a more sophisticated and complete matrix algebraic statement of the principle, but this need not concern us here. Heisenberg's uncertainty principle is an epistemological one as it rigidly specifies how the accuracy in our knowledge of one physical quantity affects the accuracy of our determination of the remaining paired quantity. Heisenberg's principle can be obtained by generalizing Planck's relation in terms of the matrix algebraic expression: p*q - q*p = h/2pi x I .

If consciousness is, itself, required to collapse the wave-function, then consciousness must originate in the interaction of uncollapsed wavefunctions. This suggests that the wavefunctions interacting with one another within consciousness are of the “already collapsed” variety, that is the perceptual representations of wavefunctions all interact based upon a subluminal propagation of mutual influence. Quantum wavefunctions which has not yet collapsed are capable of interacting with one another at a distance instantaneously and this sort of phenomenon is referred to by Physicists as the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen, or E.P.R. effect. There are two basic schools of the Quantum Theory. Where they differ is in their interpretation of the stuatus of Heisenberg's uncertainty principle. One school maintains that this uncertainty is due merely to the practical limitations of observation, that is; the uncertainty is only epistemological in nature. The other school maintains that this uncertainty is a theoretical limitation, that is; the uncertainty is ontological in character. The dispute between these two schools is solved easily enough, however. The reason for the momentum fluctuation spectrum of an electron contained within a quantum well being identical to the spectrum of possible discrete energy transitions between possible quantum well energy levels may be on account of the following simple observation. Such transitions downward by a real electron are stimulated to occur either by real or virtual photons while such transitions upward by a virtual electron are stimulated to occur likewise either by a real or virtual photon, and the spectrum of such virtual photons represents that of the vacuum electromagnetic waves with which the bound electron can resonate with and with which it can exchange energy. Since the photon propagates through vacuum part of the time as a electron/ positron pair, and in a gravitational field the density of virtual fermion/antifermion pairs is somewhat decreased, it follows that the velocity of the photon through this modified vacuum will be correspondingly decreased. It follows from this that the energy density of the vacuum must vary proportionally to the cube of the local value of the speed of light within the gravitational field-laden, and hence, modified vacuum. This may

similarly be interpreted as the energy density of the vacuum being proportional to the inverse cube of the frequency of vacuum electromagnetic waves. This is just the relationship of vacuum energy density to virtual photon frequency which renders the quantum vacuum perfectly Lorenz-invariant. In Nature, Oct. 19, p(574), the time required for quantum mechanical tunneling of an electron across a Josephson junction was measured. This result means that there is some meaning which can be attached to the velocity of the particle during its act of quantum tunneling. Sudden, nonadiabatic compression of the Casimir plates should result in the spontaneous emission of photons by the vacuum. Similarly, nonadiabatic expansion of tightly compressed plates should result in the spontaneous absorption of some real photons which happen to be within the geometry of the plates at this time. NOTE: This statement may not be true because the Einstein coefficient of spontaneous absorption is identically zero; the coefficients of spontaneous emission, and hence, of stimulated absorption and emission, may be changed through altering the vacuum electromagnetic energy density utilizing Casimir plates, resonant cavities, etc. The Universe might be described by a wavefunction representing its tunneling through a hyperspherical barrier, in four real spatial dimensions. The quantum tunneling of the Universe through this hyperspherical barrier may be alternately described as the collapse of a false vacuum state and the subsequent creation of free particle wavefunctions propagating along an imaginary axis of a four dimensional hypersphere of 3 real + 1 imaginary spatial dimension. The probability density of this wavefunction adjusts as time passes reflecting the increasing uncertainty of its would-be position eigenstate. Any vector at a point where its scalar product, with the wavenumbers of the eigenfunction expansion (of the universal wavefunction), is zero is assigned an imaginary coefficient reflecting its being rotated 90owith respect to the wavenumber set of the eigenfunction expansion. There

was a recently announced discovery that the linear Hubble relationship between galactic distances and recession rates does not strictly hold, but that the recession velocities are distributed discretely with increasing distance, each velocity being roughly an integral multiple of 72 Km/sec. These observation suggest two distinct but related possibilities. One, that the initial collapse of the quantum mechanical vacuum state occurred in discrete stages in much the same way that an excited electron decays from a highly excited state. Two, that the Universe tunneled, quantum mechanical fashion, out of a hyperspherical potential barrier where, as in the usual case, the transmission coefficient varied sinusoidally with the wavenumber. The vacuum electromagnetic field is said to be incompressible, but this is not strictly true. The vacuum electromagnetic field actually appears to decrease in energy density when confined within a resonant cavity of decreasing volume. This seems to suggest that the energy density of the vacuum electromagnetic field is in a sense negative. We may think of the effect of shrinking the resonant cavity upon the photons present within this cavity in two distinct ways: 1) The photons wavelengths are simply compressed by the cavity shrinkage factor or 2) The zero-point of the vacuum electromagnetic field is altered by a certain fraction so that the energy of photons within the cavity "appear" to be greater (relative to the new zero-point) by this same fraction. Of course, the first alternative appears more intuitively evident but embodies the simplistic assumption that the photons within the cavity possess some permanent and abiding existence rather than being a packet of energy which is continually being emitted (created) and absorbed (annihilated) by the fluctuating electromagnetic vacuum field. If a photon is in a momentum eigenstate, then the position of this photon along its translation axis is totally uncertain. We say therefore that in the position representation of the photon's wavefunction that the probability density of photons along the particular photon's translation axis is

exactly zero. Consequently, a photon or photon beam which is in a momentum eigenstate - and hence an energy eigenstate also - does not alter the probability versus frequency distribution function (along its translation axis) for virtual photons of like eigenenergy. This may be seen to follow from the fact that an increased likelihood of finding a photon of a particular eigenenergy within a certain spatial interval means that the probability vs. frequency distribution function in this region experiences a peak at the frequency corresponding to this eigenenergy. The rates of stimulated emission and absorption of electromagnetic radiation at a particular frequency are proportional to the density of the ambient radiation at this frequency. The constants of proportionality are the Einstein coefficients of emission and absorption, respectively. It was stated earlier as a general principle that all physical processes were mediated through the exchange of energy between matter and the vacuum, the reservoir of energy uncertainty. This principle may be made more specific by invoking the Einstein relationships for electromagnetic radiation emission and absorption as the mechanism for all energy emission - absorption, that is, for all forms of energy exchange, so that the rates at which all physical processes take place becomes proportional to the spectral energy density of the fluctuating boson fields of the vacuum - in accordance with our earlier intuitions. this assignment of the Einstein mechanism ( for want of a more convenient term) for physical processes in general depends upon the implicit assumption that in the absence of stimulated emission (and absorption) the coefficients of spontaneous emission and absorption are identical - just as are the coefficients of stimulated emission and absorption are identical in the absence of spontaneous emission. But the problem here is that there really is no such thing as spontaneous absorption - as noted before this condition would violate the principle of energy conservation. Spontaneous emission appears to only occur to electrons which have already been elevated to excited energy levels through stimulated absorption - in other words the energy fluctuations of the vacuum serve merely to trigger the decay of excited states produced through ambient electromagnetic radiation. However, this would not be

the case if spontaneous absorption applied only to energy in the form of virtual particles. The lifetime of virtual particle is determined by the uncertainty principle and therefore the absorption of these particles out the vacuum does not violate conservation of energy. It must be observed here that the assignment of the value ) to the coefficient of spontaneous absorption is only required by the assumption that the energy density of the vacuum is itself zero. A number of experiments on vacuum cavity resonance suggest that spontaneous emission rates are suppressed by imposing boundary conditions upon the electromagnetic vacuum. It is our deepest suspicion that the fraction by which the emission rate is suppressed is equal to the fraction by which the density of the electromagnetic vacuum is reduced through the imposed boundary conditions. In the chapter on nonclassical light in the work, Light and Quantum Fluctuations, a correspondence is drawn between the effect of a dielectric medium within a certain region of the vacuum and the alternate introduction of specific boundary conditions upon this vacuum, say, utilizing conducting plates, resonant cavities, etc. In this chapter it was concluded that the fractional increase in the index of refraction is directly proportional to the fractional increase in the electromagnetic energy density of the vacuum with the wavenumber being also altered by this fraction but with the frequency being unaltered by the dielectric medium so that a fractionally decreased local value of the speed of light results. How do we represent a trajectory despite the fact that the motion of the particle must be continually recast in terms of a time varying set of basis functions. This time variation of the basis functions must contain an element of randomness, or unpredictability since otherwise a unique unchanging basis could be found with which to represent the motion. Distinct trajectories can only be co-represented within the same presentational space if each and all are differing projections of a single evolving trajectory. Each eigenfunction is related to its noncommuting spectrum of superposed complementary eigenfunctions in the sense that figure is related to ground. The complementary eigenfunction spectrum is a data set; the selection of one of these eigenfunctions within the

observational context constitutes the engendering of a bit of information. The component eigenfunctions become mutually coupled provided that their wavefunction resists alteration through external influences. The eigenfunctions are coupled to one another if each contains at least a tiny projection along all of the other eigenfunctions which together with it make up their wavefunction. This is only possible if this set of eigenfunctions contributes to the defining of the Hilbert space geometry within which they find expression. This requires that the time evolution of the wavefunction be nondeterministic, which is to say, nonunitary. Particle creation at the event horizon of a black hole gives rise to a precisely thermal spectrum. This suggests that the vacuum itself is in thermal equilibrium with itself so that the vacuum must be continually exchanging energy with itself. Because the time rate of change of all physical quantities depends on the existence of energy uncertainty, dq/dt = [H, q] + f[H,q], where f[H,q] is usually written as @q/@t. On this view, quantum mechanical systems possess energy uncertainty because they are continually perturbed by intrinsic vacuum energy fluctuations. In this way, all mass-energy systems are in a process of constant energy exchange with the quantum mechanical vacuum. Since all macroscopic transfers and exchanges of energy between two points in spacetime are mediated via the submicroscopic energy exchanges occurring within the vacuum, it follows that conservation of energy macroscopically is dependent upon conservation of energy exchanges within the vacuum. It is not possible to distinguish different time rates of change within a closed dynamical system. This is because such a closed system possesses only a finite number of discrete energy levels, and when the total system is in a particular energy eigenstate, its energy uncertainty is 0 so that there are no vacuum fluctuations available with which to mediate changes in physical observables of the system. We may define the distance separating two events as a function of the number of vacuum momentum fluctuations existing between the two said events. Similarly, we may define the time interval between two such events as a function of the number of vacuum energy fluctuations existing between the two said events. Of course, the partitioning of the relativistic

momentum - energy tensor into pure momentum versus pure energy components is dependent upon the particular Lorenz reference frame within which one performs the momentum and energy measurements; the converse of this is also true. Since the energy levels at which information is stored in a neural network are defined in terms of the lowest stable energy of the neural network as a whole, virtual energy transitions between these energy levels presuppose a coupling between the wavefunctions describing the quantum mechanical states of all of the individual neurons of the network in the sense of their being nonlocally connected. It is the spontaneous coherence in which the neural network is embedded which provides the ultimate context within which the neurological events are to be interpreted. This coherent field is that of the nonlocally connected vacuum electromagnetic fluctuation field. The many worlds interpretation of the quantum measurement problem may be understood as a reversal in causal relationship between the uncollapsed wavefunction representing the mind of the observer and the uncollapsed wavefunction representing the potentialities of the quantum mechanical system being observed by this mind in the following manner: when the observer notes the collapse of the wavefunction with respect to an observable he is attempting to measure, what is actually occurring is the collapse of the wavefunction describing the observers mind so that it (the observer's mind) now abstracts from the Weltall one particular eigenvalue of the object wavefunction, but without inducing a collapse of the object wavefunction itself. Without a God's eye view of Reality in which to ground these complementary possibilities, there is not legitimate distinction which can be made between them. One might ask what is the fundamental difference between these two interpretations if there is not some third realm, independent of both the observer's and object wavefunctions in terms of which one interpretation might be favored over the other as being ontologically prior. This third realm belongs neither to that of causality (the mutual interaction of collapsed wavefunctions), nor to that of contingency (the interaction of collapsed with uncollapsed wavefunctions, and vice versa), but to that realm

constituted solely by the mutual interaction of all uncollapsed wavefunctions. This realm we may refer to as the composite contingency - necessity manifold or continuum. The probability spectrum of a given wavefunction may be underdetermined so that there exists an unlimited number of ways in which an ensemble of measurements of the eigenstates of the wavefunction with respect to a particular observable may sum together so that the wavefunction appears perfectly normalized; this property may permit an additional degree of freedom within quantum mechanical virtual processes not previously suspected to exist. Probability density conservation in 4-dimensional spacetime is at the heart of the underlying physical mechanism for gravitation that we are proposing. For instance, the gravitational reddening of starlight may be simply explained in terms of this concept of probability (density) conservation. Probability conservation is the most general statement of the principle of causality. There is an absolute simultaneity which mental events distinctly enjoy due to the fact that they do not admit of perspective; if anything they constitute perspective. However, the order in which neurophysiological occurrences occur ( in the brain) is at least partially dependent upon the reference frame (in the relativistic sense) that these events occur (as observables). There must be an embedding of these neural events in a substrate which extends beyond the merely neurophysiological in order for a reference frame to be defined in which there can arise a correspondence between subjective and objective simultaneities. The nonlocally connected vacuum electromagnetic field offers itself as the prime candidate for this embedding substrate. Since it is the pattern of virtual particle emission and absorption which every real particle continually undergoes which determines the mass of the particle, it follows that real particle masses are determined through the particular manner in which real particles exchange energy with the fluctuating quantum vacuum field; consequently, alterations in the density of the vacuum field energy will affect the masses of particles

occupying this vacuum. We might expect that this relationship between mass-energy and vacuum-energy is symmetrical in nature because the interactions mediating the continual exchange of energy between matter and vacuum are themselves reversible interactions. 11/96 The quantum vacuum energy fluctuations collectively, as we have seen, may be understood as the first cause of the world in the more fundamental sense of sustainer of all of the structures ultimately deriving from it in that the quantum vacuum is the originator of temporality. Matter does not possess a genuine substantial existence since its energy is forever being replenished by the vacuum fluctuations continually interacting with it, much in the same manner as a particular spot in a river is continually replenished with new waters so that, as Heraclitus says, one cannot step twice into the same place within it. This two-way causal, symmetrical relationship between mass energy and vacuum energy within quantum field theory reminds us of a similar relationship between mass and space-time curvature within the theory of general relativity: the presence of mass within a given region of spacetime produces an additional curvature in this spacetime; also, an increase in the curvature of a particular region of spacetime produces an increase in the mass of particles or material bodies already occupying this region. Since spatio-temporal variations in the energy density of the vacuum energy field are correlated with variations in spacetime curvature, we might suppose that some sort of conformal mapping relationship obtains between the ratio of real particle to virtual particle energy densities and the degree of mutual inclination of the time and space axes ( of the Minkowski light cone ) to one another. This relationship is also suggested by the fact that real particles are virtual particles which have been promoted to the level of real existence through the absorption of energy; particles are excitations of the vacuum state which is itself a reservoir or sea of virtual particles. Also, through the application Mach's formula for the speed of sound to this vacuum energy reservoir, we see that such a conformal mapping relationship between Einsteinian spacetime curvature and spatial-temporal variations in the zero-point energy of the vacuum (or, alternatively, its energy density) must involve

mappings between the hypersolid angle swept out by the light line in four-dimensional (Minkowski ) spacetime, and the energy density (or pressure) of the vacuum. The quest for the "theory of everything" is therefore doomed to ultimate failure, since what we call "everything" is necessarily unique, and this uniqueness prevents us from separating those "variables" which are particular to the thing itself from those which owe in part to our investigatory involvement with this thing. The self, in the act of investigating ultimate reality, must be included within the dynamic of the reality for which we are seeking a complete description. This inherent recursiveness which lies at the heart of any earnest attempt to develop a complete description of reality is alone responsible for the fact that the domain of truth necessarily transcends the sum of knowledge comprising any point of view (of reality). Quantum Mechanics tells us that a closed dynamical system may only undergo temporal evolution provided that a certain energy uncertainty exists within the system. This energy uncertainty is just the standard deviation of the energy about its mean or expectation value. This energy uncertainty may be interpreted in terms of a time-average sum of random energy perturbations to the system "from outside" the system. The phase of the isolated quantum system formally undergoes temporal evolution, but there is no physical meaning to be attached to an absolute phase. It is only when another system is brought into interaction with the first system do we get temporal evolution of relative phases of the two systems which possess measurable and observable effects. If these energy perturbations, or some component of them are not removable, are not merely the artifacts of our inadequate perturbative analyses of quantum systems, but are ontologically real, then the infinity, and perhaps the infinite dimensionality, of the world logically follow. These random energy perturbations manifest themselves in the form of

energy exchanges between the quantum mechanical system and the sea of virtual particles in which this system is embedded. The interaction of these virtual particles with the quantum mechanical system are responsible for virtual transitions of the quantum state of the system to other quantum states. The only real energy transitions available to the quantum mechanical (dynamical) system are those from amongst the set of virtual energy transitions which are continually occurring within the time interval specified by the system's time uncertainty. The density of this virtual particle energy sea has a direct bearing upon the rate of temporal evolution of any given quantum mechanical system. Our central hypothesis is that the presence of matter has a perturbing effect upon this virtual particle energy sea, i.e., the quantum vacuum field, and this perturbing effect is, namely, to decrease the overall density of this vacuum energy which results in a similar decrease in the time rate of change of all physical processes within the spatial volume occupied by this matter. This proposed vacuum mechanism is exactly similar to the mechanism by which a quantum resonant cavity decreases the rate of spontaneous emission of 'cavity - detuned' photons by a Rydberg excited atom. The resonant cavity achieves this by excluding most of the photons of half-wavelength larger than the cavity diameter: to wit, it does this by decreasing the energy density of vacuum electromagnetic field fluctuations of roughly the same energy as that of the suppressed atomic energy transitions. 96 We know that nonadiabatic changes in the boundary conditions of the infinite potential well problem results in a transition of the particle energy to an excited state with respect to the new wavefunction describing the new potential well resulting from this sudden change. This suggests that perhaps irreversible, or, nonadiabatic, changes in a quantum mechanical system are necessary for the wavefunction describing it to undergo "collapse." Perhaps changes in the boundary conditions of the (non?)locally connected vacuum can be modeled upon a change in the dynamics of this vacuum in the absence of changes of the boundary conditions. Perhaps all changes in the dynamics of the

nonlocally connected vacuum are only measurable in terms of their manifestation as changes in the boundary conditions of a locally connected quantum system. When the boundary conditions applied to a given wavefunction are treated classically, then nonadiabatic changes in the boundary conditions will usually result in a discontinuous change in the wavefunction, i.e., a collapse in the wavefunction. But if the classical boundary conditions are themselves treated quantummechanically, then the composite wavefunction will not suffer a collapse, but will evolve according to the time-dependent Schrödinger wave equation. 01/97 Is a nonadiabatic change to be understood as a change in vacuum boundary conditions which cannot be expected (by the vacuum itself) because /\B//\t > /\B x h//\E ?It is clear in a geometrically intuitive sense that transformations of entities which are not truly independent and separable from an open-ended context or system in which they are grounded cannot be genuinely reversible but only abstractly to within a certain approximation. Participatory knowledge transcends abstract description in terms of abstract representations of independent "things" or entities. This is the knowledge based in the intimate interaction with the open-ended. Is it possible to not be in an eigenstate of any quantum mechanical observable whatever? Does this describe the normal condition which the quantum vacuum finds itself in? If the mode of interaction of real particles with real particles, i.e., real-real interactions, is correctly described as deterministically ordered, and the mode of interaction of real with virtual particles as randomly ordered, then should we describe the mode of interaction of virtual particles with themselves as both random and deterministic? Is a superposition state possible in the absence of wavefunction boundary conditions? Are some superpositions well-formed in the sense that they can be inverse Fourier-transformed to a unique eigenstate with respect to a definable observable? Are some ill-formed in the contrary sense of not possessing an inverse Fourier-transform to a unique eigenstate of a single observable? Perhaps well-formed superposition

states may only be defined given appropriate spacetime boundary conditions, i.e., initial and boundary conditions. Notice that when a measurement is performed upon one of the separated particles of an EPR type experiment, that the particles remain nonlocally connected after the "collapse of the wavefunction" describing the particles jointly, although the particles are now nonlocally connected in a new way precipitated by the observer's act of measurement. Has the observer simply succeeded in discontinuously altering the inertial frame of reference in which the particle pair is embedded? If so, doesn't he do this by accelerating the particles? Are the nonlocal connections within the observer's mind merely apiece with the nonlocally connected vacuum state in which his brain is embedded, and so when he performs his measurement upon the particle pair, the pair must "jump into" a new nonlocally connected vacuum state, resulting in a discontinuous change in its superposition state? Does the observer recoil nonadiabatically into a new nonlocallyconnected vacuum upon performing an act of quantum measurement which induces what appears to him as a wavefunction collapse? Must the vacuum possess infinite self-similarity so that "identical events" may unfold with different rates of temporal evolution, depending upon which inertial frame of reference they are "viewed from?" Self-similarity can never be exact. If the vacuum state were merely locally connected, then its temporal evolution "as a whole” would necessarily follow along a predetermined continuum of vacuum states. However, a nonlocally connected vacuum state creates its own trajectory as it evolves temporally. I am trying to build a case for distinguishing between two seemingly very different descriptions of the process of quantum measurement, namely, the discontinuous collapse of the wavefunction of the quantum mechanical system being observed/measured from a similar collapse of the wavefunction describing the mind of the observer performing the measurement, which is to say, the Copenhagen from the "Many Worlds" interpretation. As is well known, Newton's law of gravitation may be given a Gaussian formulation exactly paralleling the electromagnetic flux law. What is surprising is that the black hole mass

of a given radius may also be given a Gaussian formulation. To wit, 1/4piG x Int(Hc) x dS = Mblackhole. It is possible to "derive" the Pauli Exclusion Principle from the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. This may be shown in the following manner. If two particles of the same quantum mechanical system were to be in the same quantum state - what is precisely forbidden by the Pauli principle, say two electrons "orbiting" the same hydrogen nucleus, it would be possible for us to measure the kinetic energy (a function of momentum) of one of the electrons, and then to measure the potential energy of the other electron with the result that we would have demonstrated the existence of a quantum mechanical state possessing, simultaneously, an exact potential and an exact kinetic energy; but this is precisely what is forbidden to exist by the Heisenberg uncertainty principle - QED. 6/97 This conclusion does not go through, however, if the requirement is made that two particles which are in the same quantum state must be described by one and the same wavefunction. The Feynman path - integral formalism of relativistic quantum field theory indicates that real particles, i.e., fundamental particles whose mass - energy is greater than the quantum mechanical energy uncertainty of the quantum mechanical system to which they belong, may be represented as stable and interlocking patterns of vacuum energy fluctuation, that is, as patterns of virtual particle creation, annihilation, and particle (fermion and boson) exchange processes which form with one another a stable, interconnected meshwork of feedback loops of virtual particle reactions. 6/97 It is not certain what the concept of stability means within the context of virtual particle processes. "Stable" certainly does not mean here persistence of a structure against fluctuations or perturbations thermal or otherwise, since the virtual particle processes themselves are the fluctuation phenomena. Stability must mean in this case the relatively unchanging probabilities of recurring patterns of quantum

fluctuation manifesting themselves as virtual particle reactions. Thus, real fundamental particles are viewed within this formalism as mere excitations of the vacuum (ground) state with more complex matter structures, e.g., atoms, molecules, etc., as feedback structures into which these vacuum excitations are organized - provided that adequate excitation energy is available. June 1997

One possible test as to whether or not a given particle is composite or simple might be: does the particle have a virtual counterpart, i.e., can the particle be produced out or the vacuum as a pure energy fluctuation out of a fluctuation of purely imaginary4-momentum? Although in theory it should be possible to produce whole atoms, molecules, or more complex matter structures through direct excitation of the vacuum state (see above paragraph), the intelligent coordination of the myriad and highly localized excitations required to do this, from within any particular modified vacuum state, is probably rendered impossible due to the inherent uncertainty of total energy which is responsible for vacuum fluctuations: certain existing boundary conditions to the matrix of vacuum fluctuations may already be immediately present - in the form of already created particles, molecules, etc., but these boundary conditions cannot be produced ab initio, but may only be "reproduced," utilizing identical pre-existing boundary conditions (in the form of already available matter) as template and catalyst for the reproduction of the desired vacuum boundary conditions. Any instrumentalities which we might employ to alter the vacuum field boundary conditions would only be effective by virtue of the vacuum field fluctuations themselves which mediate their action; we must realize that the imposition of genuinely new boundary conditions upon the vacuum, i.e., without the utilization of a "template," even if locally, would imply a change in the global boundary conditions of the entire vacuum energy system ( the entire spacetime continuum). On the view of matter and vacuum which is espoused here, matter is seen as not having an existence independent of the vacuum energy field, rather, the stability of matter at all levels of its hierarchical structure, is underpinned by the myriad field energy

fluctuations of the quantum vacuum. Consequently, matter does not possess an independent existence in the Democritean sense of "atoms and void;" our view is more consonant with that put forward by Heraclitus, to wit, that everything is composed "of fire in measures kindling and in measures going out;" all change is driven by the clash of opposites and all potential for change lies with the tension between these opposites. Here "fire" is given the modern physical interpretation as "vacuum energy" and the "clash of opposites," as the creation and annihilation operators ( 2nd quantization of quantum theory) into which all operators corresponding to physical "observables" are analyzable. What Heraclitus' physics lacked was a basis for physical continuity from one moment of time to the next; the reproduction of vacuum boundary conditions (in virus - like manner) supplies this missing element within modern physics. Within this understanding of the relationship between matter and vacuum Democritus' notion of persisting "substance" no longer has any application and the continuous existence of real matter particles consists in the continual recreation of a coherent and interlocking pattern of virtual particle reactions which is apiece with the larger pattern of vacuum energy fluctuations within the indefinite surrounding region of spacetime. 10/96 The basic idea behind a perturbative analysis of a quantum system is that one is not able to write down with infinite precision the exact Hamiltonian of the system under consideration and so one describes the energy of the system in terms of a Hamiltonian plus a perturbation energy. This perturbation energy is usually the first nonzero term in an expansion of energy terms where additional terms are progressively smaller and must be neglected since to include them poses analytic intractability. In other words, one does not have the precise energy eigenfunction expansion of the system's wavefunction; if one did, then one could in theory prepare the system in any one of its energy eigenstates where the system would exist at a precisely defined energy for all time, assuming the system were not interfered with as a result of

exchanging energy with some other system. But since the Hamiltonian of a quantum mechanical system is always a function of the system's momentum and position, which are incompatible observables, the energy of the system, which is a function of both the system's particle/field momentum and particle/field source position, can never be precisely defined. In this way we see that energy perturbations are not an ad hoc and practically useful accounting device needed to make up for a merely practical, and, hence, theoretically removable, ignorance concerning the system's real energy eigenfunction expansion. Rather, perturbations to the system's energy - any system's energy - are not merely artifacts of a perturbative analysis, but are ontologically real and not due to a temporary inability to specify the system's true energy eigenfunction expansion. There is a small component of the perturbation energy which is forever irremediable and represents the exchange of energy between any quantum system and another quantum system which is always present. An important conclusion to be drawn for quantum theory here is that, the wavefunction only represents the most that can be known about a quantum system in the absence of the irremovable perturbations. We might be tempted to speculate here that more can be known about a quantum system than can be contained in any wavefunction provided that the effect of the irremovable perturbations are included. If the objective and the subjective are considered to be disjoint categories, then we may say that just as the wavefunction represents the most that can be objectively known about a quantum system, what can be subjectively known about a quantum system in due entirely to influences lying altogether outside all possible wavefunction descriptions of the system. Such influences, collectively, are the so-called irremovable perturbations. We must not straight-away identify such "irremovable perturbations" with the virtual particles and fields of relativistic quantum field theory as these entities are largely artifacts of low order perturbative analysis involving perturbations which are largely removable, in theory, should the observer acquire greater knowledge of the system under observation. What uniquely distinguishes virtual

particles and fields from their real counterparts does, perhaps, point to some of the properties of the medium with which all quantum systems forever exchange energy, leading to the so-called irremovable perturbations. Therefore, the introduction of matter particles into a volume of spacetime is not distinct in principle from creating these particles ab initio from a portion of the vacuum energy already present within this particular volume of spacetime; in an inertial frame of reference, a real matter particle imparts an excitation energy to the vacuum such that a particle identical to itself is created out of the fluctuating vacuum field energy; at the same time the previous particle is destroyed, its massenergy providing the excitation energy necessary to re-create itself anew. In an accelerated, or more generally, a non-inertial reference frame, the particles mass-energy excites the vacuum field in a different manner, continually producing a new variety of particles to take its place. It has often been noted in the literature of modern physics that particle production from the vacuum state is to be expected within curved spacetimes. This leads us to the idea that merely localized alterations in boundary conditions of the vacuum field in no way alters the total energy density of the region occupied by the vacuum field, but merely changes the ratio of mass - energy to vacuum energy from zero to some fraction approaching infinity (in the case of black hole masses). The general relativistic alteration in the local velocity of light may be understood in terms of Mach's formula for the speed of sound in an energy conducting medium in its application to the quantum vacuum. Mach's formula states that the velocity of sound in an energy conducting medium is a function of the pressure and the energy density of the medium. Specifically, the velocity of sound in the medium is the square root of the pressure of the medium times the speed of light squared divided by the energy density of the medium. Since the pressure of the vacuum is equal to its energy density, and the pressure of matter is effectively zero, the energy density and pressure terms in Mach's formula are the total energy density and pressure of

space, respectively; the pressure of the vacuum is always equal to its energy density, which decreases in step with the increase in the massenergy density. By letting the total energy density of space equal to the sum of the vacuum energy and mass-energy densities, i.e., Etot = Ev + Em, and the vacuum pressure equal to the modified vacuum energy density, i.e., Ev' = Ev - Em, Mach's formula works out to vsound = sqrt[(Ev - Em)c2/Etot] which reduces to the result, vsound = [1 GM/RC2] * c, and this result is identical to the reduced local value of the speed of light calculated from general relativity (in the weak field limit). Our requirement of no spatial variation in the total energy density of space, i.e., that the mass-energy and vacuum energy densities are complementary, seems to demand that the density of gravitational energy density If we are correct in reinterpreting the gravitational redshift of photons propagating in a spatially varying gravitational potential as being due to a spatial variation in the zero-point of the vacuum's energy (against which the photon's energy is to be measured), then The imposition of boundary conditions upon the vacuum field merely produces local and discontinuous variations in the spatial (and temporal) distribution of the field energy, leading to the appearance of negative binding energies which exactly counterbalance the positive gains in mass - energy which thereto result; it is in this sense that mass-energy may be thought to occupy a "hollow" in the vacuum energy field and the "displaced" vacuum energy has merely assumed a new form as massenergy. Meff = Mr/sqrt(1 - (c')2/(c)2), where Mr = binding mass and Meff = effective mass. The binding mass stems from the sum of all (+) and (-) non-gravitational binding energies. The accumulation of many such discontinuous energy gradients submicroscopically leads to the appearance, macroscopically, of continuous energy gradients in the vacuum. Since the energy of the vacuum field owes its existence entirely to the quantum mechanical energy uncertainty of spacetime, in turn owing to the fact that the energy Hamiltonian is a function of incompatible observables, it follows that the vacuum field shares in the general properties of quantum mechanical energy uncertainty. One such property is that energy uncertainty is required for any discrete change in a quantum mechanical observable; for example, all changes in a physical

system stem from the application of forces upon the system while all fundamental forces of nature are mediated via the exchange of virtual bosons between fermions composing the system. Consequently, physical processes undergo temporal evolution only insofar as they comprise quantum mechanical systems possessing finite energy uncertainty, with the rates of the component processes determined by the magnitude of system energy uncertainty. A fermionboson quantum mechanical system may be thought of as an interconnected meshwork of temporal fermion energy transitions with spatial boson momentum transitions, with the fermion wavefunctions and boson wavefunctions being antisymmetric and symmetric, respectively, so that increasing the density of interacting fermions and bosons within a particular region of spacetime results in a decrease in the energy uncertainty and increase in the momentum uncertainty of the vacuum state, respectively. November 1996

Any wavefunction may be alternately represented as a sum of symmetric and antisymmetric wavefunctions. If one calculates the probability density function for a wavefunction in this new representation, one is tempted to give some physical interpretation of the three distinct components which result. X*X = X*symXsym + X*antiXanti + 2X*symXanti The first term represents the probability function resulting from the mutual interaction of bosons while the second term represents the probability function resulting from the mutual interaction of fermions. The third term may represent the probability function resulting from the interaction of bosons and fermions with each other. July 1997

In Fourier analysis, a function which satisfies the Dirichlet conditions, may always be represented as a Fourier sum of weighted sine and cosine functions of the bounded variables. We note here that this function may be represented as either purely even or purely odd, i.e., as

either purely a Fourier sum of cosine functions or sine functions, provided that the appropriate transformation of the coordinate system is performed within which the Fourier expansion is to be computed. In direct analogy to what has been said concerning Fourier analysis, we may say that through a judicious transformation of the spacetime coordinates, we may represent an arbitrary wavefunction as either of purely even parity or of purely odd parity. What we cannot do, however, is take a wavefunction of purely even parity and transform the coordinate system so that this function is now represented as possessing purely odd parity, or vice versa. Continuing with our analogy, we cannot represent a sine function in terms of a sum of cosine functions and so on. We cannot do this, as was said, through a transformation of the spacetime coordinates, however, an odd function can be readily converted into an even function and vice versa through the mere addition of a phase factor ( of pi/2 ) within the argument of the function we wish to transform. We know that if an operator does not commute with the Hamiltonian operator, then the observable corresponding to the first operator cannot be a conserved quantity. Conversely, any operator which commutes with the Hamiltonian will be tied to a change the total energy of the system if this operator itself suffers any changes. It is well known that parity is conserved within the theory of both the electromagnetic and strong nuclear interactions. This is all to suggest that an alteration of the momentum-energy tensor through the judicious insertion of phase factors into each momentum and energy eigenfunction, may result in a transformation of the momentum-energy eigenfunction, Psi(x,y,z,t), without altering the momentum-energy tensor, Ti,k itself. This is just saying that the wavefunction representing the quantum mechanical system with momentum-energy tensor, Ti,k, is itself degenerate with respect to the phase. We may deduce from this that matter cannot exist in either a purely fermionic or purely bosonic state. Otherwise, we would be in a position to alter the tensor, Ti,k, describing this matter distribution, through a non-coordinate transformation, namely, through the mere introduction of an arbitrary nonperiodic phase factor into the energy eigenfunction representing this mass distribution. This would constitute a stark violation of the

Equivalence Principle of General Relativity which implies that each distinct stress-momentum-energy distribution, as represented by T, uniquely correlates to a distinct curvature of the spacetime metric. To wit, matter must always exist as a mixed system of fermions and bosons, namely, any given real matter distribution must be described by a wavefunction which is neither purely symmetric nor purely antisymmetric. 11/96 By calculating expectation values for various observables for the quantum vacuum, such as , , , , etc., we may be able to exploit our intuitions about what X*qX(vac), where q is the observable in question, must be in order to guess at the probable relationships of these various vacuum expectation values. 10/96The relativistic effects upon kinematics (space and time) are grounded in the relativistic effects upon the dynamics through the conservation of momentum-energy. We believe, for instance, that the relativistic contraction of the positional uncertainty of a particle, say, and the relativistic time dilation (of the particle's lifetime, if it is unstable), do not lie behind the dilation of /\p and contraction of /\E, respectively through the Heisenberg uncertainty relations. This would be to ground dynamical effects in mere kinematics. Rather, the kinematics should be grounded in the dynamics: the effects on space and time are epiphenomenal to the substantive effects associated with the conservation of momentum-energy. This is thought to take place through the Heisenberg uncertainty relations for position/momentum and time/energy. Changes in the components of the momentum-energy tensor cause alterations in the tensor of stress-momentum-energy uncertainty. We may suppose that the presence of real fermions reduces the number of available vacuum fermionic energy states while the presence of real bosons increases the number of available virtual bosonic momentum states, relative to the reduced number of virtual fermionic energy states. In this manner, more virtual energy transitions occurring within the vacuum state must be effected via similar transitions occurring within the massive body in question. This situation is

consistent with the effect mass has upon the surrounding vacuum of simultaneously decreasing the energy uncertainty and increasing the momentum uncertainty radially about the gravitating massive body. A general result of the preceding discussion is that the accumulation of mass - energy, more particularly binding energy, within a volume of spacetime causes a corresponding reduction in the density of energy uncertainty (vacuum energy), in turn resulting in a corresponding decrease in the rate at which physical processes occur within this particular region of spacetime. How are we to understand so-called energy-degenerate transitions within the vacuum state, which is to say, transitions within the vacuum state not involving a change in the vacuum's energy? The degenerate wavefunctions represent the possibility of change which falls outside of the physically temporal. 10/96 Does gravitational time dilation have any effect upon the frequency of degenerate transitions? Is the density matrix an approximation made in lieu of the actual wavefunction which we are for merely practical reasons unable to specify, or does a quantum system sometimes not possess a wavefunction at all? What relation does the 2nd rank tensor relating two different virtual particle current densities have to the momentum-energy tensor of GR...to the metric tensor or GR? Would an exceedingly intense beam of coherent electromagnetic radiation (laser beam) result in a kind of anti-squeezed state? This might have the precisely opposite effect to that of the Casimir Effect which normally induces an expansion of the momentum uncertainty along two orthogonal directions to the axis along which the conducting plates are oriented. A question here is whether the momentum uncertainty along the time axis (the energy uncertainty) is also dilated due to a squeezing of the momentum uncertainty between the plates. The token reflexives, here and now, seem to presuppose the token-reflexive, I, or me. Conversely, the token-reflexives, I, or me, seem to equally presuppose the token-reflexives, here and now. This seems to suggest that the nonlocal connections, manifested in the relations of virtual particles/fields to abstract spacetime may also be essential in mediating the individual consciousness of observers interacting with spacetime.

Within the context of an expanding universe, then, matter does not merely alter the density of the vacuum, but also alters the rate at which the density of the vacuum energy decreases with time due to cosmological expansion, and since the time rate of change in energy density is, itself, a physical process, matter, by reducing the energy uncertainty of the vacuum, also causes a radially varying vacuum field energy density which manifests itself as a spherically symmetric energy gradient centered about a mass which is identical to the gravitational field! Changes in the composition of the total energy density of a region of space with respect to the proportions of mass - energy and vacuum energy are reflected in the transformation of the spatio-temporal variation in vacuum energy density from being purely temporal, in the case of free space, to a mixture of two parts, temporal and spatial, in the case of typical distributions of matter, to a purely spatial variation of vacuum energy density, in the case of black hole masses; and there is a homologous mapping between the degree of tipping of the Minkowski light cone in curved spacetimes and the degree of transformation of a temporally varying vacuum energy into one which is purely spatial in its variation. Within curved spacetimes, the local value of the velocity of light is reduced below its normal value in "free space," and this may be envisioned as a narrowing of the hypersolid angle swept out by the Minkowski light cone centered at a given point within this region possessing a gravitational potential. This contraction in the area of the hypersurface of the Minkowski light cone may be alternately described in terms of a light cone which suffers no contraction of its hypersurface area, but a decrease in the uniform density of vacuum energy occupying the uncontracted light cone surface, and hence the equivalence of the spacetime curvature with the spatiotemporal variation in vacuum energy density. If we are correct in positing an exact equivalence between spacetime curvature and spatio-temporal variations in the density of the vacuum's zero-point energy, then the phenomenon of particle production

in a spatially or temporally varying spacetime curvature, or via the equivalence principle, due to the effects of noninertial motion, may be explained alternatively in terms of spatial or temporal variations in the boundary conditions on the vacuum field such that spatial or temporal variations in its zero-point energy result. In this scenario, the existence of real particles is understood as just a manifestation of zero-point energy from the vantage point of a noninertial frame of reference or equivalently, from the standpoint of a region of the vacuum possessing "less restrictive" boundary conditions than the region of the vacuum in which the particles appear. On account of the precisely thermal spectrum of the particles produced within curved spacetimes and also due to the unique requirement of a thermal spectrum for the vacuum itself in order that it possess Lorenz invariance, an entropy may be meaningfully assigned to both the vacuum as well as the particles produced from it as a result of the imposed vacuum boundary conditions. Since this production of particles from the vacuum state due to imposed boundary conditions is a reversible process, because the particles are reabsorbed if the boundary conditions are later removed, the change in the entropy of the vacuum field must be exactly compensated by the entropy increase due the particle creation so that the total entropy of the particle - vacuum system is a constant. The Feynman path integral technique for calculating the ground state energies of atoms may ( in principle ) similarly be utilized to calculate the ground state energy of the vacuum state of free space or, indeed, the vacuum state of a region of space in which a gravitational field is present. It is probable that fewer paths comprise the Feynman integral where a gravitational field is present than in the free space vacuum; this limits the number of valid available paths along which energy may be exchanged between two points in this particular region of spacetime - hence the reduced value of the integral, and in turn, the decreased value of the vacuum state energy in this region. The reduced number of Feynman paths, or histories, means that the vacuum's ability to exchange energy with itself, as well as its ability to exchange energy with particles and fields, and thusly to

mediate the exchange of energy between particles and fields among themselves, is correspondingly diminished so that the rate at which the vacuum's energy density decreases with time ( due to the expansion of the universe ) is likewise diminished. In light of the diminished self-energy of the vacuum, the resultant increased inertial mass of particles within this altered vacuum may be viewed in two distinct, but fundamentally similar ways. First, the diminished capacity of the vacuum to undergo energy exchange with itself means that it is more difficult for the gravitational field energy to redistribute itself in response to changes in the matter distribution within the altered vacuum state; consequently, by the general equivalence of gravitational and inertial masses, it follows that there is an equal difficulty for matter configurations to change their distributions in response to impressed external forces attempting to accelerate these mass configurations. This is further theoretical evidence for the complementary relationship between the mass energy density and the vacuum energy density which together define the total energy density of any particular region of spacetime. Moreover, if there are already existing particles both prior and subsequent to the imposition of the vacuum boundary conditions, then the masses of these previously existing particles is expected to increase in accordance with the decrease in the vacuum energy density (and vice versa); this is consistent with viewing particle production more generally as an increase in mass within the region of varying vacuum energy - as the conversion of vacuum energy into mass - energy: the fraction by which particle masses are increased in transporting them from a region of higher vacuum energy density to one of lower density must complement the fraction by which the vacuum energy density decreases between these two points. This means that the maximum density of mass possible within a certain spherical region is equal to the maximum density of particles which may be created from the vacuum energy occupying this region, via excitation of the vacuum state. We arrive at the interesting result that the density of the vacuum energy in a certain spherical volume of free space (where no

mass-energy is present) is precisely equal to the mass-energy density of a black hole which could possible occupy this same volume. One important idea which suggests itself within the context of this discussion is the famous cosmological constant problem and the discordant interpretations of it within quantum theory and general relativity theory. There is a 46 order of magnitude discrepancy between the calculations of the value of this constant within these two theories, hence the profound difficulties in developing a consistent theory of quantum gravity! Now if the energy of the vacuum is interpreted as suggested by the work of Sakharov and more recently by the zero-point energy gravitation theory of Hal Puthoff then rather than being, itself, a source of gravitational fields, like particle or field energy, the energy of the vacuum would merely be the mediator of gravitation so that differences in gravitational potential would correspond exactly to differences in the energy density of the vacuum at two different points in spacetime. A uniform distribution of vacuum field energy would therefore have no more effect upon matter particles within this energy distribution than would a series of concentric mass shells upon the matter particles contained within them; which is to say, no effect whatever, and this due to the precise mutual cancellation of the combined perturbations to the matter particles by the fluctuating vacuum energy field. Thus, only differences in vacuum energy density would have any meaning so that the overall vacuum energy density would play no role in the definition of Einstein's cosmological constant, and there would be no necessity of postulating a unique exchange particle mediating the gravitational force; gravity would not in this case be viewed as a fundamental force as are the electromagnetic, strong and weak nuclear forces, but would be understood as a "parasitic" force stemming from the imposing of boundary conditions upon the combined vacuum electromagnetic, strong and weak nuclear fields which together owe their existence to the fundamental energy uncertainty of the vacuum state, described by an energy Hamiltonian which is a function of incompatible observables. If the graviton were really a “fundamental particle”, i.e., a vector boson with the same ontological status of a photon, gluon, W and Z particle, then graviton creation-annihilations and exchanges would be more or

less just as pervasive within the vacuum’s “bulk” as in its “surface”, represented by spacetime structure. Puthoff’s theory of electromagnetic induced gravity would not apply in the same way to a neutron, c.f.,cit= The Connectivity Hypothesis (2003), or a neutrino as it would to charged particles, e.g., electron, proton, muon, etc. We should not expect Puthoff’s theory therefore to support Einstein’s equivalence principle in a logically consistent manner in that gravitational interactions are not treated in his theory with sufficient generality. On the other hand, there does not seem to be a more general way, apart from Einstein’s theory of gravitation, for the so-called physical vacuum to satisfy the equivalence principle of relativity than the density functions or density matrices of quantum theory. And the most general feature of these, which connects matter and energy to the physical vacuum as well as to the four fundamental forces/interactions of nature is that of quantum statistics. We say this rather than the concept of the symmetry/antisymmetry of the wavefunction because the quantum statistics of the density function includes both reversible and irreversible quantum processes and possesses symmetry properties more general than those of “symmetric” and “antisymmetric”. The concept of causality can then be given its greatest possible generalization within this theory of induced gravity because the theory is most amenable to the application of prn=Bohm’s Causality Principle. The pure imaginary momentum of all "rest masses" within the 4 hyperspherical cosmological model may be justified beyond its value as a convenient mathematical formalism if these masses are viewed as presently being in the act of tunneling through a hyperspherically symmetric potential barrier. The gradient of this hyperspherical potential would be a four - vector with components 1,2, and 3 vanishing in free space, but transforming through multiplication by a tensor into a new four - vector with non-vanishing spatial components, resulting in the appearance of a gravitational field. Certainly this tensor is the matter-stress-energy tensor described in the field equations of Einstein; the only difference is that the vacuum energy does not contribute to the value of T, the matter-stress-energy tensor, which is responsible for

altering the metric tensor which describes the curvature of spacetime, or alternatively, the spatiotemporal variation in the vacuum field energy density. It is perhaps now easier to see at an intuitive level why the field equations of general relativity predict the existence of a universe which is either globally contracting or expanding: unless the energy density of the vacuum field is temporally varying in free space, the matter-stressenergy tensor operates upon a zero four-vector (representing the gradient of the hyperspherical potential) and the introduction of matter distributions, represented by the matter-stress-energy tensor, into this vacuum field, cannot produce a non-zero four-vector, namely, nonvanishing spatial components of the free space four-vector, i.e., a gravitational field. Within this particular cosmological model, the energy, linear 4-momentum, and angular 4-momentum of a particle is always conserved, regardless of motions or accelerations which it might undergo as a result of interactions with other particles and fields. We are saying here that gravitation is, itself, a four-vector, whose magnitude is always conserved independently of the matter distribution. The matter-stress-energy distribution within a particular volume of space merely alters the decomposition of this four-vector into a new set of vector components in much the same way that a boost, rotation or translation produces a new decomposition of the Minkowski four-vector which describes the instantaneous world segment of a particle; hence, matter distributions manifest themselves as tensor fields in spacetime. If the gravitational field owed its existence to the presence of matter-stressenergy distributions in spacetime, then we would certainly describe the gravitational field as being itself a tensor field; however, the gravitational field is actually a conserved four-vector ( in the sense that the magnitude of this vector is conserved ), and this four-vector owes its existence to the inverse square decrease in the vacuum's zero-point energy density in combination with the inverse cubic decrease in the mass-energy density which results due to the process of cosmological expansion. The action of matter distributions, however, must be described in terms of a tensor field; again, the gravitational field, itself, is not a tensor field; the action of mass upon this field is, however,

tensorial in nature. As we know, from the many discussions of attempts to produce quantum gravity theories, quantization of a 2nd order tensor field results in the appearance of a spin 2 boson which acts as the unique exchange particle mediating the tensor field. The fourdimensional zero-point energy gradient does not transform itself with time in free space in a manner which necessitates a tensor description; consequently, gravitons will not be present in free space as vacuum field fluctuations; however, any valid theory of quantum gravity ( assuming one is possible ) demands, along with the uncertainty principle, that the total vacuum field contain virtual gravitons in its mix of fluctuating energy, but because a tensor does not describe the transformation with time of the free space vacuum, the quantization of the total free space vacuum field cannot include spin 2 particles, which is to say, the free space quantum mechanical vacuum does not possess virtual gravitons and hence does not possess (per se) gravitational field fluctuations. Consequently, gravitons do not exist in regions where matter distributions are present so that the search for gravitational waves must turn out to be a fruitless endeavor. Another way in which the imaginary coefficient may be justified is to note that the rate at which the vacuum energy density decreases with time is proportional to the vacuum energy density itself, just as are the time rates of all physical processes, so that if the vacuum energy density is reinterpreted as its probability density (in terms of the square of the vacuum wavefunction amplitude), then the negative exponential time evolution of the vacuum probability density implies that the vacuum has a purely imaginary four - momentum with a four velocity of magnitude c. The effect of accelerations, for instance, upon a particle is merely to change the distribution of its total linear/angular momentum within the conserved 4-quantity. The perhelion shift in the orbit of Mercury, predicted by general relativity, may be simply understood as a cyclic redistribution of the planet's 4-angular momentum as it moves around its orbit so that the 3-dimensional projection of it 4-angular momentum varies sinusoidally with the orbital period; this causes Mercury's 3angular momentum to be slightly greater than that predicted by classical

mechanics, producing the observed advance in perhelion. The black hole, as noted earlier, represents mass-energy in its most compressed state. For maximum symmetrical energy exchange between any two shells occupying a given volume of matter ( of uniform density ) where the density of vacuum energy exchanges is proportional to the density of the vacuum energy itself, we require that the density of mass-energy decrease with the inverse square because certainly the density of bundled energy trajectories (along which all energy exchanges occur) must also fall off with the inverse square due simply to the geometry of spherically symmetric radiation of energy in 3 dimensions. We expect the density of exchange energy, due to vacuum field fluctuations, to be proportional to the density of energy so exchanged because it has already been established that the rate at which all physical processes occur is proportional to the density of Heisenberg-uncertain energy (vacuum energy) and the decrease in the density of this energy with the expansion of the universe is itself a physical process; moreover, there is a vectorial continuity equation, analogous to a field equation of Maxwell's, which describes the relationship of spatial and temporal variations in the density of the vacuum field energy so that the spatial variation of this zero-point energy will have the same structure as the temporal variation of the zero-point energy due to cosmological expansion. The question then arises, " what is the structure of this variation in vacuum energy density in free space, where no mass-energy is present?" Well, the density of the vacuum zero-point energy is only meaningful as a physical quantity in relation to the density of the mass-energy just as the energy of a particle is only meaningful in relation to the energy of the vacuum state, so the general time variation in the mass-energy density due to cosmological expansion should give us a clue to the manner in which the vacuum energy density changes with time; provided that our hypothesis of a dynamic vacuum energy mechanism for gravitational fields is fundamentally correct. Therefore, if we postulate this vacuum mechanism, then it is clear that the time variation of the vacuum energy density in the universe due to cosmological

expansion must be such that the ratio of the temporal variation in vacuum energy and mass-energy has the same mathematical structure as the spatial variation in the ratio of these two densities about massive bodies which acts as a gravitational potential. Since the gravitational potential decreases inverse linearly so that the strength of the gravitational field itself decreases with the inverse square, and since the density of vacuum energy (zero-point energy) must be smaller in stronger gravitational potentials than at weaker ones because gravitational time dilation increases in step with the increasing potential, it follows that the ratio of mass-energy to vacuum energy must decrease inverse linearly to mimic the inverse linear variation in the magnitude of gravitational time dilation; remember that gravitational time dilation is owing to a decrease in available exchange energy with which all physical processes are mediated. Hence, since the decrease in massenergy is with the inverse cube, the decrease in vacuum energy must itself be with the inverse square. At this point we note that the decrease in black hole energy density is with the inverse square of black hole radius. We are therefore led to think of a black hole as constituting the maximum density of mass-energy possible in the sense that all energy exchanges occurring within the volume of space occupied by the black hole, occur between the black hole and itself, symmetrically, with no exchange energy left over to mediate matter-vacuum energy exchanges. This is presumably why the intensity of gravitational time dilation is infinite at the surface of a black hole; the vacuum energy fluctuation field (zero-point energy) no longer interacts with the black hole mass so that no physical processes ( which can be communicated to the "outside") are mediated. As stated earlier, it the interaction of the vacuum zero-point energy with quantum mechanical systems which is wholly responsible for all changes in the quantum mechanical observables in the system, i.e., temporality of the system. The theory of quantum electrodynamics explains the propagation of fermions and bosons in the following manner: a massless photon propagates through spacetime by continually transforming into an e+e- pair and back again

into a photon of identical energy (assuming a flat spacetime), while an electron propagates through spacetime by continually transforming into dynamical system temporally evolves may be given a consistent definition in terms of the ratio of the density of energy exchanges of the system with its outside environment to the density of 3-momentum exchanges of the system with itself. By this definition, the most rapidly temporally evolving dynamical system would be that of the pristine quantum mechanical vacuum state - the quantum vacuum in the absence of real particles or fields. We must note that the notion of the absolute passage of time, i.e., the passage of time for reality as a whole, is a meaningless concept, or at least, a concept which cannot be given a selfconsistent formulation or interpretation. This fact is intimately related to the fact that a thermodynamic system to which the notion of entropy applies (the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics) is by definition an open system in the sense of a system undergoing continual energy exchange with a thermal reservoir or "heat bath." A completely closed system, as noted earlier, would possess initial and boundary conditions resulting in the quantizing of energy and momentum throughout the system giving it a closed state space and a Poincare recurrence time which would be indistinguishable from a finite 4th spatial dimension. In such a system, with time being spatialized, the notion of the direction of time is completely arbitrary - there is not outside to which the system is tied which can serve as a memory of the history of the system to prevent the system from being completely reversible. The system would be ergodic and possess a conserved phase space volume. In perturbation theory within quantum mechanics, we find that an incompletely described dynamical system is approximated by a Hamiltonian possessing a perturbation energy which may be thought of as a system exactly described in terms of a Hamiltonian, H0, which is interacting with a larger energy system through the perturbation Hamiltonian, Hfluc which is simply added to H0 such that the new wavefunction calculated from this sum through the Schrodinger equation is just the new wavefunction expanded in terms of the old one defined in terms of H0. In this way the actual system is seen to be the old system undergoing virtual transition between its energy eigenfunctions. The old system's energy uncertainty

is represented in terms of the perturbation energy associated with the fluctuation Hamiltonian, Hfluc. In this way, it is seen that, in general, the temporal evolution of any quantum system is representable in terms of the interaction of an approximate system represented by a zeroeth order Hamiltonian, H0, with its outside environment from which is has originally been abstracted. When one has taken into account all possible perturbations due to real particles and fields interacting with the given system in question, one is left with the ineradicable residue of the quantum vacuum itself. So the concrete (and real) temporality of any quantum system, when the mere appearance of change in the system due to inadequacies in our nth order perturbation expansion description of the system have been taken into account, is wholly attributable to the action of the quantum mechanical vacuum. So we now come to an important distinction: changes in the system which are not directly measurable and hence understood as virtual transitions between energy levels of an approximate Hamiltonian description of the system versus transitions between energy levels of the system due to an actual incompleteness or openness of the system description due to ontological, i.e., actual, indeterminacy or indefiniteness of the system itself, as opposed to mere epistemological indefiniteness of the system which is a mere artifact of an incomplete quantum-perturbative analysis of the system. This is the distinction of ontological versus epistemological energy uncertainty of a quantum mechanical system. This above discussion pertains to the distinction, made in an earlier letter, of /\E, which I have said may be wholly attributable to the observer, and the square root Since momentum and position are incompatible observables, then so are a function of momentum and a function of position. Now the total energy of any quantum mechanical system, the Hamiltonian, H(p,r), is the sum of its kinetic and potential energies, H(p,r) = f(p) + f(r), where p and r are momentum and position, respectively. So by what has been said, H(p,r) cannot have a precise value - for this would imply simultaneously precise values for the kinetic and potential energies,

which, in turn, would imply simultaneous values of p and r. So the value, H(p,r) must undergo fluctuations of a fundamntal sort. Now even the vacuum is a quantum system, i.e., a q.m. ground state. So the vacuum's Hamiltonian, that is, its total energy, must also fluctuate. These fluctuations interact with every particle and field, introducing uncertainty in the location of particles in phase space, i.e., x-p space. October 2011 It seems likely that H(p,r) serves as the “medium of exchange” in any transformations of potential energy into kinetic energy (gravitation) or of kinetic energy into potential energy (inertia) and so that the quantum vacuum as a momentum-energy fluctuation medium provides the origin of both inertia and gravitation. Machian theory of inertia and gravitation: inertia induces gravity as gravity induces inertia. So-called “dark matter” may be a mere symptom of the application of prn= Mach’s principle to the momentum-energy fluctuations of the quantum vacuum. All measurement does is alter the shape of the area of phase space "occupied" by the particle. Measurement does not change the area of phase space where this particle is likely to be found ("occupied" by this particle"), however. The particle does not possess an exact "position" within the x-p (phase) space. We can never say beforehand how the vacuum fluctuations interacting with the particle (and out of which the particle is constituted and sustained) will nonlocally resonate with the vacuum fluctuations interacting at the time of measurement with the observer's brain (the observer's brain is also a quantum system, BTW). Remember that qbar = sqrt[^q**2 - /\q**2 ] where ^q is the fluctuations of q due to the quantum vacuum and /\q is the uncertainty in q which may be wholly attributed to the observer's brain due to the influence of vacuum energy fluctuations upon it!. It is the cooperation of these two terms which results in qbar, the expectation value (classical value) of q! This perhaps reminds some of you of Huxley's theory of perception: the receipt of photons by the retina of the observer results in a stimulation of the brain in such a way that its ether wave filters reconfigure so that the signals representing the object seen are no longer screened out by the consciousness reducing valve (the brain, that is) which are then "picked

up". The brain is then conceived of as a kind of ether wave tuning device and perception is just an altering of the set of frequencies of ether waves (vacuum fluctuations, if you prefer modern parlance) which the vacuum can resonate with where the brain acts only as a hardware interface between two unbounded sets of interfering ether wave spectra. The brain on this view is simply a changeable and complex set of boundary conditions placed upon the vacuum electromagnetic field's self-interaction!

Is there some general relationship between the height of the potential barrier and the magnitude of the energy uncertainty? Or is there really no general principle at work here relating these two quantities? H# = E# --> = --> = / **2 = **2 /\E = sQrt{ - **2} , where H = H(T(p),V(x)) What is the relationship between the reduction of the wavepacket upon an observation being performed on some quantum mechanical system and the conversion of virtual particles into real particles? It may be possible to modify Poisson's equation, @ 2P/@2r = 4pi(rho), to include a 2nd partial derivative of P, the potential, with respect to the time such that we might assimilate the 2nd partial derivative with respect to r to the state variable, (rho)mass, and assimilate the 2nd partial derivative of P with respect to t to the state variable, (rho)vacuum, so that (rho) in the above equation may be interpreted as the space density which is a locally conserved quantity.

Let us examine Einstein's field equation for any potential mathematical affinity it might have with respect to our equation relating the space energy density to the sum of the vacuum and mass energy densities. ====>

Tuv = -Ruv -1/2Rguv

Each of these three terms are what are called tensor densities. They have physical dimensions of energy density. In Mach's formula for the speed of pressure wave oscillations in a continuous, energy-conducting medium, the pressure is associated with the vacuum energy density since the quantum vacuum always obeys the equation of state that its pressure and energy density are identical. But this identification leaves only one possible further identification of the medium energy density; that is, the energy density must be identified with the total energy density of space, what is termed within our theory, the space density. In order for an entropy and temperature to be assigned to the quantum vacuum, we must suppose that this vacuum remains in thermal equilibrium with this heat reservoir, the energy density of which is the space density referred to earlier. Intuitively, if any further identifications are to be made between terms within our theory and terms within Einstein's theory, then the following identifications might be made: The scalar curvature, R, should be identified with the space density, the momentum-energy tensor, Tuv, should be identified with the massenergy density, and the term, -Ruv, should be identified with the vacuum energy density. The term, guv, which in relativity theory is the dimensionless dot product of the spacetime coordinate unit vectors, eu and ev, may be alternatively interpreted to correspond to the ratio of sum of the momentum-energy and Riemannian tensor densities to the scalar energy density. Within our theory, the guv correspond to mixed 2nd order partial derivatives of the ratio of the sum of the vacuum scalar

energy density to the total space energy density. xx virtual - virtual virtual |---------------------------| |---------------------------| | x x x | o o x | | x x x| xo | |x x x x | ox | | x x x | x o| | x x x x | x o | | x x x x | o x| |---------------------------| o |

real - real

real |------------------------|

|o

oo

| o

o

o o

| |o |

o

o|

o

o

|

|

o

o

|

|o ox

o o

o

| o o o o

o o

o| o| o o|

|------------------------|

| xo xx xo

| x | o

oo x xo o o x ox x

| x x o |o

o

o x

G = U - ST (free energy) is minimized and configurational entropy is maximized when rho(v) = rho(m) in the formation of a black hole. Do the partial derivatives of the gravitational potential transform like the components of a four vector? It would appear that an arbitrary Lorenz transformation of the 1st order partial derivatives of a standard static gravitational potential should transform so as to evince the existence of a time-varying potential, and hence, that of a 4-hyperspherical potential.

There is an important distinction to be made between massive and massless particles. This distinction consists in the fact that a massive particle which is seen to be at rest has a 4-momentum which is purely imaginary, but which may be re-represented by a Lorenz transformation in terms of a new set of real and imaginary components within some different inertial reference frame. This is not generally true of massless particles, however. A massless particle, such as a photon, possesses a relativistic 4-momentum which is purely real in any and all inertial reference frames. There is no possible Lorenz transformation which can succeed in re-representing the 4-momentum of the photon as a mixture of real and imaginary momentum components. However, in the case of real massive particles, the relativistic mass increases exactly in step with the increase in imaginary momentum. This suggests that perhaps photons do not possess a gravitational mass, and that the true source of the gravitational field is a massive body's imaginary momentum. How then, if this is true, do we account for the disappearance of the gravitational mass which results from the total conversion of mass into photon energy? Does this energy disappear in the form of longitudinal pressure waves in the quantum vacuum?

A photon which is climbing out of a gravitational potential must acquire an imaginary component of 4-momentum relative to its previous location within a stronger potential. We say, then, that a photon possesses an imaginary momentum relative to a point in spacetime of greater gravitational potential. The inertial frame-dragging effect deduced by Lenz and Thirring from Einstein's field equations, may be understood intuitively in the following

manner: angular momentum of a massive gravitating body as observed from a great distance away (where the body's gravitational potential has fallen off appreciably) appears greatly reduced when the observer is transported close to this body. This change in the appearance of the 3angular momentum of the massive body in transporting the observer from a reference frame of small gravitational potential to one possessing large potential may be understood in terms of a different partitioning of the total conserved 4-angular momentum of the body in the two different, locally Minkowskian frames. In other words, 4-angular momentum which is mostly about an arbitrary z-axis, for example, when the body is viewed from a region of spacetime of small potential, (relative to so-called "free space") is rotated within 4-dimensional spacetime in moving the observer to the region of large potential in such a way that most of the 4-angular momentum of the body now "appears" along the local time axis within this spacetime. The angular momentum seen by the more distant observer is hidden from the observer in close vicinity to the body because he is occupying a space which is, relative to the distant observer, spinning in the same sense as the body itself. This interpretation is consistent with the general relativistic effect of perhelion precession which occurs in the sense opposite to the direction of the body's orbital motion. In a conversation with Brian Swift it was suggested by me, in connection with a discussion of the old density wave theory of galactic spiral arm formation, that perhaps a spinning supermassive blackhole lies at the center of any given spiral arm galaxy and that the Lenz-Thirring inertial frame-dragging effect could be at least partially responsible (maybe also in conjunction with density waves) for the formation of the classic spiral arm structure of, for example, the Milky Way Galaxy.

Outline of a taped conversation between Dr. Brian Swift and Russell Clark Energy and time transform in opposite manner within relativity from how they transform within the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. The local velocity of light is affected by a Lorenz transformation analogously to the way time and length transform within this transformation. There may be a difference between energy and mass parallel to the distinction between fermions and bosons within quantum mechanics. It may be that gravity is only generated by fermions and not by bosons. Energy and mass may not be equivalent in all reference frames. Mass and energy may transform in opposite manner within a Lorenz transformation. Real fermions disturb the normally balanced renormalization which exists between the vacuum fermion and boson fluctuation fields. There is no fundamental distinction between real bosons and virtual bosons. End of this installment of the conversation between B & R. It is possible to understand from quantum theory, the causal relationship between the momentum - energy tensor and the space - time tensor of general relativity by noting a pair of bridging relations between these tensors via the Heisenberg space-momentum and time-energy uncertainty relations. These uncertainty relations prevent the defining of precise, deterministic trajectories for particles moving within 4dimensional Minkowski spacetime. In particular, no precise trajectory can be defined for particles whose sole component of motion is along the Minkowski ict axis. Such particles are observed to be "at rest" with respect to the local system of coordinates. What does it mean, we may ask, for a particle at rest to have an ill-defined trajectory, as implied by the Heisenberg principle? One obvious interpretation is for the particle to lack the continuous, independent existence of a classically described, inert and atom-like substance. The analogue of the particle - wave complementarity in quantum

theory is the dualism between mass and energy within the theory of relativity. The general absence of either a precisely defined particle position or momentum implies an oscillation of the particle between its particle and wave mode manifestations which may be understood in terms of the continual back-and-forth transformation of matter from its mass to its energy manifestation. This spontaneous activity on the part of matter may be visualized in terms of its continual reformation and disintegration into mass and energy. Only massless particles are reintegrated exclusively from the vacuum energy. Though massive particles are largely reintegrated out of the energy of the quantum vacuum, a tiny percentage of this energy must be supplied internally, that is, from energy resources of the mass itself. The measure of this fraction is the ratio of the mass-energy and vacuum energy densities within the volume occupied by the mass. This tendency for matter to replenish itself from a fraction of its own existing mass-energy in competition with its reintegration out of the locally available vacuum energy may account for the linkage of inertia and gravitation. This reintegration process may be modeled as a constant process of energy exchange amongst matter particles in competition with energy exchanges between these particles and the thermal reservoir of the vacuum nuclear electro-weak field fluctuations necessitated by the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. The exchange of energy within quantum mechanical systems may be generally characterized by three principle modes of energy exchange: first, the exchange of energy between mass-energy and itself which is mediated by the totality of fundamental force-carrying particles, collectively known as bosons. This particular mode of energy exchange is owing to the position-momentum manifestation of the generalized Heisenberg principle. Second, the exchange of energy between massenergy and the vacuum energy field which is the mode of energy exchange responsible for the phenomena of spontaneous emission, nuclear decay, quantum mechanical tunneling, etc., owes its origin to the time-energy form of the Heisenberg principle. Finally, there is the

energy exchange mode taking place between the vacuum energy field and itself. This energy exchange mode we suspect powers the process of global cosmological expansion. In general, an operator which does not commute with the Hamiltonian operator, i.e., [q,H] \= 0, must experience fluctuations. The Hamiltonian itself is subject to fundamental quantum fluctuations so we may say that [H,H] =\ 0. This means that changing the order in which we measure H makes a difference in the results of our measurement. This doesn't seem to make sense unless we are speaking of making these same measurements, but in opposite time order. If this is the correct interpretation of [H,H] =/ 0, then quantum fluctuations in the Hamiltonian of spacetime may be responsible for time's fundamental asymmetry. But how can H fail to commute with itself? This mode also constrains, we believe, the thermodynamic equilibrium of mass-energy systems embedded within the expanding mass-energy/vacuum-energy system, and so seems the most general manifestation of the Heisenberg principle. The overarching system of energy exchanges will altogether comprise a total conservative energy system to which will correspond the conservative force-field known as gravitation. On this view, gravitation is not thought to be mediated by a unique force-carrying particle, or boson, i.e., graviton, but is a fundamentally "parasitic" force, one which depends for its action on the collective interaction between matter, its fundamental exchange forces, and the total vacuum nuclear-electroweak field. Specifically, it is the shift in the balance between the three types of energy exchange continually occurring within the quantum vacuum: particle-particle, particle-wave, and wave-wave, energy exchanges. Because matter is continually being reintegrated from the vacuum energy field which originally created it, the transport of matter particles from one region of vacuum locally, to another region, cannot, on our view, be understood as being fundamentally different from the destruction of these particles within one local region of the vacuum field (and subsequent conversion to vacuum energy within this region) with the subsequent re-creation of these particles from the vacuum energy

locally available within the destination-region where they are ultimately "brought to rest." Therefore, we believe that the total energy density of any given region of locally Euclidean 3 - space may not be altered through changes in the local distribution of energy constituted by real matter particles and fields. We understand energy density more broadly here as the total four-momentum density of local regions of Minkowski spacetime, and understand the conservation of energy density as the constancy of total 4-momentum density despite phenomenological (apparent) variations in energy density (classically understood) within local Euclidean 3-spaces. To wit, though the magnitudes of the various components of the total 4-momentum density may change within an arbitrary 3-volume of Euclidean space, the magnitude of the total 4momentum density of spacetime does not change locally; that is to say, it does not change observably over relatively small distances and times within a Minkowski metric. The so-called mass-energy reformation process is limited by the density of available vacuum field energy out of which real particle/field energy systems must constantly reform themselves, and there is an antagonistic relationship between real particle/field energy and virtual particle/field energy such that the relative alterations in the densities of each be constrained by the principle of their conservation in total combination through the principle of conservation of total 4-momentum density. In general outline, the mechanism of gravitation works through the parallel connections mentioned earlier between the momentum-energy tensor and the space-time tensor in the following manner: a decrease in the positional uncertainty of a collection of particles induces an increase in the momentum uncertainty of these particles, one which is associated, through the definition of momentum uncertainty within quantum mechanics, with an increase in the collective energy of the particles which cannot originate with the forces initially bringing the particles together. Consequently, to conserve energy, this energy must be supplied from somewhere; we maintain that this energy is supplied by the quantum vacuum. This consequent decrease in the energy of the

vacuum energy field leads, in turn, to an increase in the energy of other distributions of particles already occupying the general region of this modified vacuum state. This increase in energy of the other particles occurs through an increase in the expectation value of the square of the particles momentum, but without altering the quantum expectation value of the magnitude of the particles total 4-momentum (consistent with special relativity). The only consistent way of effecting such a change in the quantum state of these particles is for the momentum uncertainty of the particles to increase. In turn, the positional uncertainty of these neighboring particles must decrease, and in such a manner that the total system of particles experiences a decrease in its positional uncertainty. The specific manner in which the particles do this is by being attracted toward the center of mass of the total particle distribution - an effect which manifests itself generally in the phenomenon of gravitational attraction. Because a particle's energy uncertainty is not an intrinsic property of the particle itself, but must be communicated to the particle through the interaction of the particle and the vacuum energy field sustaining its existence, the communication of energy uncertainty between particles distributed throughout space is after the fashion of an inverse-square law. Of course, a collection of particles may not really be thought to have a defined positional uncertainty unless these particles form with one another a bound system of particles. This is why we suspect that the gravitational force is only capable of coupling to binding energy so that the energy of the unconstrained vacuum may not itself be thought to gravitate; it is only spatiotemporal variations in the energy of the vacuum field which may be thought to produce gravitational effects. In fact, it is the tendency of massive bodies to hold themselves together against the opposite tendency of the cosmological acceleration field to disperse the particles forming these bodies, which sets up the spherically symmetric imbalance in the distribution and flow of the vacuum energy field ( in the case of spherically symmetric matter distributions ) which manifests itself as the gravitational field engendered by these and all other massive bodies within the expanding universe. Three-momentum is conserved in particle collisions because the acceleration of a particle always involves the rotation of its 4-

momentum, describable by a Lorenz transformation, and equal and opposite 4-momentum rotations on the part of the colliding particles always results; this is just a relativistic expression of Newton's actionreaction principle. In the case of two colliding particles with 0 initial and final total net momentum, an arbitrary quantity of energy may be supplied to the two particles without disturbing the net momentum of the particles. This may be regarded as a special instance of a property of momentum which is normally not obvious to an observer confined in his observations to the three dimensions of Euclidean space, but which is always operative within the context of the higher dimensionality of Minkowski spacetime. Accelerations merely have the effect of rotating the 4-momentum of particles within Minkowski space, as mentioned earlier, and so the magnitude of a particle's 4-momentum can never be altered. In general, forces are manifestations of momentum exchanges between the local imaginary and real momenta of particles and fields. When these momenta exchanges are rendered asymmetrical, the 3momenta of particles and fields are not generally conserved. Within a hypersurface of simultaneity in flat Minkowski space, the vacuum 3momenta are conserved despite the participation of the vacuum energy field in the local cosmological velocity field. This is due to the inherent symmetry of the momenta exchanges between the real and imaginary vacuum momentum components. The presence of matter induces an asymmetry in the momentum exchanges between the vacuum's real and imaginary components of momentum reflected in the asymmetry of the vacuum's self-energy exchanges. When energy is spontaneously imparted to a massy particle and then returned spontaneously to the vacuum energy field, within this brief interval of time, the energy state of the local vacuum has altered slightly in the direction of decreasing vacuum energy density so that each time the energy originally imparted to the mass is paid back to the vacuum, the vacuum receives in return a slightly smaller quantity of energy. The result of this is that the mass of the particle continually increases very slowly with passing time as the universe continues to expand during the course of the constant exchange of energy between the particle and the vacuum in which it is embedded. It is this constant exchange of energy between the particle and its

vacuum energy field which is responsible for the magnitude of the particles momentum/energy uncertainty. We term this the "perturbation interpretation" of the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. Because the cosmological expansion rate is locally constant, the imaginary momentum of particles is always increasing very slowly with the cosmological expansion. It can be independently demonstrated that the real momentum of particles is always increasing at the very same rate as is their imaginary momentum. If the mass of a body is relativistically increased, then if the magnitude of its 4-momentum is to be conserved, then the 4-momentum of this massive body must experience a rotation in Minkowski space which just compensates the effect of this increase in mass on the imaginary momentum of the body. In brief, we say that an acceleration field induces an increase in the relativistic mass of a body, and conversely, a field which induces an increase in the relativistic mass of a body, must itself constitute an acceleration field. The presence of a real fermion inhibits the appearance of certain virtual fermion-antifermion pairs out of the vacuum because, by the Pauli exclusion principle, a virtual fermion in the same quantum state as the real fermion which is already present is forbidden to appear where the positional uncertainties of the real and virtual fermions were to overlap. Thus, the creation of the entire pair within this region of overlapping positional uncertainty is suppressed. There should, of course, be some sort of smooth decay of this suppressive effect of real fermions on the creation of virtual fermion-antifermion pairs in the vacuum away from the center of the "volume of positional uncertainty" within which the real fermion is to be found. In a similar manner, an energy of 2m sc2 must be created out of the vacuum in order for a black hole of mass energy, msc2, to "evaporate" via the emission of Hawking radiation. In the case of bosons, the opposite principle is operating. This principle might be termed the Pauli "inclusion principle." The more bosons we have in a particular quantum state, the greater is the probability that more bosons will enter this same quantum state. We might, therefore,

expect the presence of real matter to enhance the probability of spontaneous emission/absorption of virtual bosons from the vacuum in a quantum state with operator values closely approximating those expectation values describing the bosons mediating the mean nuclear electro-weak field responsible for the binding forces of this matter. Of course, what we are really saying here is that the operator expectation values themselves for vacuum operators are altered, or shifted in value, from their "free space" values. This alteration in the vacuum field may be viewed as stemming from either: 1) a shift in the value of the quantum operators, 2) an alteration of the vacuum wavefunction acted upon by the quantum operators, or 3) a combination of both 1) and 2). In the particular case where only the vacuum wavefunction itself is altered, we might interpret this in terms of an alteration of the vacuum Hamiltonian from which the vacuum wavefunction is calculated. We already know that any alteration in the Hamiltonian describing the energy of a harmonic oscillator will result in the oscillator undergoing a change in its zero-point oscillations, that is to say, the oscillator will suffer a shift in its zero-point energy. Any change to the zero-point energy of a harmonic oscillator may be modeled on a change in the oscillator's Hamiltonian owing exclusively to the appearance of an additional potential term within the Hamiltonian function of the oscillator. If we want to integrate the quantum mechanical and relativistic effects of matter on the vacuum nuclear electro-weak field, then we must reconcile the influence, which changing mass-energy distributions have upon the uncertainty relations within the vacuum, with our requirement that the variations in vacuum momentum-energy and position-time uncertainties be connected to one another along contiguous points in spacetime by series of instantaneous Lorenz transformations. If the energy structure of the vacuum is modeled as a crystalline lattice of coupled harmonic oscillators, then the reconcilement of the two so-called Heisenberg and

Einstein effects of matter upon the vacuum energy field might be possible. We might succeed in doing this by introducing just the sort of ad hoc potential term alluded to earlier. By this , we mean the potential function which incorporated into the Hamiltonian of the vacuum's oscillator meshwork effects the desired spatio-temporal alteration in the vacuum's zero-point energy. Such a spatio-temporal variation in the vacuum's zero-point energy should recoup all of the anticipated general relativistic effects, e.g., gravitational redshift, light deflection, time dilation, length contraction, mass increase, etc. It should achieve this while at the same time explaining a concomitant change in the BoseEinstein and Fermi-Dirac statistics of the vacuum consistent with the application of wavefunction symmetry/antisymmetry to the interaction of matter and vacuum. We might begin doing this by explaining away, if you will, the seemingly inconsistent demands of the time/energy expression of the Heisenberg principle and the relativistic expressions for time and energy within relativity theory. This must be done with respect to the predicted interactions of time and energy uncertainty within both theories. First, let us note that both principles, Einstein's and Heisenberg's, agree with one another concerning the relationships of changes in length and positional uncertainty, on the one hand, and momentum and momentum uncertainty, on the other hand. Where these two theories conflict, is in comparing the effect of a change in energy uncertainty on the value of the time uncertainty: relativity predicts that a relativistic increase in energy uncertainty will be accompanied by a relativistic increase in time uncertainty, while Heisenberg uncertainty principle predicts that an increase in the energy uncertainty of a quantum mechanical system (here, a relativistic increase) will be associated with a decrease in the time uncertainty of the system. The solution to this dilemma may lie with the simple fact that position and time are not on an equal footing with one another as they are within the special relativity theory - there is no operator corresponding to the time variable within quantum mechanics as in the case of position, momentum and energy. Or the solution may lie with the possible inconsistencies of the notion of energy uncertainty within both theories. This may be due to a deeper inconsistency in the definition energy within both theories. Energy in

quantum mechanics is defined as the Hamiltonian function whereas the energy referred to in relativity theory is the mass-energy, or, perhaps, the kinetic energy. The Hamiltonian is, of course, the sum of both the kinetic and potential energies of the quantum system. Of course, if the vacuum modeled as a Debye solid, that is, as a network of coupled harmonic oscillators, then the Hamiltonian describing this system of oscillators must be consistent with relativity. The potential energy of the Hamiltonian must be a function of not only x,y and z, but must also be a function of the variable, ict, within the Minkowski metric. The kinetic energy component of this vacuum Hamiltonian must be a function of all four components of the relativistic 4-momentum vector of special relativity. Perhaps we may think of virtual particle reactions as lying "off the mass shell" between two extreme points off-shell. These are: virtual momentum fluctuations with negligible virtual fluctuations in energy, and virtual energy fluctuations with negligible virtual fluctuations in momentum. We may liken the spontaneous creation of virtual bosons from the vacuum as pure momentum fluctuations, and of virtual fermion-antifermion pairs as pure energy fluctuations of this vacuum. Is spin another name for angular momentum about the ict axis? Is it possible, then, for a spin 0 particle to possess a component of angular momentum within the three normal spatial dimensions? If so, then wouldn't this constitute a stark violation of the principle of the relativistic invariance of angular momentum? There is an apparent paradox associated with the gravitational redshift of starlight predicted by Einstein's theory of general relativity. The general theory explains this reddening of the sun's light, for instance, as being due to the fact that the energy of photons has an inertia associated with it and that, therefore, the photons must give up the requisite energy in overcoming the Sun's gravitational potential as they fly away from the Sun, off to infinity. The specific paradox is seen when one considers the reverse of this process, the gravitational "bluing" of starlight as it falls

into a gravitational potential, and then imagines "bouncing" photons off of a huge mirror stationed closed to the surface of the Sun, presumable in a very tight circular orbit! Photons leaving the Earth for the Sun, for example, experience an increase in their energy ("bluing") which will exactly offset the decrease in their energy on their return journey, after bouncing off the mirror, so that the wavelength of these photons will not differ from that when initially leaving the Earth. When particles are compressed into a progressively smaller volume of space, the positional uncertainty of all the particles decreases. Consequently, the momentum uncertainty of all of the particles will increase. Although the quantum mechanical expectation value of momentum for the particles will not be affected by a change in the momentum uncertainty of the particles, nor the square of the expectation value of the momentum, the expectation value of the square of the momentum will change, however - it will increase. This all follows from the mere definition of momentum uncertainty in quantum mechanics. This is to say that the total energy of the particles will be increased simply by virtue of the obvious decrease in quantum positional uncertainty of the particles as a result of their having been confined to a smaller volume. Note that this energy conferred to the particles cannot be explained in terms of any work which might have been performed upon the particles in the process of pushing them together, as we might have taken, theoretically, any amount of force at all in pushing them together, depending upon how much time we were willing to take in doing so. This is yet another reason for believing that the collective vacuum energy field is associated with the operation of a conservative force-field. If we have not really imparted any energy to these particles simply by virtue of having moved them together somewhat, then how are we to explain the appearance of this energy in such a manner that the total energy of the volume occupied by the particles remains constant, that is to say, so that the total energy of this volume is conserved? We might postulate a kind of hidden energy which, along with the particles, also occupies their space. We might further suppose that these particles may be thought to be made out of this energy so that an increase in the

energy of particles within a particular volume of space becomes tied to a corresponding and compensating decrease in the amount of this hidden energy such that the total energy of the volume remains unchanged - a kind of radical energy conservation principle. One way to make such an assumption, and there are indeed many different ways in which this assumption might be realized, would be to postulate that there is a fourth component of particle momentum, previously unsuspected, itself unchanged by our having pushed the particles together, but possessing a square whose quantum expectation value has been altered in a manner which exactly cancels the changes in the expectation values of the squares of the usual three independent components of momentum along the x, y and z axes of a Cartesian coordinate system. One way for the momentum of the particles along the hypothetical "w-axis," as well as along the other three axes, to remain unchanged, with the energy of the particles changing at the same time, would be if the masses of the particles were permitted to change in inverse proportion to the change in the velocity of the particles along this new w-axis. We can succeed in doing this by permitting the particles to possess a negative kinetic energy which is decreased as the particles are pushed together. But turning to an analogy with the case of a particle "tunneling" through a potential barrier, any change in the necessarily negative kinetic energy of the tunneling particle could be compensated for through judicious instantaneous adjustment of the height of the potential barrier though which it is moving, that is to say, through the appearance of a kind of ad hoc potential term which is to be added to the original barrier potential, V(x). If we identify this ad hoc potential so-called with the gravitational potential, then two things immediately follow: 1) a gravitational potential exists in space whether or not matter is present; it is built into the very structure of space itself. And, 2) matter has the peculiar effect of altering this essentially cosmologically-based potential through quantum mechanical interactions taking place between all matter particles and the continuum of space in which they are embedded. The quantum vacuum offers itself as a logical candidate for this medium of space (aether, if you will) with which all matter particles are in interaction. Moreover, the variation of the density of this vacuum

energy due to the process of the cosmological expansion of space provides a logical basis for our postulated potential barrier. The increase in energy of this hypothetical system of particles is based on the decrease in their mutual positional uncertainty and the masses of the particles are irrelevant to the determination of this energy increase. If gravitational effects are to be ultimately traced to variations in the energy uncertainty of mass-energy distributions, leading in turn to a modification in the cosmological spatiotemporal variation in the vacuum nuclear-electroweak field from its equilibrium momentum density in socalled free-space, then there must be some means of defining the masses of particles, as well as the mass equivalence of field energies, in terms of their binding or self-energies alone. Lorenz attempted to do this in the early 1900's with respect to the mass of the electron; he tried to define the mass of the electron exclusively in terms of its electromagnetic selfenergy. He was, however, unsuccessful, and to my knowledge, no further efforts have been made to repeat the attempt. Let us look at this question in term of a hopefully illustrative analogy. Suppose instead of simple monochromatic light, we send a modulated carrier wave of electromagnetic radiation from the Earth to the Sun and back again. Suppose the modulation upon the carrier wave was a simple TV transmission of a normally functioning analogue wall clock. @? Particle creation at the event horizon of a black hole gives rise to a precisely thermal spectrum. This suggests that the vacuum itself is in thermal equilibrium with itself so that the vacuum must be continually exchanging energy with itself. because the time rate of change of all physical quantities depends on the existence of energy uncertainty, dq/dt = [H, q] + f[H,q], where f[H,q] is usually written as @q/@t. On this view, quantum mechanical systems possess energy uncertainty because they are continually perturbed by intrinsic vacuum energy fluctuations. In this way, all mass-energy systems are in a process of constant energy exchange with the quantum mechanical vacuum. Since all macroscopic transfers and exchanges of energy between two points in spacetime are

mediated via the submicroscopic energy exchanges occurring within the vacuum, it follows that conservation of energy macroscopically is dependent upon conservation of energy exchanges within the vacuum. The temporal evolution of the quantum vacuum is, therefore, mediated by its own action. A number of conclusions follow from this fact. 1) the vacuum’s energy is conserved, but not by virtue of this energy possessing a determinate quantity: the vacuum’s energy is conserved even though it is an indeterminate quantity. It is not possible to distinguish different time rates of change within a closed dynamical system. This is because such a closed system possesses only a finite number of discrete energy levels, and when the total system is in a particular energy eigenstate, its energy uncertainty is 0 so that there are no vacuum fluctuations available with which to mediate changes in physical observables of the system. We may define the distance separating two events as a function of the number of vacuum momentum fluctuations existing between the two said events. Similarly, we may define the time interval between two such events as a function of the number of vacuum energy fluctuations existing between the two said events. Of course, the partitioning of the relativistic momentum - energy tensor into pure momentum versus pure energy components is dependent upon the particular Lorenz reference frame within which one performs the momentum and energy measurements.

Since the energy levels at which information is stored in a neural network are defined in terms of the lowest stable energy of the neural network as a whole, virtual energy transitions between these energy levels presuppose a coupling between the wavefunctions describing the quantum mechanical states of all of the individual neurons of the network in the sense of their being nonlocally connected.

It is the spontaneous coherence in which the neural network is embedded which provides the ultimate context within which the neurological events are to be interpreted. This coherent field is that of the nonlocally connected vacuum electromagnetic fluctuation field. The many worlds interpretation of the quantum measurement problem may be understood as a reversal in causal relationship between the uncollapsed wavefunction representing the mind of the observer and the uncollapsed wavefunction representing the potentialities of the quantum mechanical system being observed by this mind in the following manner: when the observer notes the collapse of the wavefunction with respect to an observable he is attempting to measure, what is actually occurring is the collapse of the wavefunction describing the observers mind so that it now abstracts from the Weltall one particular eigenvalue of the object wavefunction, but without inducing a collapse of the object wavefunction itself. One might ask what is the fundamental difference between these two interpretations if there is not some third realm, independent of both the observer's and object wavefunctions in terms of which one interpretation might be favored over the other as being ontologically prior. This third realm belongs neither to that of causality (the mutual interaction of collapsed wavefunctions), nor to that of contingency (the interaction of collapsed with uncollapsed wavefunctions, and vice versa), but to that realm constituted solely by the mutual interaction of all uncollapsed wavefunctions. This realm we may refer to as the composite contingency - necessity manifold or continuum. There is an exactly parallel assimilation between the category space - time with our category of necessity - contingency. In this way we may realize that the concepts of locality and nonlocality constitute a distinction which cuts across that constituted by the polar concepts chance and necessity. Good is that which enhances creativity which is the explicit expression of implicitly integral wholeness. Evil constitutes that which seeks to destroy, confuse, disintegrate as well as to impair the expression of unity

and wholeness through creativity. All creativity is in reality re-creativity. The probability spectrum of a given wavefunction may be overdetermined so that there exists an unlimited number of ways in which an ensemble of measurements of the eigenstates of the wavefunction with respect to a particular observable may sum together so that the wavefunction appears perfectly normalized; this property may permit an additional degree of freedom within quantum mechanical virtual processes not previously suspected to exist. There is an absolute simultaneity which mental events distinctly enjoy due to the fact that they do not admit of perspective; if anything they constitute perspective. However, the order in which neurophysiological occurrences occur ( in the brain) is at least partially dependent upon the reference frame (in the relativistic sense) that these events occur (as observables). There must be an embedding of these neural events in a substrate which extends beyond the merely neurophysiological in order for a reference frame to be defined in which there can arise a correspondence between subjective and objective simultaneities. Since it is the pattern of virtual particle emission and absorption which every real particle continually undergoes which determines the mass of the particle, it follows that real particle masses are determined through the particular manner in which real particles exchange energy with the fluctuating quantum vacuum field; consequently, alterations in the density of the vacuum field energy will affect the masses of particles occupying this vacuum. We might expect that this relationship between mass-energy and vacuum-energy is symmetrical in nature because the interactions mediating the continual exchange of energy between matter and vacuum are themselves reversible interactions. This two-way causal, symmetrical relationship between mass energy and vacuum energy within quantum field theory reminds us of a similar relationship between mass and space-time curvature within the theory of general relativity: the presence of mass within a given region of spacetime produces an additional curvature in this spacetime; also, an increase in

the curvature of a particular region of spacetime produces an increase in the mass of particles or material bodies already occupying this region. Since spatio-temporal variations in the energy density of the vacuum energy field are correlated with variations in spacetime curvature, we might suppose that some sort of conformal mapping relationship obtains between the ratio of real particle to virtual particle energy densities and the degree of mutual inclination of the time and space axes ( of the Minkowski light cone ) to one another. This relationship is also suggested by the fact that real particles are virtual particles which have been promoted to the level of real existence through the absorption of energy; particles are excitations of the vacuum state which is itself a reservoir or sea of virtual particles. Also, through the application Mach's formula for the speed of sound to this vacuum energy reservoir, we see that such a conformal mapping relationship between Einsteinian spacetime curvature and spatial-temporal variations in the zero-point energy of the vacuum (or, alternatively, its energy density) must involve mappings between the hypersolid angle swept out by the light line in four-dimensional (Minkowski ) spacetime, and the energy density (or pressure) of the vacuum. Quantum Mechanics tells us that a closed dynamical system may only undergo temporal evolution provided that a certain energy uncertainty exists within the system. This energy uncertainty is just the standard deviation of the energy about its mean or expectation value. This energy uncertainty may be interpreted in terms of a time-average sum of random energy perturbations to the system "from outside" the system. These random energy perturbations manifest themselves in the form of energy exchanges between the quantum mechanical system and the sea of virtual particles in which this system is embedded. The interaction of these virtual particles with the quantum mechanical system are responsible for virtual transitions of the quantum state of the system to other quantum states. The only real energy transitions available to the quantum mechanical (dynamical) system are those from amongst the set of virtual energy transitions which are continually occurring within the time interval specified by the system's time uncertainty. The density of

this virtual particle energy sea has a direct bearing upon the rate of temporal evolution of any given quantum mechanical system. Our central hypothesis is that the presence of matter has a perturbing effect upon this virtual particle energy sea, i.e., the quantum vacuum field, and this perturbing effect is, namely, to decrease the overall density of this vacuum energy which results in a similar decrease in the time rate of change of all physical processes within the spatial volume occupied by this matter. This proposed vacuum mechanism is exactly similar to the mechanism by which a quantum resonant cavity decreases the rate of spontaneous emission of 'cavity - detuned' photons by a Rydberg excited atom. The resonant cavity achieves this by excluding most of the photons of half-wavelength larger than the cavity diameter: to wit, it does this by decreasing the energy density of vacuum electromagnetic field fluctuations of roughly the same energy as that of the suppressed atomic energy transitions. In the first couple of decades after the first "atom - smashing" experiments performed with the primitive particle accelerators of the 1930's, it had been supposed that the particle products of these violent collisions were actually pieces of the colliding particles which had been jarred loose by the sudden impulsive force of their slamming together. But soon after this early period the kinetic energies of the particles going into these accelerator collisions began to significantly exceed the combined mass - energy of the particles which themselves initiated the reaction, with the result that the end product of these collisions was a set of particles with individual member particles possessing a mass greater than the combined mass of the particles originally participating in the collision. The common sense "broken pieces" explanation of accelerator products now had to be modified in some way or rejected outright. Two alternative interpretations of this "mass paradox" were suggested by particle theorists: either the product particles were created from the excitation of the vacuum by the kinetic energy of the collision with the "input" particles serving as the points of application of the excitation energy, or they were really inside the initial particles all along but the excess mass - energy was being exactly balanced by an equal and

opposite negative energy due to the internal binding forces holding the particles together. Thanks for the response. An energy eigenstate is an abstraction in the sense that only a closed system can be in an energy eigenstate, but thermodynamically this is not possible because of the fact that vacuum fluctuations in momentum-energy cannot be screened (kinda like gravity). Some modes can be screened of course and the Casimir Effect is an example of this. But in this case only momentum fluctuations, virtual photons, are being suppressed here. Virtual electron/positron pairs are not suppressed, in fact, the probability of the creation/annihilation of these pairs is actually enhanced between the Casimir plates. We may think of virtual fermion/antifermion creationannihilation events as energy fluctuations, collectively of spin 0 and the photon creation-annihilations as momentum fluctuations of spin 1. Together, the spin 0 energy fluctuations and the spin 1 momentum fluctuations may be considered to be a fluctuating momentum-energy four vector of expectation value for T(i,k) (momentum-energy tensor) = 0 and this is part of the reason that the vacuum does not gravitate, I believe. Getting back to the main point, as long as there is a fluctuation component to the Hamiltonian, which cannot be completly removed through supplied boundary conditions, the system will never exist in a true energy eigenstate and will be forced to temporally evolve due to the exchange of momentum energy between the system and its fluctuation Hamiltonian (the vacuum fluctuations). During uniform acceleration, the space and time axes are displaced by twice the angle relative to each other as do these axes relative to their inertial frame counterparts. The fact that composite matter cannot exist as virtual particles suggests that it is only composite matter, i.e., matter possessing a binding energy over and above that of the vacuum constituting the elementary particles

separately. This fact suggests that the particle vacuum fields do not, in isolation, possess a distinct gravitational field. Relative versus absolute spacetime rotations are important in connection with spin statistics. Supposing the quantum vacuum itself can be the source of a gravitational field leaves no quantum mechanism (behind the scenes) available to mediate gravitation. Certainly the positive definite signature of the Minkowski metric is intimately related to the symmetry and antisymmetry of the wavefunctions describing fermions and bosons. Because topology is constituted by spin statistics of virtual particles the energy of the zero-point field falls outside of the scope of general relativity. Because energy uncertainty drives temporal evolution and gravitation can only manifest itself by deflection of timelike vectors so that they acquire spacelike components, it follows that the underlying dynamism of gravity must be the energy fluctuations of the quantum vacuum. Because an object’s energy is even if only in a tiny part reconstituted from out of its own energy, the object cannot move along its own time axis at the speed of light. In the exchange of substance in the continual reconstitution of an object there is a discontinuity and hence topological change. Does the quantum vacuum possess an unbroken spin 2 gauge symmetry, obviating the need for a spin 2 exchange boson? Normally, symmetric and antisymmetric wavefunctions cannot be superposed. The wavefunctions describing bosons and fermions are in

this sense orthogonal. It may be that the orientation of spins for spin 0 and spin 1 particles are normally mutually orthogonal. We have the bosonization of fermions, but there does not appear to be any such phenomenon as the fermion-ization of bosons. 1. In what is called the Casimir effect, parallel electrically conducting plates separated by some small distance, d, exclude all modes of vacuum electromagnetic field fluctuations, i.e., virtual photons, of halfwavelength greater than d. The plates modify the v.e.f. mode structure of the vacuum between the plates. If energy is supplied to the plates too rapidly, separating the plates to a new, larger distance, d', nonadiabatically, then when the old wavefunction describing the former configuration of the plates is expanded in terms of the new set of energy eigenfunctions representing the new set of v.e.f. modes, the vacuum will be found to be in an electromagnetically excited state with one of the modes above the ground state now occupied by a photon. This corresponds to the creation of a real photon from the modified vacuum. 2. Such a photon would have to be passing through a field providing the energy necessary to prevent the electron positron pair from recombining to give back the original photon. For example the photon would have to pass very close to an atomic nucleus so that the pair would be separated by the nucleus' electric field. 3. If you are speaking only of the vacuum electromagnetic field, that is, only of the e/m component of the total quantum vacuum field. There are, of course, other components corresponding to momentum fluctuations in the form of virtual W,Z, and gluon particles, not to mention mesons, etc., and other integral spin, force-carrying virtual particles. There are also energy fluctuations of the total vacuum field such as virtual fermion /antifermion pairs, e.g., electron /positron, muon/antimuon, tao/antitao, etc. 1.

It is a purely quantitative distinction. A virtual particle may be thought of as a real particle possessing energy equal to or less than

the energy uncertainty of the quantum system of which it is an excitation. A real particle may be thought of as a virtual particle which possesses more energy than the energy uncertainty of the system with which it exchanges momentum-energy. The fact that the distinction between real and virtual particles is only quantitative in this manner implies that Bose-Einstein statistics applies equally to virtual and real bosons and that, moreover, Fermi-Dirac statistics applies equally to virtual and real fermions. The real vs. virtual distinction for particles is dependent upon reference frames in the relativity sense, e.g., virtual particles can become real in an accelerated reference frame. I believe that real particles cannot become virtual however and this would imply, if true, that acceleration is irreversible in the thermodynamic sense and this is why we should expect the vacuum's of gravitational fields to possess an entropy. This is perhaps the same irreversibility associated with Penrose's one graviton limit for spontaneous, orchestrated reduction of the wavefunction (OR).

F(t) =

Â

0

= e-iwtF(w)dw

if f(t) = 0 over the range t1 ¼ t ¼ t2, then the Fourier analysis of this function give positive and negative frequencies, corresponding to “+” and “-“ energies. Translational motion relative to a particular point in spacetime, over a time interval in which f(t) = 0, causes a doppler shift in the positive frequencies which is exactly compensated by the doppler shift in the negative frequencies of F(w) over interval of time /\t = (t2 – t1). The gravitational redshift may be understood in terms of a 4 dimensional doppler effect caused by different local velocities of light as reckoned from one or another of the two localities distinguished by different gravitational potentials. Gm/R has units of c2.

@$

Occupation numbers for Bose and Fermi statistics: number of fermions shifts the number of bosons appropriate to an equilibrium black-body spectrum. Frequency, f, and wavenumber, k, are only discrete variables in the case where boundary conditions have been placed upon the bosons, b(f,k). It is in just this case where the time and space variables may be treared as quantized with a complementary description as gravitational (spacetime) waves, or, alternatively, as “gravitons.” We would not, in light of the above, expect such pseudogravitons to be produced in the absence of boundary conditions placed upon the vacuum boson field. In classical theory, accelerated electrons radiate electromagnetic energy at a rate equal to 2/3 e2/c3 |X``|2. In a gravitational field, this energy radiation rate will be dilated in accordance with general relativity. @$Thus smaller zero-point energy fluctuations will be required to prevent collapse of the electron into the atom’s nucleus. The perfection of the strong equivalence principle seems to be tied to the condition of perfect Lorenz invariance, which, by the way, is violated by a vacuum with only a finite spectrum of modes of electromagnetic oscillation, such as is defined by the Planck wavelength (as an “energy cutoff”) and the radius of the observable (mutually causally-connected universe). The principle of relativity seems to demand reference frames in which the gravitational potential is time-varying. If a spectrum of radiation is thermal due to its self-interaction, then this spectrum cannot be Lorenz-invariant, but defines a privileged frame of reference. If the radiation spectrum possesses its thermal nature solely

by virtue of the correlations between the photons after the manner in which they are created, with each photon being “destroyed,” or annihilated before any can interact with the others so as to disturb these correlations, then this thermal spectrum should possess Lorenzinvariance. There should be uncertainties, analogous to those in p and E, in the other 12 components of stress-momentum-energy. Are we in this case no longer dealing with the simple case of a quantum mechanical system which can be described by a wavefunction, but which must be described in terms of a density matrix. Bohm’s statement in his book, Quantum Theory (1951), that causal connections can always be alternatively expressed in terms of collections of correlations appears related to the fact that the expectation values and Heisenburg uncertainties of observables can always in turn be expressed in terms of a combination of fluctuations and uncertainties. Any energies smaller than /\E may only be connected to each other and to the system in which /\E is defined by virtue of nonlocal correlations. But can /\E be decomposed into both locally, causally connected and nonlocally correlated eigenfunctions? Can /\E be described by a quantum statistical mixture? Virtual gravitons cannot be understood to be quantum fluctuations in spacetime topology since topology is prior to metric and hence to an established scale of space and time, still less of scale of spacetime interval. If the metric tensor components are used to describe deviations of the metric from that of “flat” Minkowski metric, then the notion of time dependence of the metric can be coherent. It is clear that the metric of spacetime is changing with time due to cosmological expansion. Of course changes with time in the stress-

momentum-energy tensor are also taking place with the cosmological expansion. The notion is not, consistent with the field equations of general relativity since this would be a casae of a time-varying metric in the absence of time-variation in the distribution of stress-momentumenergy. Yet certainly time-varying of the embedding space (of spacetime itself) should produce dynamic effects which could only be taken into account by general relativity in an ad hoc manner; this is perhaps how we should understand Einstein’s emendation of his original field equations when he inserted into them a cosmological constant term. Einstein’s motive in inserting this ad hoc term was to resolve the inherent instability of the spacetime described by the field equations with respect to its collapse or expansion. Does the stress-momentum-energy of the quantum vacuum form a tensor, or does it merely constitute a tensor in combination with particles and fields? What invariants, if any, are associated with the quantum vacuum? Is it ever the case that, Æ/

s=

Æ/

vac x

vac/ s = I

?

where Æ is a field or field component and s is the spacetime interval, vac is the quantum vacuum field and I is and invariant. In other words, does the product of changes in the components of certain invariants with respect to changes in the quantum vacuum field with certain changes in this vacuum field with respect to changes in local spacetime interval itself produce an invariant? Nonlocality arises in general relativity because the global boundary conditions of spacetime are not reducible to a composition of local spacetime boundary conditions.

This suggests a damped, resonant oscillator circuit model of inertia. Can exponential envelope and enclosed sinusoidal variation be attributed to orthogonal or coupled, pseudo-orthogonal Fourier components?

Clinton = World President in A.D. 2020 GATT NAFTA Bail-out of Mexican Peso Chinese Connection/Nucl. Secrets Interventions/Police actions, e.g., Rwanda, Haiti, Serbia, etc. Palestinian Peace Accords Release of Int’l. Terrorists from American prisons Forgiveness of Foreign Debt by World Bank Hilary’s Women’s Summit Northern Ireland UN Environmental Preserves to be established within US borders

********************************************************** ************************** ………………. new material.

=

update www.driveway.com with the highlighted

There is apparently no sufficient reason for distinguishing the case where a single consciousness takes myriad distinct forms, i.e., egos from that wherein each ego is the limitation of a wholly and substantially distinct, transcendental consciousness. Only from the perspective of that which is the author of the principle of order determining which metaphysical case is ultimate reality are these two cases distinguishable and actually distinct. It seems that the requirement that ultimate reality be determinate in some respect or other in turn demands that such an author of the principle of being itself possess being. To survive the loss of one’s human life, one must have prior to this event, contacted and come to identify with one’s deeper identity that has never been revealed from within this life that is to be lost. Consciousness as the source of all metaphor must itself literally exist, if literal (written/spoken) versus metaphorical (image) make up a genuine duality. Differences inhering in consciousness that are not essential if the characterization of consciousness as such, but merely a subcategory thereof. The transcendental nature of individual consciousness is that of the transcending of existence (appearance), which of consciousness in its suchness is that of reality itself (Being). Compare and contrast the indefinite extensibility of consciousness with the capacity for blank paper to have anything whatever written on it. Some systems of thought however brilliant are not inspired by truth but by illusion, opposition, imitation, to wit, they are coherent resonances of the intellect without any inner principle by which they might sustain

themselves – thought, in other words, engendered by only 3 of the 4 varieties of cause specified in Aristotelian metaphysics, i.e., efficient, formal, material, causes in the absence of the operation of final causes. Is god consciousness an extension of consciousness’ reflection it has always caught of itself but not dissociated sufficiently to be reified as other. Or is God glimpsed within the otherness of the Self (Father) and of the self in the other (Christ), spirit the principle of order connecting the two? How can we properly accept Christ’s sacrifice as a gift if we don’t feel unworthy of receiving it?

Rule-governed strings of words describing how to form word strings – these are the sentences that we possess without ever having heard before. The capacity of the brain to produce and maintain conscious states is dependent upon the maintaining of both proper internal and external connections. Grace – what the heathen term “good luck.” When one doesn’t have a life of one’s own, one may substitute a kind of tourism of other people’s lives. Exploring the combinational permutational space of possibilities alters the complexion of this space in a way that must be represented in terms of an altogether novel set of combinational and permutational possibilities, i.e., a change on basis is effected, however one that is not symmetrical (as a transformation), c.f., Quantum Theory (1951), David Bohm, on similarities of QM systems and consciousness. Problems with early marriage – coalescing of inchoate identities crystallized only much later with circumstantial shift. On the other

hand, two mature, determinate, independent individuals respectfully entering into a union different from Pioneer American paradigm of marriage. The desire to “monkey” or “spielen mit” what one has identified as the mechanical or protruding, deterministic component of another person’s being is one surely informed by a necrophilic impulse. We have to consider that the principle of the being of the individual’s consciousness has ot have its origin outside of the individual’s being qua being. This is due to the (as already noted) transcendental nature of the concept of consciousness as such. The disturbance of the observer to the QM system that causes momentum to be imparted by the observer is unanticipated due to the “freely-willed” origination of the causal chain of the disturbance. For otherwise, the individual’s act of will in imparting this disturbance momentum to the system could have been included along with the system under observation to form a kind of “super-system,” itself evolving deterministically, which is to say, the observer’s act could not here provoke any state reduction of the vector describing the subsystem (of the “super-system”) under his observation/measurement. The act of quantum observer’s upon QM systems induces state vector reduction (i.e., “collapse of the wavefunction”) because the observer is in reality not wholly contained in any possible QM system which also contains the system being observed/measured by him. This fact must undoubtedly carry some important metaphysical implications for our understanding of the nature of this observer’s being. When one acts in accordance with one’s nature one enjoys the protection at least for a time of grace regardless of what that nature might be, good or ill. When one commits evil acts not in accordance with one’s own nature, it is here that one’s just desert is received quickest. The fact of good and evil forming a four category grid instead of a

simple duality, has caused much confusion and error in the moral thinking of Man, as humankind conceptualizes most conveniently and naturally in terms of dual category distinctions, i.e., (natural, good), (natural, evil), (unnatural, good), (unnatural, evil). A superposition of all possibilities would perhaps imply an absence of all boundary conditions. But is this possible? Could this infinite superposition be altered? Deconstruction and dissociation: “We must be as little children to enter the Kingdom of Heaven.” Transcendence is the guarantor of the fulfillment of deferred meaning/reference. An underlying system of credit is indeed in place which permits the exchange of discursive and abstract symbols of value ( here read information). The metaphor of economy serves here as a touchstone for exploring the nature of language and intersubjectivity. Awareness of and use of the concept of dissemination as a necessary component of truth validates the method of arriving at truth through the untwisting and disentangling of “wrong” and “confused” ideas. @$

Only a freely acting will can stabilize the finite within the infinite. Dialectical change is irreversible, historical change in which the continuum of possibility is reconstituted. The principle by which the order of transcendent being is established cannot be identified with any particular infinite and transcendent being. In death, time as a category is transcended. Death separates my temporally bound, existent self from myself as transcendence just as does this gulf separating my being from that of the other. In fact, the separation between self and other is indeed deeper and a more profound one than is that dividing the self in its mode of embodied immanent existence from that of disembodied, transcendent being. The self and the other are not separated by merely one, but by at least two deaths. In this way the possible transcendence of the self in death is less remarkable than is the transcendence of any given self in a theoretical

passing of this self over to that of the other. The notion of the structure of the unknown is relevant to consider here. Two individuals do not revert to the same ground upon their respective deaths. The question arises at this point whether, in the face of the unlimited variety of others, it is really proper to speak of such a notion as “The Other,” as though we should be here invoking by this term a universal category. The shifting of scientific paradigms is necessitated by the contact between Man as fundamentally creative in his capacity of initiating causal chains, that is, in his capacity of acting outside the anticipation of the naturalistic order thus far established, i.e., Nature and Nature’s characteristic tendency toward reforming herself so as to maintain an order of self-consistency. Temporality then is not a continual departure from a completed state of being so much as a continual endeavor of returning to an order of perfected and timeless, finished being in the face of a continual recasting of being along wholly new and unanticipated lines. Nature is in a constant flux of returning to being while being prevented always from doing so. Because existence and nonexistence as a dual opposition of categories is incomplete because transcended by the category of being, it follows that causal relationships between existents cannot be captured within the scope of purely abstract relations: there is always fluctuation outside the scope of any causal variable that intrudes upon all possible system – or ordered descriptions encompassing this and other variables. Every surface possesses a depth incommensurate with itself. Every function must fail to be reducible to form admitting a temporality that escapes all possible unification, i.e., and spatialization. So temporality is necessarily a plurality of infinite multiplicity. The limitation of the transcendent infinite introduced uncertainty, not only with respect to knowledge formerly held in completion but also with respect to the knowledge held or potentially graspable at higher levels than the one descended to though still short of that at which absolute knowledge is experienced. But if the path of limitation is not reversible, then this uncertainty must become relative to potential

knowledge graspable by others. The grasping of this knowledge of the other can be only indirect and mediated. Objective knowledge is the representation within one subject of the subjective knowledge of the other’s knowledge that is itself already a representation of the knowledge possessed by still other subjects, and so one. Inadequate expression of the self that is known (privation of means), as well as inadequate knowledge of the self (privation of ends) causes unintentional and intentional suffering respectively. The nonlocal hidden variable may indeed turn out to reside within the continuum of consciousness as the underlying basis of the integrity of its interface with the brains of quantum observers. We might say that God sees both A and B, the stations at which quantum entangled photons are analyzed, simultaneously regardless of the reference frame chosen at which the initial act of measurement is preformed, whether A and B. According to au=Aquinas, man only fell morally as a result of his indiscretion in the garden of Eden, leaving his intellect intact, still as much in the image of God’s Intellect as prior to this moral misstep, c.f., au= Francis Schaeffer, Escape From Reason. If this is true, then perhaps, as indicated by Adler in the prologue to his book, Ten Philosophical Mistakes, the other shoe (of the Fall of Man) managed to drop during the 17th Century – sometime within the beginning of the philosophically socalled Modern Period. Whether this intellectual fall of Man with the end of the Reformation, which marked the collapse of the Church’s spiritual authority in Europe, is indeed mere coincidence, remains a point of never-ending debate. The fact, however, that this collapse of spiritual authority was necessarily conjoined with the decline of Aristotelian metaphysics, which had buttressed Church Theology since the time of the Schoolmen of the Middle Ages, underscores the possibility of a second (intellectual) Fall of Man, particularly if au=Adler is right that all of the fundamental departures in metaphysical thought from Aristotle are to be traced to the major English and Continental thinkers of the 17th and 18th Centuries. These misguided, if ambitious, departures from “philosophical common sense” represented by the

systematic speculations of au=Berkeley, Hume, Kant, etc., have continued apace during the period of Modernity as represented by such thinkers as au= Husserl, Sartre, Quine, Rorty, Ryle, etc., and continued with the postmoderns, Foucault, Lacan, Derrida, Deleuze, Gattari, etc. The characteristic distinguishing these later efforts from those of earlier empiricist and rationalist philosophers (with regard to this notion of flouting philosophical common sense) seems to be that of academic ambition and a heartily conscious appreciation for the power of the Sophist to shape the indeterminate philosophical reality where it will cooperate. Where this inchoate grist of thought refuses to conform to the tugs and twists of the cynical philosopher, then human suggestibility, academic faddishness, and the sociological nature of knowledge may be relied upon for assistance in the efficacious marketing of one’s chimerical and monstrous systems, theories and propositions to the bored and clamoring philosophical consumer. “The momentum measurement assumes the accessibility of the entire state extended over an arbitrarily large spatial domain.” “In the nonrelativistic QM there is domain and hence the momentum (and other observables) can in principle be measured with arbitrarily high accuracy.” For the above quotation, c.f., cit=arXiv:quant-ph/0103019, p.2. The above quoted passage points up the interdependence of the momentum and time uncertainties of a QM system and hence a further interdependence of such systems’ momentum and energy uncertainties. “The orthogonality of two quantum sites is, strictly speaking, a nonlocal property, both in Hilbert space and in the Minkowski spacetime.” - p.2 (see above) With regard to the question of how curvature of spacetime affects the orthogonality of the eigenstates comprising a wavefunction, is there possibly an equivalent statement of a function such as /\Q(x 0, x1, x2, x3) in terms of some other function including the factor, Q (/\x0, /\x1, /\x2, /\x3), where “/\” indicated quantum uncertainty?

@$

The inadequacies of quantum theory in the face of the possibility of self-observing quantum systems reminds as of the dilemma for the unity of mathematical knowledge posed by Gödel’s incompleteness theorem. = commutativity of expectations A`B` =/ B`A`  =/ äab = Ö - äba = Ö - äab ½ äba

 not sure what this means.

Must spacelike separated quantum measurements commute? This simply depends on the presence or absence of quantum correlations between the two systems. The motivational force caused by the reaction of vacuum fields to the uniform acceleration of a perfectly reflecting surface (mirror) vanishes in the case of a single mirror. Inertial forces only arise in the case where a second vacuum radiation scatterer is present, c.f., cit= arXiv:quant-ph/0101082, Inertia of Casimir Enregy, by Jaekel and Reynaud. This result suggests that it is only systems possessing “binding energy”, which possess inertial mass. Meditation: the intersubjectivity of language, the suggestibility of the human mind in the processing of newly, subjectively – occurring ideas and conceptions, whether their origin be in externally or internally – produced speech, and the restoring of proper motor control to motor neural networks randomly reconnected to the central nervous system. Meditation: two way implication of processing experience in the light of concepts and abstraction of “new” concepts from processed (i.e., filtered experience). Nothingness as the proper infinite context for global states of individual consciousness this suggest that nothingness (as the multiply

unknown/unknowable) possesses and infinitely deep and broad structure, as opposed to no structure whatever. My reason for asserting that there must have been an act of willing behind my having become the embodied being that I am is that, there seems to be no possibility for a closed, exhaustive set of necessary conditions, i.e., a sufficient condition, for my having become me rather than some one else. So the Universe would have had to churn away from eternity past until conditions could have become proper for my advent. Identity is not conditional, merely the forms that an identity takes on. January 2003 Unconditional identity is identical with itself; conditional identity fails this test. If my infinitely past preexistence is presumed, then my continuity as a not necessarily embodied being (or consciousness) introduces an openendedness transcending the defining of any exhaustive set of conditions necessary for my being who I am (my identity), continuity over infinite past time implies the existence of a being possessing infinite causal over determinateness. Continuity may be by continuation of a connecting thread (which need’s be sustained by the continued orchestration of favorable contextual conditions), or by virtue of the robustness of the potentiality for a given discrete structure or function due to the conditions for its presence always being present within the ground of being, i.e., the implicature of the entity is a permanent feature of the eternal ground of being. By virtue of the concept of consciousness being a transcendental category, it follows of some property or attribute which itself by its very nature is never given once within experience. We deduce rather the fact of our possessing consciousness not from the fact of its intermittence within neither experience periods of unconsciousness nor, therefore, periods of alternation of consciousness with unconsciousness (c.f., sleep). Rather this deduction the fact of our own consciousness comes from another apparent fact, that of the impenetrability of the mind of others, supposing they really exist, that is. And here we have returned

to our earlier intuition, of the “existence” of (a) transcendental mind, within which the concept of consciousness as such may actually be entertained. The belief in the existence of such a transcendent mentality is tantamount, where the required quantity of faith underscoring this act of belief is concerned, to the belief than one possesses consciousness in the absence of the direct experience or intuition of this one’s individual consciousness. To wit, belief in God (as a transcendentally given Mind) constitutes no greater an irrational leap of faith than that by which I believe in the fact of the existence of other minds from my own, after the fashion of Dasein’s natural standpoint. The fact of the existence of the minds of others whose presence along with that of myself is daily suggested to me through the dubitable evidence daily presented to me by my sense perception. June 2001

In Douglas Adam’s story, Per Anhalter ins All, the computer, Deep Thought, describes itself as the 2nd greatest computer in space and time. Deep Thought also claims, however, that, being able to glimpse “the totality of probability currents moving along their limitless and innumerable circuits,” he can nonetheless design the 1st greatest computer. This future greatest of computers shall prove able to solve the question of Life, the Universe, and Everything, a question that Deep Thought admits, he was unfit to properly answer, having already given his “dysfunctional” answer to this question as “42.” The possibility of reference depends upon two distinct further possibilities: the possibility of the wholly external (i.e., the transcendent reality) and the rather problematic possibility of something that is capable of referring to itself. What can we say about the possibility of an entity that encompasses both of these possibilities? On a personal level, of course, the most evil being imaginable for me is that one whose greatest delights is in my greatest suffering and who’s greatest suffering is constituted by my greatest happiness. That is why evil, if it is to be taken seriously, has to be taken in the utmost personal way possible. My otherness is precisely an aggrandizement that is

entirely at his expense; it is a theft from the heart of his (the evil one’s) very selfhood, and so is ultimately the sparking and inflammation of the profoundest of jealousies and covetousness. But this is to cast evil behavior as serving an almost instinctive if morally incoherent defensive strategy, and we don’t want to let evil off so handily. We absolutely must make sure to include in any adequate definition of evil the crucial dimension of cruelty. "Humanity can perhaps be divided into four distinct groups with respect to how each experiences jealousy, each motivated by different admixtures in the relative proportions of deadly sins 6 and 7". There is no difference between presence and mock presence according to the Deconstructionists. The Spirit is the connection between the Father and Son as, respectively, the transcendent and immanent poles of a (in a certain sense) single Being. But this connection between the two “poles” is a unique, irreversible, and contingent one, informed by the dialectic of the enlarging of existence. And this connection may engender the altogether novel, possibilities for Being and so there is the natural requiring of the independence of this Spirit and hence a mutual independence though interdependence of the three: transcendent, immanent, and this dialectical being that we have termed the Spirit. Is God then the author of the transcendent principle of Man’s transcendent being? - the double appearance of the term “transcendent” being in no wise a redundancy, either intentional or otherwise. Adam’s existence originally pointed to the proper and real transcendent being though after the fall it now pointed to a mere projection of false being. We should distinguish between the case of Christ as God (the Father) become Man from that of Christ as an altogether separate though

intimately to God related person become a man. In the first interpretation temporality and eternity are dialectically related in the second they are merely related via a mutual projection. In his fallen state Man is a duality falsely believing himself to be a unity, when in fact he had been made in the image of God, i.e., a trinity. This fallen state for Man consists in the disconnection of his transcendent and immanent selves. For Christ, this connection between the transcendent and immanent had been continually maintained up to the time of his being forsaken by the Father while on the Cross. We naturally assume that our identity and our individual consciousness as such (qua individual consciousness) are indeed synonymous. But it is not so for consciousness as such since consciousness in its mere suchness, though necessary, is not sufficient to fix personal identity at all or, at least in the sense of personhood searchable within human understanding. All of the grand categories of human experience: love, beauty, power, compassion, insight and so on are but abstractions drawn from within the depth of experience over the biographical history of each particular human creature though not from across the breadth of the experience of these creatures collectively, except in a purely hypothetical, language mediated way. Substance differentiated is indeed Form. Undifferentiated substance is on necessity and in its essence uncreated and timeless. And a plurality of substances if not itself a differentiation of some prior unitary substance must likewise be essentially eternal though each may participate in temporality only through the mutual participation of substances. An order of a plurality of distinct substances constitutes an order altogether devoid of form. Such an order can only be grasped by a being that is itself prior to substance. When one makes a prediction about a person’s future actions, the moment that this person obtains knowledge of the prediction, an abrupt change ensues, in the spectrum of probability of action by this person. Doesn’t this remind us of the effects of a quantum observer’s act of

observation upon the system observed? The differences between consciousness and whether these differences may assume a multiple ordering (or are simply, in fact, multiply ordered) has bearing on the question of whether being itself is multiply ordered, c.f., “chain of being.” Now difference, that is, difference between, and perhaps, more generally, the relation of betweenness itself, is by its nature abstract. Interestingly, abstraction and abstractness (“-ness” suffix usually connotes quality or essence), originally supposed to be an artifact of mind and or both its operation and its activity (operation – kinematic; activity – dynamic) was demonstrated by Gödel to transcend all finite mind (at least). Difference between transcendental consciousnesses should perhaps constitute abstract relations escaping the grasp of each particular transcendental mind. (Is there somehow necessarily a paradox involved in the notion of “a particular transcendental mind?”) Is one’s compassion for the suffering of others only really sincere given that one would take that person’s place if one only could? And what are we to think of a sufferer who presented with the same choice, would accept such an offer? The question arises whether there can be such a thing as a context of consciousness (of the individual consciousness as such), and also of whether there is some overarching context for consciousness as such (as opposed to mere individual consciousness as such). The number of given transcendental consciousnesses must be unity or infinity. There can be no sufficient ground for only a finite number of such transcendental beings being given unless it be the will of a still higher Being, itself unique or an a particular among an infinite number of such beings. June 2012

Consciousness as an exemplar of consciousness as such appears to

require a ground of being, i.e., transcendent mind. If a mind is posited that is not connected to this ground of being, then this is either transcendent mind prior to creation or a solipsistic conscious entity. Since the concept of consciousness cannot be grounded in terms of a general abstract quality held in common between various exemplars of consciousness entities, it must be grounded in terms of relation with a transcendent or universal mind as instantiations, not of an abstract category, but as instances of creation. There seems no avoiding Plantinga’s argument that atheism, if true is tantamount to solipsism of the lone atheist. April 2013 “René Descartes, in 1600 or thereabouts, to see if he could be certain of anything at all, even made the supposition that there might be some kind of demon who would be constantly fooling him that what he thought he was looking at didn't exist; and he couldn't find any way to be certain that this was not happening. So the existence of the world "out there" in addition to my experience is immediately evident, but not self-evident. Denying that there is one does not in any way imply affirming it. Still, the immediacy of the experience of a world "out there" which you experience (you can't really believe there isn't one, even if you theoretically "convince" yourself) indicates that ther is something that is extremely forceful telling us this fact”, see the following, c.f., http://fundamentalissues.net/metaph/met4.htm. Is there any mechanism that could render the probability of a network of Boltzmann brains arising as a fluctuation more probable than the similar spontaneous arising of a solitary Boltzmann brain? The logic of the context-meaning and context-free-spatialized-time connections implies that intentionality cannot obtain in conjunction with an absolute failure to refer. We should not fail to appreciate here the underlying logic of the multiverse being more probable than an isolated, solitary universe. July 2013 epi=

“The logic distilled from decades of experience is inescapable by all, except the inexperienced." The reduction of the state vector is commonly supposed to be an essentially random occurrence.

Yet there must be no basis for preferring a given state function description over another when no one has yet interacted with the system in question. Therefore the system possesses as many wavefunction descriptions as there are actual potential observers (and this may go for “potential potential” observers,” as well). Note here that observation of a quantum system can never truly be joint or collective. It is readily understood that what is called inertia, i.e., mass, is merely constituted by the relative ratio of internal to external coherence and consistency of the structured network of momentum-energy fluctuations constituting the matter + vacuum system. The actual resistance to “impressed forces” is read in the off-diagonal components of the stressmomentum-energy tensor for the mater + vacuum system. The relativistic increase in mass due to its acceleration is importantly related with the decrease in available density of Heisenberg-uncertain energy (within the quantum vacuum) and increase in density of Heisenberguncertain 3-momentum of the mass (internally). This is why the inertial mass at any given moment during the mass’ acceleration is dependent upon the instantaneous value of this ratio of vacuum energy to mass 3momentum densities. Only approximately 0.4% of the human genetic sequence is unshared with our closest primate relative, the bonobo ape. Man shares as much as 50% of his genetic code with the lowly yeast molds. It is probable that human that Man might be, say, between 0-25% and 0-10% genetically related to life on other planets though perhaps it should in principle be rare for this figure to be much above 0 despite the alleged universality of physical law throughout the “uni-“ “verse.” But the probabilities so casually referred to here may not be properly definable in the absence of some appropriately restrictive set of boundary condition, i.e., the probability for, e.g., self-reproducing, information – bearing/expressing, stable molecular structures may not be properly renormalizable. We may wish to make a distinction at this point between what we may term internal versus external resonance/resonant structures. Externally resonant structures would be described by

renormalizable wavefunctions. This would not, however, be expected to be the case for internally resonant structures. Such structures would exhibit a certain degree of cohesiveness that may well manifest itself in ways, which defy a QM description. One need only reflect here how the lack of a complete and consistent QM theory of the Helium atom, similar to classical physics’ longstanding and now historic difficulties with the solution of the gravitational three body problem, puts the proper QM treatment of complex macromolecules, forever beyond the grasp of modern scientific endeavor. We fail to normalize a wavefunction when we fail to encompass within the normalization integral the total space occupied by this wavefunction. This should be expected when internal spaces (with their respective internal degrees of freedom) contain “bleed over” of the wave function (c.f., QM tunneling) and these internal spaces are found to be essentially asymmetrical. In such case the internal degrees of freedom of the space support and necessitate irreversible reaction with coupled symmetrical component space degeneracy’s) though the fundamentally irreversible interactions home to the internal space and its degrees of freedom. The asymmetrical component subspaces of the total system space would be occupied by a system describable only by an aperiodic, or anharmonic, wavefunction. The energy uncertainty of such a system, in terms of the associated frequency spectrum for the component energies of this uncertainty, would have to be fundamentally different from that of a normalizable QM system, i.e., from that possessing a normalizable wavefunction. We may have now been led to the making of a distinction here between what we may term active versus passive information. How far if at all this distinction parallels that of the same name defined and discussed by Bohm, c.f., The Implicate Order, remains to be investigated. The represented by prophecy is conceived by those who are somewhat more sensitively attuned to historical inevitability of consciousness’

working out of itself. Prophecy has a way of pulling itself up by its own bootstraps and manifesting the realization of its assertions by any stretching reach available enabled by historical particulars that emerge wholly unexpectedly but which are then grasped and woven into the very fabric of the prophecy’s system of archetypal elements. I sometimes feel as though I am living in the shadow of some great, disruptive and disillusioning realization perhaps only to be actually encountered many years or even decades later. Churches are houses of spiritual complacency, the real purpose of which is the Devil’s whereby Christians are kept off the streets where they might do the most good. Nobody really believes in their actual salvation, nor do they really believe that the unsaved are in any serious spiritual danger. At least this is the conclusion to which the impartial observer of Christian peoples must be led by the simplest of logic to presume. For otherwise wouldn’t all Christians be alternating between dancing and shouting jubilantly over the fact of their own salvation, and miserably weeping over the fate of the lost already departed from this world, on the one hand, and launched into tireless and impassioned efforts on the behalf of those unsaved yet alive, who still possess the hope of heaven and the escaping of eternal hellfire? The average spacetime curvature at a point on spacetime is dependent upon the average density of momentum-energy at this point. For this reason it is presumed that the magnitude of the density of fluctuations in momentum-energy at a certain a point on spacetime is not merely correlated with but causally connected with the magnitude of spacetime fluctuations at that particular point on this very same spacetime. But how can the stated notion of fluctuations of spacetime and hence, uncertainty in spacetime position be located at a particular point on spacetime? There is here a seeming paradox of infinitely selfreferential spacetime.

One conception of grace is that which preserves one while one’s situation is unstable and precarious, admitting little if any margin for error. Another concept of grace is that of intrinsic robustness or what might otherwise be termed antichaos. There is so much room for the fulfillment of basic possibilities and potentialities within such a wide range of life style boundary conditions that there is little need to think too long and hard about how to optimally engineer them, apart from the following and application of a mere handful of simple a basic values and principles. Many happy and unassuming (and successful) people seem to have always instinctively understand this though, perhaps without having ever once articulated this to themselves. We cannot argue each individual’s concept of consciousnes is abstracted from its multiple instantiation over time. (, c.f., CPT theorem.) We can entertain the projection of multiple instantiations of a given concept through a kind of metaphorical multiple recasting of our direct intuitions of a being into multiply distinct and varied forms and then proceed to abstract from this set of differences of our own fashioning. This act is linguistically determined in a manner such that inconsistencies between different individuals’ projected concepts/categories are glossed over, or if uncovered can be easily enough repaired/amended through a dialectic of negotiation of meaning and reference, say through erecting of a larger category subsuming these differences as being within the new category. In contemplating the fond well-wishing for another from whom one is to be forever separated does one glimpse the Dasein of Providence. We cannot like a hypothesis without at least secretly to ourselves assenting to a kernel of truth in it. Relating Aristotle’s Metaphysics to Modern Physics: Potential vs. Actual

~

Bosons vs. Fermions

Matter vs. Form ~

stress-momentum-energy vs. spacetime

Efficient Cause ~ Formal Cause Material Cause ~ Final Cause

State Reduction/Wavefunction Collapse ~ Schroedinger Equation Quantum Vacuum ~ Principle of Least Action

A system may either be identified with one of a set of eigenfunctions, exist between, or encompass the set. Coherence and cohesiveness would seem to require superposition of correlated or partially nonorthogonal eigenfunctions. This may relate to why eigenfunctions cannot be strictly orthogonal in the presence of a gravitational field. Since each individual’s ideas are tinged with the acceptation of his novel application of them within the context of the history of his own experience that is necessarily, in part, unique to himself, it follows that what is insight for one is for another in some cases hard won empirical knowledge, in other cases, for another piecemeal-fashioned induction or deduction, and so a given idea is known intimately as intuition by one and for another only through metaphor. October 2011 It is playfully said that, “we only trust the law of induction because it has worked so well in the past”. However, we did not first trust the use of induction for this reason. @$Induction is likely a subcategory of the larger category of self similarity or recursiveness. This is just a particular symptom of the general fact that one knows the other by analogy, all the while knowing the self in an unmediated fashion ( if only potentially, as some only know of themselves as they know their native tongue – through listening to those for whom oneself occupies an analogous position of being). Necrophilia, as the “desire for the otherness of the other.” Such people as cannot perceive the otherness within themselves have a sense of unfreedom, of being unjustly imprisoned and therefore the freedom of the other, particularly

in the other’s own relative case with and grasping or mastering of their own otherness, is all the more regrettable, making as it does for much rankling, festering resentment, destined to turn to hatred, if the tendency cannot be defused and reversed. Differences of race, class, status, gender even, are attributed as cause for the resentment of the self for the other under the convenient covering rubric of prejudice, racism, sexism, etc. But this is to turn a blind eye to the fact that the unseemly emotion of resentment possesses a defining dimension of the personal, taken personally. Those who hate blacks, Jews, those who are misogynous and so on have perhaps made a false generalization of what originated at a strictly personal level. These external differences merely underscore the otherness of the other that is usually hidden through false or baseless identification of the self with the other, e.g., glorying in the success of the home town hero when one is far from home, on the one hand, though equally in turn envying and secretly begrudging this same hero when both he and oneself are once more back home among common friends and acquaintances. How rapidly does an impending barroom brawl defuse itself when at closer quarters the prospective combatants at once recognize one another, despite the typical dim lighting, and this almost regardless of the nature or severity of the insult or offense, real or imagined, which lie at the root of flaring aggressive impulses. A nonadiabatic coupling of the brain of an observer to the system as a whole, but to the brain only in part. Otherwise stated, is the brain far more extensively connected to its defining context than it is even too itself? October 2011 What essentially distinguishes matter, i.e., that which possesses mass from the underlying quantum vacuum field is the independence of matter from this vacuum. By this is meant the breakdown of the faithful application of Bohm’s Principle of Causality, more or less at the matter-vacuum boundary. Note that this “boundary” is not at the 2-surface interface, but is rather defined by a 3-surface. The “bandwidth” connecting matter and its context giving vacuum carries information on a flux perpendicular to this 3-surface. Decoherence may

be caused by the opposite of this situation, perhaps.That is, decoherence must befall systems that possess a critical recursiveness or self connectivity relative to the quantum context of the system, i.e., embedding vacuum electromagnetic field. These ruminations lead us to the perhaps bizarre notion that, the human brain with its distinctive powers of self-consciousness, becomes in at least a very narrowly defined sense, better connected to the information reservoir of the quantum vacuum electromagnetic field than this information is connected to itself. This points up one of the important functions of the brain, that of reprocessing information latent in the vacuum through effecting higher levels of integration of this information. So-called “higher levels of integration” here seem to bespeak the possibility of a concept of contexts of the ground of being. Suppose that the individual consciousnes of A is just the outcome of the quantum vacuum’s continual, ongoing reaction to the presence/activity of the individual’s brain that is embedded within it. Similar July 2011 observations apply to B’s consciousness, C’s, etc. In this way the consciousness of each involves its own unique spectrum of contextproviding bed or correlated quantum fluctuations. No “cross-talk” between brains is to be expected (what would manifest itself during the course of evolution as telepathy) Since the constructs of the individual self and external world (including postulated other minds) which arise within the consciousness of the individual are to be attributed to the creation of entanglements due to the historical operation of that individual’s brain, these are separate from those quantum correlations continually recreated in the field of the vacuum’s fundamental fluctuations (that comprise any reductions in /\Q – Heisenberg uncertainty in Q) to which the brains of others “tune” and resonate, and so it is a distinctly different and disjoint spectrum of the vacuum electromagnetic field which is continually “tweaked” by the operation of one brain from that of another. A paradoxical observation is the following: “I feel so different within my being than I did when I was a teenager that if it weren’t for the

continuity of my environment, social relations, my own physical appearance, together with memory, I could swear that I’m now an altogether different person now from what I was then. But, of course, the attributes enumerated above are just the one’s apart from identity dependent upon the subsistence of unique substance. The urge torward mystical union with the other is diametrically opposite to the necrophile’s desire to penetrate the mystery of the other. Of course, mystery, by its essential nature, once so penetrated, ceases to be. The necrophile’s being is driven by the impulse to reveal all mystery as a mere tissue of lies and illusion. July 2011 It would not surprise me if necrophilia were not someday proven to be (or shall eventually come to be commonly understood as) a mere Freudian reaction-formation in reponse to an extraordinarily great fear of death relative to the already extraordinary fear of death which is in humans instinctive and inborn. Along similar lines to our arguments that consciousness cannot be manifested or be a property of closed, isolated systems, it may be possible also to argue that a system without consciousness, or at least in interaction with (the observation of) consciousness cannot possess temporality of the kind which can produce novel systems or structures. July 2011 Consciousness does seem to be the only means for process as a whole to be referred back to its fundamental components so that there is awareness and a bridge between being and becoming, while attention is a focusing of this consciousness. Such a system would only posses the deterministic temporality normally associated with classical physics and/or the time independent Schroedinger equation, i.e., temporality of spatialized time. If it is true that the Universe was utterly devoid of consciousness and conscious states prior to some critical point in its deterministic evolution, such that it must have possessed a static, 4-dimensional spatial structure (in general relativity, there is no global distinction between space and time – such a distinction of space from time is local and observer-dependent) between two nodes, that of the Big Bang and the other of the awakening

of the first glimmer of consciousness within it. But why not rather suppose that the right-hand node, if you will, does not represent some critical threshold having been passed by some slowly and gradually developing mentality dragging itself up from some primordial slime, but rather this node of “timeless spacetime” opposite to that of the precipitous “Big Bang” was itself equally precipitous, namely, constituted by the act of intervention (say, perhaps through mere “observation”, in the quantum mechanical sense) by a fully and completely developed consciousness. September 2011

If “consciousness collapses the wavefunction”, then the level of development of the consciousness involved must be of some importance to the level of complexity of systems, which manifest as expression/outcome of this collapse. If we suppose that no perfect consciousness exists, but nonetheless admit the notion of there perhaps being some such, say, as a result of furthering of the evolution of mind over succeeding millions of years, then there must be some principle of order (itself essentially timeless and complete) that itself already exists by which this future development of a perfect consciousness shall be fulfilled. But perhaps what we meant to speak of here was not the future evolution of consciousness into a perfected state, but instead the future evolution of mind into such a final state. Here mind would simply be a structure of consciousness and the principle of order that we have said must already exist and by which the future perfected development of consciousness (here read “mind”) is just that of consciousness itself as such. Every possible structure which consciousness can take on is already implicit within it. The establishment of a common language with which even merely denotative communication is to be pursued, must first be preceded by the establishment of a common reference. In this way it appears that connotation must precede denotation, i.e., metaphor must first be utilized to establish the common reference for later denotative communication.

Jesus said that if a man had but a mustard seed of faith he could command mountains to hurl themselves into the sea. It is likely that “mustard seed of” is to be interpreted as a minimum or “least bit of.” January 2003 Perhaps a better interpretation here is that of “kernel” (and there is likely some special characteristics of a mustard seed which set it apart from the seeds of other plants in serving Jesus’ metaphorical purpose). January 2003

epi=fcbk=

“By asserting, categorically, that “existence is not a predicate,” one is implicitly assuming that @$the notion of degrees or grades of existence is a meaningless or incoherent one and, moreover, that the term existence refers to the totality of being, rather than to some property, condition, or quality of being, conceived either as a one or a many.” August 2013 epi= Given a properly full blooded concept of transcendence, existence itself becomes a predicate. This is because existence is no longer the most general mode of being, but is merely one mode of being alongside other modes of being, such as mathematical subsistence, and it becomes meaningful to speak of existence as a predicate, since existence is not itself utmost in generality, but is nonetheless abstract. The development of relative otherness occurs in parallel with the growth of the self. At some earliest stage, the chain of reference (of meanings) terminates with that which refers to no phenomena whatever, e.g., natural languages, perceptions, sensations, etc. In the building up of ever more complex and coherent biological systems, the process of evolution, rejects not alternative sets of possibilities for life each of which comprised in turn of some corresponding sum of isolated, disconnected possibles. To the contrary, each of these rejected possibilities for life are equally viable in terms of a combination (or sum) of the dual properties, adaptable + coherent/cohesive thought, of course, the relative proportion of each of these two properties with respect toward the other is less fit and responsive to the particular prevailing set of environmental conditions from which it has been excluded by natural selection and in favor of

what happened to have replaced it by more successfully surviving. So the various forms failing to survive and which are excluded from evolution’s path possess no less “fitness” relative to some other possible though not actual environment and both the fitness of that which survives along with that which perishes must be explained by some altogether different means than through the invoking of a principle of natural selection. Only by linking to transcendent consciousness, say during prayer, meditation, or psychedelic drug experience, of which one’s own as well that of each other person, is but a peculiar instantiation, does one gain access to the knowledge of the suchnes of one’s individual consciousness, i.e., of one’s consciousness as an example, among an infinite number of possible examples, of consciousness as such (“consciousness at large,” if you will). Might this experiecne be considered the glimpsing of one’s consciousness as the ground of all experience always possible to the individual in the vein of this ground itself as figure? This context of the individual’s consciousness as the medium of all possible experience would necessarily be the grasping of space and time in its unified totality of givenness. It would then be a glimpse by the individual of his own eternal and absolute being. This is all because time is only within experience, founded in the ground of all possible experience which itself, therefore, has to transcend time. Time is always within the timeless, in other words. Paul may be described as a gnostic Christian because his doctrines as set forth in his epistles to the early churches of the Near East were revealed to him after the death and Resurrection of Christ. When God first became man in the form of Adam. He forgot and lost his sense of his original self and fell from grace, taking all succeeding Mankind with him. So perhaps a large part of the motive of Christ’s sacrifice is the recreating of this original incarnation successfully and

then the repayment in the form of sacrifice on the Cross for the bringing of Sin into Creation. But this great feat could only be achieved by reincarnating as originally – in the very absence of this sin infecting all Creation. A consequence of Sin, rather than having been the engendering cause of Sin, is man’s blindness to his own divine nature and therefore in turn his blindness to the nature of the Divine as such. The giving up of the responsibilities while retaining the freedoms, the shunning of obligations, while holding fast to the rights of Godhood – this lies at the core of the nature of Sin. The question concerning the true nature of consciousness, when properly asked, would be its own answer simply upon simple removal of “?” at its end and it s replacement by a “.”, that is, by a period. This question should be posed in its simplest conceivable form as, namely, “what is consciousness?” such that the answer to this question then becomes, “What is consciousness.” So the answer to this question, “What is consciousness” may still more succinctly be put . . . “Exactly,” or “Yes” or “Affirmative.” Consciousness itself is the answer to the question, “What is consciousness?” The essential nature of consciousness is its own answering to itself of the question it asks of itself, more properly stated as “Who am I?” “I am who” or . . . Who? I am! The answer, far from being Douglas Adam’s “42” is “I”. But we reject this as the answer and seek another. It is like trying to find the answer to What is 2 + 2? Rejecting the obvious suggestion of “4” and going onto an endless pursuit for some more suitable solution to 2 + 2 =? Consciousness is the medium through which all questions might be asked whereby the answer to whatever the particular question may be is

only not already understood by virtue of some a posterior limitation of said consciousness. Clearly, once all such particular limitations upon consciousness are removed, only one question remains which is answere3d just at that precise point that the last limitation upon consciousness has been removed. And so at just this point is the question what is “pure consciousness” (i.e., what is consciousness as such) able to be properly formulated and which at once is seen to contain or be coextensive with, rather, this question’s proper answer. “What is Pure Consciousness?” Pure consciousness is What. We might playfully symbolize this “What” or “W-hat” as “W^”, borrowing the “^” notation from quantum theory. W^ we might equally playfully term the pure consciousness operator. So that W^ Psi = W or, if Psi is not a pure state, but a superposition state, W^ Psi = wi. The question then arises, how are we to interpret W^ Psi when Psi is a statistical mixture? The answer to the question what is consciousness only seems to admit of a complex answer because we falsely identify consciousness as such with the ego (secretly with our own ego) while all along overtly and in an intellectualized manner identify consciousness as prior to and transcending though also ultimately the ground of – all form whatever. Any answer that would satisfy us qua “answer” must, like the answers to all other questions with which we’ve had experience, possess some kind of logical and/or semantic structure, although anything, necessarily possessing structure as do all logical or semantic entities, must be presupposed by such structures. Each pure state is a superposition state with respect to some other, incompatible observable. But W^ commutes with itself and all other w I, but the wI do not mutually commute, that is, wjPhiI where PhiI is an eigenstate of wI^, is necessarily a superposition state in terms of the Phij’s. In other words, W^ does not interfere with the actions of the w^I, w^j, w^k, etc.

Metaphor shows the extension of the scope and reference of a concept, but is not itself a concept. Coining a new metaphor may result in the founding of some altogether new concept. The purpose of this amazingly dense field of Karma is for us to have and sharpen our humility, for once we’ve acquired perfect humility our character has finally been properly formed and we are now free to do anything we want while still remaining smack in the middle in the Will of God. We seek a representation of consciousness within consciousness. Arguably, the individual’s own, unique consciousness qua individual consciousness is just such a representation of pure consciousness or consciousness as such, i.e., impersonal consciousness. This may in fact be the meaning of the individual being made in the image of God – his personal consciousness is a representation within God’s consciousness. Alternatively, the individual consciousness may be its own representation, which lies behind the inherent recursiveness of the individual’s consciousness. And the concept of consciousness as such is a deduction of that within which the individual’s consciousness is a representation, identified with the other. The question arises here as to whether the otherness of all selves refers to a single being. To properly and meaningfully communicate, the Other must be recognized within the Self as the Self is within the Other. Is there a unity of that which makes any and all others other, that is, relative to me? And is it this unity that points up the reality of the Other, i.e., God, but therefore, of a God wholly unique to myself and hence permitting a unique I and Thou relationship (in Buber’s sense)? Might we term the guiding principle here the Anthropic Microcosmological Principle? So if everything that can become the subject of knowledge or of our

knowing must be a manifestation within (or constructed from manifestations within) consciousness, then could consciousness itself ever be a subject of knowledge or stated another way, how could consciousness be found to be itself a manifestation of some subset of what can be manifested within it, and which refers at the same time to something altogether outside of its possible scope (i.e., reference)? Particles and antiparticles possess opposite signed quantum numbers. We are interested when constructing a system of morality and ethics of defining persons so that they are 1) absolutely distinct from one another so that the respect demanded by the alterity of the Other is maximal and 2) irreducible in their essence to features or elements held in common, potentially or actually, between distinct persons. In this way, each person is most conceived as being 1) Other and 2) an end in himself. That which does not possess being does not possess ultimate reality and that which does not possess being if only in a derivative sense (say, through intersubjective cooperation) cannot possess the qualified being we term existence. What defines the so-called normal, unassuming person is unreserved participation in local beliefs and customs in the absence of any insight into the underlying archetype or paradigm infusing them, and in addition a virtually complete lack of awareness of the necessity of some underlying deeper meaning attached to the local cultural and religious forms/ tropes in which he regularly participates. Consider the reexpression of opposites, which have been transcended by their prior unification. Religious symbols and images that are metaphors for the divine presence arise, as au=Jung has forcefully demonstrated, through the action of the collective unconscious through the action of the collective unconscious,

though perhaps, to follow Jaynes, this process had been well under way long before primitive Man acquired an individual consciousness in the sense of a self-consciousness. The dense array of religious symbols which surrounded human beings during this preantiquity would have presented a flowing gestalt of protoconscious meaning much as does the imagery confronting a modern human being in midst of a dream sleep. In the same way that the dreamer may awake and attain lucidity within the artificial world of these enveloping dream images, a growing fraction of individuals, one by one, awoke to a sense of their own individuality, acquiring at once a dim recognition of the arbitrary nature of the symbols along with the intimate connection of these symbols to their own new found identity, as well as insights into how these symbols might be manipulated and transformed to reveal their metaphorical reference. Their literal reference is to the metaphoricity of the self. The principle mystical insight is that each incarnate self is local metaphor for one and the same transcendental (literal) self. Just imagine going back merely five or ten years and switching the outcome of one major decision point, say to marry someone from whom one’s way has long since departed. The effect of this may well be predictable, in general outline at least. This predictability must, we think, be altogether absent where enough of the decision points, early enough throughout our biography are arbitrarily switched or reversed. But we can equally well oppose to this the argument based upon the notion of character being one’s fate. Though we may perhaps also reconcile the two views by distinguishing the large number of smaller (though at the time seemingly significant) decisions from those larger and actually more significant ones by which our character had acquired some of its more important and life long features. The naïve notion of artistic expression, particularly in the sphere of literature, is that of the artist searching for some particularly apt modes, techniques, and metaphors for manifesting or getting to the outside some

profound pet idea that he has long carried around deep within himself and with which to gift less sensitive and enlightened souls. But another view is that of the artist being only the apprentice who, though highly skilled in the use of the tools and techniques for fashioning the works dictated by his master, at any given stage in the physical construction of the art work, possesses only a half-baked notion as to what his master ultimately intends in dictating it. We may only speak of insights being latent if the person carrying them around fails to realize them merely for lack of the advantageous conditions in which the efficient cause or causes are sufficient to trigger their coalescence/crystallization. It might turn out that upon heavenly reflection our erstwhile mortal existence will be understood as one in which the answer to absolutely every conceivable metaphysical question was along known to us and that it was really only the fact of our having been all along in possession of this metaphysical knowledge that forever as mortals. How the pupil of the critical eye of most people dilates upon learning some work already placed before them is said to be important. The individual sees all around himself the order that was necessary to permit just the particular consciousness that he is to come into being. One of the outstanding features of this order, necessary for this individual’s consciousness, is the presence of a chain of being, i.e., a vertical-ordering or depth-ordering of being. Another is what we may aptly term a horizontal ordering or breadth-ordering of being these two types of ordering are simply the highly specific and particular versions of the corresponding Kantian forms (of intuition) of Time and Space. The time-ordering represented by evolution and the space-ordering represented by the particular complexion of present by extant individuals belong to the human race ( through which one entered space and time) – these two orderings are simply those that were required to be in entered

space and time, to have taken up this most basic of limitations of my transcendent being. We are speaking here of the particulars of the Anthropic Microcosmological Principle. But this is to view the entire world as merely providing scaffolding for the construction of one’s individual self.

States of conscious awareness point up the lack of indifference of Being to the passage of time. It points up the registration of the human and cosmic data storage system, if you will, and represents the engendering of altogether new information within the Real. Novelty and irreversibility essentially characterize conscious experience. If there is any important lesson for metaphysics to be derived from a contemplative study of quantum theory it is this: possibility is not fixed, but is always a function of the imposed boundary conditions (upon the vacuum quantum field, ultimately) and these are subject to change. Note here, however, that the existence of boundary conditions presupposes a spacetime written which such conditions are to be definable. One knows one is conscious not by noticing it as being an attribute or quality of every particular manifest within conscious experience. For how could one note the positive presence of that which is everywhere and always given and never within (conscious) experience absent. It is not by virtue of some sort of contrast that one’s consciousness is apprehended, if it is apprehended at all, that is. Consciousness in other words is never within experience but experience is present within consciousness. Another view here is that consciousness is known through abstraction from its occurrence in varying degrees. The existence of a form or thing is simply its groundedness in the indeterminate that originally brought it into being. Existence is the principle of a thing’s sustainment as such within space and time. Being

on the other hand is principle of order through which the dynamics of this sustainment compensates for the contingency represented by the extraneous component of ground’s fluxion. Pure possibility is timeless and context-free. Existence is a predicated of the merely possible in which the heretofore merely possible acquires possibilities of its own. The possible becomes a subject of change leading to the creation of new never-before-existing possibilities (along with the “retireing.” If this line of thinking lead us to the reversing of the relationship of the possible to the actual so that possibilities became merely the abstraction from the real (pure empiricism a la Hume), rather than the real being a manifesting of the possible, then we should not have succeeded in this way in showing that existence is (or can be) a predicate. However, if possibilities can be engendered independently from the mere abstraction from experience, i.e., sense impressions, and in this manner, the totality of the possible augmented, then existence must be capable of being a predicate. So in this way it is seen that the minds ability to conceive that which is neither (presently) real nor possible is essential to the possibility of existence being a predicate. The predication of existence is therefore responsible for (or the outcome of) the temporality of Mind. Consider the temporality of possibility as well as the temporality of Mind outside of time (intersubjective time). Anselm’s Ontological Argument depends upon, among other assumptions, the self-contradictory nature of the notion of a being greater than which none greater can be conceived. But this assumption is only valid if consciousness can keep pace with (so to speak) the potential complexity of which being can exist that is greater than that than which no greater can be conceived by consciousness as such most generally speaking. As evidenced by the difficulties in functioning demonstrated by the Schizophrenic, coherence and consistency of the emotions, will,

intellect, whatever faculty of consciousness require the exclusion of certain disruptive elements that would disseminate and subvert the unity of the system of the faculty concerned. Rationality subserves value as science subserves art. Perhaps the uproar of moral outrage on the part of Christian groups for example over the new techniques, practices and products resulting from the heady progress of the new biotechnology is all too transparent in how it is motivated out of these groups shared premises and assumptions. That there is a similar degree of outrage over the potential implications of the new science of biotechnology, expressed by agnostics and secular humanists alike, is on the face of it perhaps a little puzzling to one describing himself as a philosophical theist. For here we have a seeming agreement on a major social issue between camps with radically different ends in view. Prophecy is historical interpretation in reverse. It might be worthwhile or merely intellectually intriguing to work out the theory of how this might be the case. The dream space if only at its most deeply symbolic level represents a kind of temporal slipstream (of “subterranean currents”) through which one’s entire biography is connected, bidirectionally. Dreams, in other words, interpret both the past and future moments within a person’s life, a life that has in essence already been lived from cradle to grave. This is the sense in which the proverb that character determines fate holds true. This is true for relationships as well, only here fate subsumes a much wider and complex variety of possible means of willing itself out (for the relationship of the two people concerned). One possesses almost unlimited freedom in principle in how he works out his fate to prove it in the end all along true. The proportion of good to ill that is fixed within one’s character may be altered through selfknowledge in its outward manifestation in one’s life. This is done when

one applies this self-knowledge in the tempting of good temptations and the shunning of bad temptations, stated quite simply. One caters to what are one’s real strengths and conceals from view what are one’s real weaknesses, limiting the scope of their aggravation and expression. The ego is the experience of the collective consciousness as delimited within the self’s unique point of view. Can the particularity of the metaphorical be refined away leaving in its place pure concept distinct from other concepts? This is very much akin to the removal of all of the scaffolding from the building that once were necessary for its construction but which are not realized to be superfluous. How could things valuable only for their own sake, that is, mere ends in themselves, arise from out of a system composed solely of means to other means, in an endless recursive labyrinth? Clearly the 232 (approximately) bits of information “contained” within the human genome are insufficient to code for the complexity of structure and function of the human organism. However, a quantity of information approaching 2(2**32) bits may well be adequate for this. In this case we are supposing that some relatively small portion of the DNA addresses the details of local DNA functioning, say, e.g., protein synthesis, regulation of enzyme concentrations, etc., while ********************************************* 06-0201*************************************** June 2001 The largest share of these 2(2**32) bits are for addressing the dynamical ground in which the functioning of the organism is embedded. For the information contianed within the DNA to remain current, the molecule must remain in contact and communication with its dynamical ground. That which is experiencing my life is itself eternal and transcendent and is not itself in any real danger. It doesn’t wish to lose its ego, its

spatiotemporal image of itself for if this occurs it can always create for itself another one. Information is never contained in or by structure or form alone. Information may however be accessed by a given form or structure provided that this structure is properly connected to some dynamical (as opposed to kinematic or mechanical) ground. The notion that human individuality is but an illusion presupposes the notion of an individuality that is real as opposed to illusory. The notion of illusory individuality surely then begs the question, what would it mean for a being to possess real individuality. This is akin to the self-undermining assertion that the totality f life is merely a dream, which begs the question what would it mean to live within reality as opposed to dream, to awake from this heretofore lifelong reverie? Although form arises from formlessness, the reverse of this cannot be the case and so pure consciousness, if it exists must be sustained from some source transcending the Universe as Form. To create ex nihilo is to create both form and formlessness. The precision with which the design of a conscious computer is specified in the very totality of the design, that is, will turn out to be the very thing that prevents the computer’s (or robots, for that matter) brain from being open to influences the nature of which could not possibly have been anticipated in the design, based as it is merely upon the physical science possessed by its designers during the stage of the completion of this design. We should expect that a truly conscious computer would be in a position, as is a gifted scientist, of extending scientific knowledge beyond that of those scientists who authored the design of its brain. So to be conscious then, a computer’s design must permit it to utilize certain as yet indeterminate components of the unknown to render determinate certain other, if not those very same, components.

Perhaps the reason consciousness cannot be objectivity defined is that “a” consciousness is not of the nature of an object that is, an essentially abstract entity – an entity abstracted from some concrete and indeterminate ground. IN fact, the objective is perhaps itself defined in terms of the intersubjective, i.e., not only does the objective presupose subjectivity in the singular but does so, still more, in the plural. Moreover, it appears that consciousness itself might be, after all, the best candidate for an indeterminate ground out of which entityes are abstracted so as to represent (create) objects. But again this determination of consciousness may only be possible where tow or more consciousnesses act in concert with one another, apart from, perhaps the determinations of space and time (nexus for all further cooperation between consciousness). The objective properties of consciousness are not intrinsic to it, but are intersubjective and linguistically mediated and structured forms of an within consciousness. The problem with functionalism is its abstraction of al functions relevant to the production of all functions of consciousness from the peculiar nature of any given medium in which these relevant functions might be realized (instantiated). And so in functionalism, the distinctly different ways in which distinct media couple to the “outside” (i.e., the unknown realm) are excluded as irrelevant thusly, the functionalist theory of mind is one that in essence treats the brain as a closed system where the functionality of the brain (or any analogous system in which mental functions are instantiated, for that matter) for the production and modulation of states of conscious awareness are concerned that is. Consciousness’ objective being is internal to itself. This is why that Ourobouros, the ancient Egyptian symbol of consciousness is so appropriate. In the same way that pure, white light combines harmoniously all of the

colors of the rainbow, so does pure consciousness combine within itself all possible experiences. It does this with perfect and peaceful harmony. What then is the reason for the necessity of a plurality of pure consciousness? None whatever if each of these is considered as stemming from some originary pure consciousness. Each of these individual and distinct pure consciousnesses, resulting in the way that presumably must have from this originary (super) consciousness, are already differentiations of this primary (pure) consciousness. And so then how can each of these be supposed to be also “pure.” What possible basis could there be for differentiating one of these pure consciousness from another when each is assumed to be independent of space and time? There must then be some principle contra Schopenhauer, c.f., Will and Representation, of differentiation, that is, independent of space and time. There are, of course, an innumerable number of Buddhas - those who have awakened to the fact of their individuality having been an illusion. Nonexistence is just as much a manifestation of being (of what is) as is Existence. Things arise from other things from within the Void, that is, from elsewhere then from within space and time. If the present moment ever became fully determinate and crystallized, there would be no means for it to advance in time or for anything within this moment to advance. Such is analogously the case with a quantum system in an energy eigenstate (one that is non-degenerate). Rather than accepting the duality of literal and metaphorical as real, we might suppose that liternalness is an abstraction from various degrees of metaphoricity. Tertium Datur ~ relate this term to the Buddhist doctrine of the Middle Way.

Consciousness may be understood as an awareness of the causal, logical, and analogical interrelationships of states of experience. The state of being at one level is the experience of the self in a way that would be recognized as metaphorical by this same self when occupying some higher, more developed state of being. We can apply this idea to God’s message to humankind in the form of His Divine Word. This should be particularly so when it comes to the Bible’s descriptions of Heaven and Hell. The component of the indeterminate which never gets caught up in acts of determination is that component constituting the eternal now. The seed in sprouting adds to its body by enlisting, colonizing and then subverting larger and larger quantities of material stuff that itself acquiring this same ability to incorporate and subvert other wise seemingly inert substance. Life is a game versus a metaphysical work. The self is illusory versus eternal and transcendent. Changes in consciousness are thought to take place only at a certain level of depth within this consciousness. Synesthesia and presence, e.g., scenes in movies and scene action music, etc. But conditioning can show that the boundaries between the modalities of sense are not fundamental, e.g., Ton und Bild sind fuer mich gleich weil sie alle aus dataimpulsen bestehen, c.f., Revolte auf Luna, hoerspiel, vol. 4 (Robert Heinlein) Plural Brahman: each Atman is its own, unique Brahman rather than each being derived from the same Brahman.

Immanence is not through simple negation taking place within a single transcendent being, i.e., unique Brahman. If consciousnes is associated with some total energy that is a function of both p^ and x^, then clearly this consciousness can never rest. Everything is impermanent except the subject of impermanence. If the individual’s consciousness is a particular form rather than being a ground or substance in its own right, then one’s consciousness is actually but a state of consciousness of some being higher than the self so that it is this being that is conscious not one’s self or ego – this only being conscious through the consciousness of that other being. This is indeed what follows from presuming that one possesses a concept of consciousness. One canot both be conscious and posess a concept of consciousness. Only a being possessing multiple states of consciousness within another all-embracing state of consciousness can possess a concept of (these lower states of) consciousness. Or perhaps we may develop a concept of former (states of consciousness) that we have grown beyond or transcended. Are “higher states of consciousness” necessarily illusory because simply more complex or coherent structures/structurings of the same underlying consciousness? Gods are bound to the wheel with chains of gold, but they had no need to develop Buddhism. The gods value happiness more than truth, the Buddhist truth more than happiness. The gods know that truth transcends the ego, that is, the necessary subject of knowledge. So the ego can only grasp knowledge about the truth that transcends ego. Purpose of becoming embodied is recreation rather than acquiring the knowledge that transcends transcendence. Transcending enlightenment by entering space and time and becoming embodied as a kind of reverse enlightenment – a kind of anti-Buddhism. The object of which is to

leave their transcendent selves and experience finitude. Distinguish the temporal now (becoming determined) from the eternal now (being of the indeterminate). The indeterminate does not literally exist though it certainly affects existence. Being as such cannot be an act of determination since only particular beings act. Liberation from the repetitive reenactment of one’s conflicted, formative past – to “fix the past” or to attempt to glimpse the past from all its myriad facets in light of superior knowledge and wisdom. To glimpse an abstract principle behind the other’s hurtful actions so as to deconstruct them into harmlessness and laughableness. One paradoxical attribute of the Christian God is the notion of God being beyond space and time, i.e., transcendent, while at the same time personal. There is a similar (though reverse) contradiction concerning the notion of the self in Hindu and Buddhist thought – the soul as the persistent bed of individuality is thought to be wholly illusory and yet both these faiths speak of reincarnation and the wheel of life. March 2014 There is the more obvious problem with the underlying logic of reincarnation: the number of possible “earthen vessels” for ancient souls to inhabit is continually increasing so if altogether new souls do not routinely come into being, then clearly we have an insoluble math problem on our hands. The question arises as to how to understand the obvious competition that must exist between new souls seeking to incarnate “for the first time” and old souls seeking to “reincarnate.” kwd=multiverse, continuity, thread, anthropic

Because the transcendent cannot become immanent, i.e., dwelling within the world (of space and time) through an act of negation, it follows that the return is a metaphorical and dialectical process in which genuinely new possibilities are engendered for transcendence. What can possibly stand in the background of consciousness by which it could appear to one?

Why is there something rather than nothing? Well, there is nothing too – there’s both something and nothing. There are two fundamentally different approaches to explaining the origin of consciousness from the functioning of the brain – from the inside, that is, from one’s own case, versus “from the outside.” But there should be just as many outsides to this description as there are insides. But only the plurality of the external points of view appear amenable to being unified. One theory is that the internal is already unified although the plurality of the external seems to belie this possibility. So what makes life possible psychologically, that is, is not having this older and more cynical version of the self, always around criticizing our every freely willed action. There are myriad examples of the simple misunderstanding in conversation in which one has misheard another and one is in a position, having heard correctly as a bystander, 3 rd party, the utterance of the 1st party. Question: for which reason is there so much embarrassment on the part of the 1st party as well as sympathetic embarrassment of the 2 nd party for the 1st, upon both becoming aware that they had been conversing unbeknownst to themselves at cross purposes due a trivial mishearing of the pronunciation of a single syllable? Answer: because both parties experience in a precise and concrete way the collapse of the presence in which all happy conversation is implicitly supposed to be embedded by all concerned. And essential to this “presence,” c.f., “metaphysical presence” in Derrida, is the notion of communication as involving the transmission of the contents of one mind to that of another. And so the collapse of presence alluded to in the above scenario is just the sudden realization by all parties of the actual tenuousness of intersubjective communication, that there was all along no actual transmission of meanings from one mind to another, just

the transmission of signs between separate minds which each, all alone and always alone interpret subjectively. ********************************************* 01***************************************

06-05-

The problem with the multiverse presented us by the Many Worlds Interpretation of QM is that by making each and every of these possible worlds ontologically equivalent to the one that we (or more properly, the individual observer(s) occupies), the counterfactual that normally occupies the ground of being is removed, rendering genuine becoming impossible and hence its appearance – illusory. An example of this is found in the covalent bond structure of molecules which depends upon the superposition of quantum states all being equally present within this universe in order to sustain the covalent bonds of these molecules that clearly do occupy our (allegedly alternative) universe. In the same way that a quantum neural network computer could not be designed so as to be prefitted to the neural network of one’s own brain so as to function seamlessly in conjunction with it resulting in expansion in the number and complexity of forms out of which one’s consciousness can be potentially structured, but must be trained over an extended period of trial and error interaction with one’s original neural network (brain) in order to function together with it seamlessly, @$so was it not possible for one’s brain to engender states of one’s own consciousness ab initio in the absence of a similar “train-up” period. A feedback process was at first necessary for a time before one’s brain could then later become the neural mechanism by which one’s consciousness could become (at first selected) and then structured. The fetus or infant’s brain had to at some point become an open system in the necessary relevant sense prior to its later functioning having become a feedback mechanism for the dynamic structuring of one’s own consciousness. To provide an explanation for something’s coming to be what it distinctively is (as opposed to uniquely, except perhaps in terms of

associated phenomenological effects attributed to it) description for that thing in such a manner that the elements of one’s explanation may be properly related to the various elements of the description. Instead of elements here, we might in certain cases substitute properties or attributes. But a substance cannot be explicated in terms of its accidents, as a moment’s reflection upon the more literal acceptation of the word, “accident” reveals.

. . . the largest share of these 2(2**32) bits are for addressing the dynamical ground in which the functioning of the organism is embedded. For the information contained within the DNA to remain current, the molecule must remain in contact and communication with its dynamical ground. That which is experiencing my life is itself eternal and transcendent and is not itself in any real danger. It doesn’t wish to lose its ego, its spatiotemporal image of itself for if this occurs it can always create for itself another one. Information is never contained in or by structure or form alone. Information may however be accessed by a given form or structure provided that this structure is properly connected to some dynamical (as opposed to kinematic or mechanical) ground. The notion that human individuality is but an illusion presupposes the notion of an individuality that is real as opposed to illusory. The notion of illusory individuality surely then begs the question, what would it mean for a being to possess real individuality. This is akin to the self-undermining assertion that the totality of life is merely a dream, which begs the question what would it mean to live within reality as opposed to dream, to awake from this heretofore

lifelong reverie? Although form arises from formlessness, the reverse of this cannot be the case and so pure consciousness, if it exists must be sustained from some source transcending the Universe as Form. To create ex nihilo is to create both form and formlessness. The precision with which the design of a conscious computer is specified in the very totality of the design, that is, will turn out to be the very thing that prevents the computer’s (or robots, for that matter) brain from being open to influences the nature of which could not possibly have been anticipated in the design, based as it is merely upon the physical science possessed by its designers during the stage of the completion of this design. We should expect that a truly conscious computer would be in a position, as is a gifted scientist, of extending scientific knowledge beyond that of those scientists who authored the design of its brain. So to be conscious then, a computer’s design must permit it to utilize certain as yet indeterminate components of the unknown to render determinate certain other, if not those very same, components. Perhaps the reason consciousness cannot be objectivity defined is that “a” consciousness is not of the nature of an object that is, an essentially abstract entity – an entity abstracted from some concrete and indeterminate ground. IN fact, the objective is perhaps itself defined in terms of the intersubjective, i.e., not only does the objective presupose subjectivity in the singular but does so, still more, in the plural. Moreover, it appears that consciousness itself might be, after all, the best candidate for an indeterminate ground out of which entityes are abstracted so as to represent (create) objects. But again this determination of consciousness may only be possible where tow or more consciousnesses act in concert with one another, apart from, perhaps the determinations of space and time (nexus for all further cooperation between consciousness). The objective properties of consciousness are not intrinsic to it, but are

intersubjective and linguistically mediated and structured forms of an within consciousness. The problem with functionalism is its abstraction of al functions relevant to the production of all functions of consciousness from the peculiar nature of any given medium in which these relevant functions might be realized (instantiated). And so in functionalism, the distinctly different ways in which distinct media couple to the “outside” (i.e., the unknown realm) are excluded as irrelevant thusly, the functionalist theory of mind is one that in essence treats the brain as a closed system where the functionality of the brain (or any analogous system in which mental functions are instantiated, for that matter) for the production and modulation of states of conscious awareness are concerned that is. Consciousness’ objective being is internal to itself. This is why that Ourobouros, the ancient Egyptian symbol of consciousness is so appropriate. In the same way that pure, white light combines harmoniously all of the colors of the rainbow, so does pure consciousness combine within itself all possible experiences. It does this with perfect and peaceful harmony. What then is the reason for the necessity of a plurality of pure consciousness? None whatever if each of these is considered as stemming from some originary pure consciousness. Each of these individual and distinct pure consciousnesses, resulting in the way that presumably must have from this originary (super) consciousness, are already differentiations of this primary (pure) consciousness. And so then how can each of these be supposed to be also “pure.” What possible basis could there be for differentiating one of these pure consciousness from another when each is assumed to be independent of space and time? There must then be some principle contra Schopenhauer, c.f., Will and Representation, of differentiation, that is, independent of space and time.

There are, of course, an innumerable number of Buddhas - those who have awakened to the fact of their individuality having been an illusion. Nonexistence is just as much a manifestation of being (of what is) as is Existence. Things arise from other things from within the Void, that is, from elsewhere then from within space and time. If the present moment ever became fully determinate and crystallized, there would be no means for it to advance in time or for anything within this moment to advance. Such is analogously the case with a quantum system in an energy eigenstate (one that is non-degenerate). Rather than accepting the duality of literal and metaphorical as real, we might suppose that liternalness is an abstraction from various degrees of metaphoricity. Terium Datur ~ relate this term to the Buddhist doctrine of the Middle Way. Consciousness may be understood as an awareness of the causal, logical, and analogical interrelationships of states of experience. The state of being at one level is the experience of the self in a way that would be recognized as metaphorical by this same self when occupying some higher, more developed state of being. We can apply this idea to God’s message to humankind in the form of His Divine Word. This should be particularly so when it comes to the Bible’s descriptions of Heaven and Hell. The component of the indeterminate which never gets caught up in acts of determination is that component constituting the eternal now. The seed in sprouting adds to its body by enlisting, colonizing and then subverting larger and larger quantities of material stuff that itself

acquiring this same ability to incorporate and subvert other wise seemingly inert substance. Life is a game versus a metaphysical work. The self is illusory versus eternal and transcendent. Changes in consciousness are thought to take place only at a certain level of depth within this consciousness. Synesthesia and presence, e.g., scenes in movies and scene action music, etc. But conditioning can show that the boundaries between the modalities of sense are not fundamental, e.g., Ton und Bild sind fuer mich gleich weil sie alle aus dataimpulsen bestehen, c.f., Revolte auf Luna, hoerspiel, vol. 4 (Robert Heinlein) Plural Brahman: each Atman is its own, unique Brahman rather than each being derived from the same Brahman. Immanence is not through simple negation taking place within a single transcendent being, i.e., unique Brahman. If consciousnes is associated with some total energy that is a function of both p^ and x^, then clearly this consciousness can never rest. Everything is impermanent except the subject of impermanence. If the individual’s consciousness is a particular form rather than being a ground or substance in its own right, then one’s consciousness is actually but a state of consciousness of some being higher than the self so that it is this being that is conscious not one’s self or ego – this only being conscious through the consciousness of that other being. This is indeed what follows from presuming that one possesses a concept of consciousness. One canot both be conscious and posess a concept of consciousness. Only a being possessing multiple states of

consciousness within another all-embracing state of consciousness can possess a concept of (these lower states of) consciousness. Or perhaps we may develop a concept of former (states of consciousness) that we have grown beyond or transcended. Are “higher states of consciousness” necessarily illusory because simply more complex or coherent structures/structurings of the same underlying consciousness? Gods are bound to the wheel with chains of gold, but they had no need to develop Buddhism. The gods value happiness more than truth, the Buddhist truth more than happiness. The gods know that truth transcends the ego, that is, the necessary subject of knowledge. So the ego can only grasp knowledge about the truth that transcends ego. Purpose of becoming embodied is recreation rather than acquiring the knowledge that transcends transcendence. Transcending enlightenment by entering space and time and becoming embodied as a kind of reverse enlightenment – a kind of anti-Buddhism. The object of which is to leave their transcendent selves and experience finitude. Distinguish the temporal now (becoming determined) from the eternal now (being of the indeterminate). The indeterminate does not literally exist though it certainly affects existence. Being as such cannot be an act of determination since only particular beings act. Liberation from the repetitive reenactment of one’s conflicted, formative past – to “fix the past” or to attempt to glimpse the past from all its myriad facets in light of superior knowledge and wisdom. To glimpse an abstract principle behind the other’s hurtful actions so as to deconstruct them into harmlessness and laughableness. One paradoxical attribute of the Christian God is the notion of God being beyond space and time, i.e., transcendent, while at the same time personal. There is a similar (though reverse) contradiction concerning

the notion of the self in Hindu and Buddhist thought – the soul as the persistent bed of individuality is thought to be wholly illusory and yet both these faiths speak of reincarnation and the wheel of life. Because the transcendent cannot become immanent, i.e., dwelling within the world (of space and time) through an act of negation, it follows that the return is a metaphorical and dialectical process in which genuinely new possibilities are engendered for transcendence. What can possibly stand in the background of consciousness by which it could appear to one? Why is there something rather than nothing? Well, there is nothing too – there’s both something and nothing. There are two fundamentally different approaches to explaining the origin of consciousness from the functioning of the brain – from the inside, that is, from one’s own case, versus “from the outside.” But there should be just as many outsides to this description as there are insides. But only the plurality of the external points of view appear amenable to being unified. One theory is that the internal is already unified although the plurality of the external seems to belie this possibility. So what makes life possible psychologically, that is, is not having this older and more cynical version of the self, always around criticizing our every freely willed action. There are myriad examples of the simple misunderstanding in conversation in which one has misheard another and one is in a position, having heard correctly as a bystander, 3 rd party, the utterance of the 1st party. Question: for which reason is there so much embarrassment on the part of the 1st party as well as sympathetic embarrassment of the 2 nd party for the 1st, upon both becoming aware that they had been conversing unbeknownst to themselves at cross purposes due a trivial

mishearing of the pronunciation of a single syllable? Answer: because both parties experience in a precise and concrete way the collapse of the presence in which all happy conversation is implicitly supposed to be embedded by all concerned. And essential to this “presence,” c.f., “metaphysical presence” in Derrida, is the notion of communication as involving the transmission of the contents of one mind to that of another. And so the collapse of presence alluded to in the above scenario is just the sudden realization by all parties of the actual tenuousness of intersubjective communication. The problem with the multiverse presented us by the Many Worlds Interpretation of QM is that by making each and every of these possible worlds ontologically equivalent to the one that we (or more properly, the individual observer(s) occupies), the counterfactual that normally occupies the ground of being is removed, rendering genuine becoming impossible and hence its appearance – illusory. An example of this is found in the covalent bond structure of molecules which depends upon the superposition of quantum states all being equally present within this universe in order to sustain the covalent bonds of these molecules that clearly do occupy our (allegedly alternative) universe. In the same way that a quantum neural network computer could not be designed so as to be prefitted to the neural network of one’s own brain so as to function seamlessly in conjunction with it resulting in expansion in the number and complexity of forms out of which one’s consciousness can be potentially structured, but must be trained over an extended period of trial and error interaction with one’s original neural network (brain) in order to function together with it seamlessly, so was it not possible for one’s brain to engender states of one’s own consciousness ab initio in the absence of a similar “train-up” period. A feedback process was at first necessary for a time before one’s brain could then later become the neural mechanism by which one’s consciousness could become structured. The fetus or infant’s brain had to at some point become an open system in the necessary relevant sense prior to it later

functioning having become a feedback mechanism for the dynamic structuring of one’s consciousness. To provide an explanation for something’s coming to be what it distinctively is (as opposed to uniquely, except perhaps in terms of associated phenomenological effects attributed to it) description for that thing in such a manner that the elements of one’s explanation may be properly related to the various elements of the description. Instead of elements here, we might in certain cases substitute properties or attributes. But a substance cannot be explicated in terms of its accidents, as a moment’s reflection upon the more literal acceptation of the word, “accident” reveals.

Exilic and Covenantal Religions are derived from the mimetic. Are all of the fundamental elements of the Christian religion, for instance, virgin birth, incarnation, sacrifice, atonement, resurrection, ascents into heaven, second comings, end of the world, etc. common to earlier primitive religions? Are Gnostic and emanationist religions examples of exilic religion? Western monotheism’s concept of a personal transcendent is seemingly a contradiction in terms. But so is Eastern mysticism’s notion of the infusion of the impersonal transcendent within the natural order within space and time. Inflection of concepts as ordered shifts in the application and acceptation of the concepts within some preestablished system contextualized domains. Generalizing through the abstracting of notions common to different

acceptations or metaphorical extensions of some denotative term. The quantum nature of the physical order and the underlying integrative mechanism of consciousness overlap and can interfere with one another. Duality implies conflict and disharmony. Fall from the transcendent. Jesus’ resurrection may have only been metaphorical, but human existence itself is only metaphorical for transcendent being. If these myths were valid in the era of their origin, then they should be able to grow and adapt to evolving social and cultural context. Living myths that remain coupled to the dynamical ground of their being through which they may be properly updated through ground’s being kept informed by temporal change. *********************************061601******************* ****** The transcendence by Deity of the dual categories of Existence and Nothingness has the result of reifying Nothingness, at least insofar as rendering it a manifestation of the Absolute. Evil originates out of the active principle (of order/ordering) of the Nothingness constituted by (following Barth) “all that which God does not will.” Heaven may be understood as sacred and holy community in which intersubjectivity is in harmony by each subjectivity being attributed to the Divine Will. Hell may be viewed as the total breakdown into chaos of a community that might have been. It is constituted by all out war between and among myriad totally self-seeking individuals – a cacophony of unfettered wills. November 2011 The obverse view is that hell is to remain forever consumed with the self and its vain imagination in the utter absence of the presencing of the other. Most of freedom is comprised by choices that if adopted set the stage for further limitation of the small residuum of choices giving freedom its only real worth. There is indeed

a kernel of an argument for the existence of other minds (solution of “the other minds problem” of the philosophy of mind) to be found in the pursuit of a deeper analysis of the meaning of hell as the natural metaphysical outcome of soul-crushing guilt, shame and regret, if not remorse (in the absence of an otherwise salvatory contrition). Somehow the sole individual and his limited imaginative resources cannot exactly reproduce the uniquely integrally whole pattern of entangled sense data that routinely presented themselves for his appraisal throughout the course of his earthly existence. There is a key element of temporality missing, which is tangibly absent from the spirit of one in a state of “damnation.” This reminds us of the role of a missing grounding biomolecular context that lies behind the persistent failure of animal cloning experiments. There is something more important than the most important thing that you presently know about and of which you will never learn about during this life. This is the beginning of the opening of one’s mind and the setting aside of one’s unbeknownst arrogance. Information about this important thing is potentially available to the individual who has opened his mind. To have opened one’s mind is to have begun a search for the making known that which is within the Unknown. Because mind is a plurality, the Unknown possesses a structure and is informed, therefore, by an ordering principle, the nature of which is to sustain the unknown in its state of being unknown. The plurality of consciousness has being but cannot be known, except to a transcendental Mind. If the real possesses a representation as Idea, then a transcendent Mind possesses true being. fb=

Man should not fear the unknown. After all it is where he came from and is where he currently makes his home. Can all fluctuation phenomena be rationalized as perturbations of expectation values. Or is the stability of expectation values negotiated (through a counterpoising of wills, say) rather than being just mechanism writ small? The fact of uncertainty possessing an

irreducible ontological, as opposed to merely epistemological component, should have an important bearing on this question. Contemplate the changeability and reactivity of language as individually implemented that is owing to a social-collective dynamic. When most people think of God, they imagine a being that falls within the description of one of a pair of a potentially myriad number of pairs of dual opposites, e.g., good vs. evil, matter vs. energy, temporal vs. eternal, existent vs. nonexistent, personal vs. impersonal, etc. But such a being as is imagined here could not possibly at the same time be the ground of being, that is, that which that underlies all duality that is a mere manifestation of transcendent Deity. The wholly other from myself would not be the merely different, c.f., difference within continuity versus difference without. For all the ways in which this other might be different from myself could be submitted to a contrast between all of my positive attributes and all its negative. But this would be a case of another individual being merely relatively different or other, in the sense of opposite extremes on a scale embodying a scheme of categorization. But the transcendent other is beyond all categorization in the same way that consciousness as the ground of thought (in general), can’t itself be a thought or embodied in thought or as the ground of experience, can’t itself be an experience or grasped within experience. Only within the transcendent consciousness of Deity from which we derive our being could consciousness be a thought. And so if Man has a concept of consciousness rather than merely possessing a metaphor of it, it’s because God has given us the gift of this concept. This idea is very much of the same spirit as Descartes argument that Man couldn’t have a notion or idea of God, if God didn’t actually exist – there’s nowhere we could have gotten this idea of God and divinity, in the sense of transcendent or universal divinity, if not from the fact of God’s being having been somehow communicated to Man through a kind of gracing of his intellect. September 2013 fcbk=epi= "The sharpest system of ethics comes from an understanding that persons do not belong in common to any conceivable abstract

category or class, i.e., comes from a recognition of the transcendental nature of the self...being ethical towards "the other as wholly other" embodies a much stronger ethical principle than does the JudeoChristian principle, "love thy brother as thy self"..." The other is not “thy brother. The "prolegomena to any possible" theology (if indeed one is possible) must include a "transcendental ethics". The magical naïve realism of Judeo-Christianity does not in fact form a metaphysical basis for an ethical system opposite to the one likely fashioned by an otherwise rational metaphysical solipsist…rather, the most rational system of ethics open to an *epistemological* solipsist/Cartesian skeptic is the one that is indeed diametrically opposite to the ethical system likely espoused by the determined metaphysical solipsist. If "thy brother" or “thy neighbor” were equivalent to "the other", then God wouldn't have directed the extirpation of all the Canaanite tribes, for example. It is always the other who is damned and not the self, e.g., “God wouldn’t damn me…I’m a basically good person, etc.” The existence of a concept of consciousness, i.e, the intersubjectivity and rationality of consciousness per se depends on this notion of “the wholly other” for its definability/conceivability. Intentionality seems the only viable basis for a category or concept of consciousness, not any group of similar instances from which we could abstract to form said concept, e.g., the electron, since one only has one's own unique case from which to draw (one can't ever know the conscious states of other minds). September 28, 2013 Posted as comment to Audubon Society page : " A most demanding system of ethics would come from an understanding that persons do not belong in common to any conceivable abstract category or class, i.e., comes from a recognition of the transcendental nature of the self...which is to say, being ethical towards "the other as wholly other" embodies a much stronger ethical principle than does the Biblical principle, "love thy brother as thy self”. But such a system of ethics might well offer up unwanted metaphysical or even theological implications, especially to those who take themselves for the most ethical of persons. Otherness as alternative coherence of consciousness can disseminate and infect one as when on adopts the voice of the other (small “v”) which results in a shift in the register of thought over to the other’s voice (large

“v”). Lime Cat May 2014 So the keenest ethics is not motivated by the perhaps admirable notion that, "I do not do the right thing by my fellow man and society because I crave heavenly reward or abhor the terrors of hell, but because *it's the right thing to do*", but by the notion that, "I shall do right by the other, who is, in his/her very ground of being, always transcendentally other from myself." It is an ethics based on the Zen notion of "solipsism without solipsism". Contrast this with wheeler’s view that, “we all share the same abstract identity”, which is a very different take on solipsism without solipsism, c.f.,cit= http://arxiv.org/pdf/quant-ph/0503113.pdf, Micro-Anthropic Principle for Quantum theory. April 2012

A key component of any system of ethics is integrity, which is where one consistently applies the principles and abides by the shared values of whatever social and collaborative endeavor one is engaged in, e.g., scientific research. What are some of the social, economic, political and even personal/psychological forces (such as greed, ambition, competitiveness) forces that influence individual researchers and research institutions in their decision-making, which causes them to fall short of the principles, ideals and values of science as an objective search for truth about the natural world? Identify those principles, values and ideals, then identify those social, political and economic forces that cause researchers and research institutions to fall short of the above and then maybe state why its important for a physicists, individually and collectively to act ethically to include the long terms social and pragmatic benefits that come from ethical scientific behavior, e.g., the image and inspiration of scientific endeavor for future generations, increasing the public's trust in scientific endeavor, which leads to greater public support for science, e.g., physics and big physics projects. Key words in the guts of the discussion: peer review, grants, contracts, awards, tenure, academic honesty, sociology of science, military industrial complex, scientific paradigms, Big Science (e.g., Superconducting Supercollider, which was cancelled by Congress 20 years ago). There is the question of whether scientific truth should be pursued (even at high cost) for its own sake or only if the investment

translates into a socially useful payoff, short or long term. The traditional notion of God secretly implies He is a kind of cosmically lonely solipsist. We should explore the implications of transcendent alterity in light of the absence of an immanent concept of consciousness with a mind to revamp our notion of God by stripping it of all of its features that might carry unwanted solipsistic implications for transcendent being. Of interest also is the notion of transcendent ground of being in the absence of transcendent being itself. Can TGB do all of the same “work” without the necessity of TB itself? Perhaps, but perhaps not. The question bears philosophical investigation. Lime Cat What I'm talking about is what I think might be the essence of real altruism. In the sense that it's less altruistic to help your brother than it is to help a cousin than a it is to help a stranger than it is to help an alien intelligence, and so on, This all starts from the assumption that altruism must be disentangled from sympathy, presumably after one has already factored out the prospect of profit or gain due to anticipated or implied future reciprocity. Friend is somewhere between brother and cousin, if you will. Except in rare cases! : ) Resonance is coherence with the other and coherence is resonance with the self. Inertia then must be interpreted more broadly as resistance to transformation involving a shift in the relative strengths of coherence and resonance. How is it that Man has since the beginning of recorded history, possibly much earlier, spoken with God’s voice though without ever having heard this voice? What causes us to resist acknowledging how little sense this makes? In the same way that the causality lying behind the coherence of matter giving it its integrity is underlied by the nonlocal connectedness of local resonances within matter, doesn’t the coherence of consciousness that we term Mind dependent upon the resonance of the individual consciousness with (nonlocal) eternal Mind (which may be a kind of

master coherence within transcendent consciousnes)? “In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God.” For being to be with itself is for being to be conscious (being). To articulate this being’s being with itself (Word) is selfconsciousness, that is, it is the very beginning of the Self in Time. There is no beginning without Being in Time. Noting the occurrence of Being within Existence is the precondition of this being within time which being notes occurrence within self. In the same way that a series of negations (descriptions in terms of negations, that is) doesn’t grasp or capture the ground of reality from which we draw our being, it follows that our being within the world is not founded upon negation within any pre-given system of forms and functions, but possesses an absolute and not merely relative or relativistic positivity about it. We are not merely existents, but metaphysical entities, and so everything we do mindfully, that is, results in the exertion of at least some small bit of metaphysical work and by which the realm of Being itself is enlarged. We are, in other words, if only in but a small way, co-creators with the Deity in the unfinished and ongoing work of creation. This is quite contrary to the spirit of Schopenhauer’s confident assertion that, “after your death you will be what you were before your birth.” December 2011

We are, in other words, if only in but a small way, co-creators with the Deity in the unfinished and ongoing work of creation. In this way, an important and substantive distinction must be drawn between a genuinely possible hypothetical person and the identity of a person who lived a life, but whose time has now passed. We must have had a potential to exist, since were are indeed here, now. But does this imply that one always had the potential to exist? Or must certain conditions be in place first, before it becomes true to say that a given hypothetical person now has the potential to exist, whether or not that person ever indeed comes into existence as a matter of fact. There are many suppressed distinctions being glossed over, equivocations of sense,

entanglements of context and confusion of categories implied by the above paragraph, which might fruitfully bear further investigation. Death is not a happening, but a failure of something to happen next, that is, if we are trying to think of death as something that occurs at a special moment at the end of life. But actually, we are always in the act of dying as we die along with the passing away of the present moment. It is the passing away of the present moment without its being replaced in turn by the following moment we call death from all other moments of one’s life. Death is just failure in the process of rebirth or reconstruction of the old pattern of one’s life in the flesh of the every-renewing flux of energy that is the life of the Universe, that is, of existence, as opposed to being. One’s being never passes away for it never once passes at all. One’s being informs one’s existence though it does not itself actually wholly embark upon and into this existence. The Absolute may be understood as that boundary condition that applies to all possible fluxes and back-reacting only takes place between the relativistic boundary conditions that exist at various levels. We might classify data as intersubjective information and information as subjective data. Certainly the Internet and the WWW is going to catalyze the crossfertilization of ideas. And out of the resulting intensification of metaphoricity will emerge, as out of a kind of distillation process, the further crystallization of concepts and may even reduce the threshold against the occurrence of spontaneous intellectual and spiritual insights, making this fundamental and transformative experience of insight more accessible to the heretofore “common man.”

One doesn’t have to have this dramatic, glamorous or interesting life to be reasonably happy, which means just being open to the bubbling forth of these brief, episodes of joy or mild elation that don’t have to have any reason de etre in the usual sense of holding out expectation for the future, say like when as children we go to a restless sleep, looking forward to embarking on the trip to Disneyland or to Grandma’s quaint house in the country, probably already practically standing-room-only filled with my similarly aged, rough-housing cousins. And one doesn’t have to have this fascinating life because in a very real alternate Universe somewhere my doppelganger is doing 25 to life for something he did while celebrating too hard on the night after passing his Harvard Law Bar exam. But there just aren’t as many alternate universe out there as there are permutations and combinations for all of the abstract physical parameters that quantum or particle physics imagines goes into the complete physical description of a Universe. There has to be something akin to a quantum degeneracy that somehow escapes the ceteris paribus principle of Occam’s razor that accounts for the coherence, cohesiveness, and consistency of this real Universe, in contradistinction to the projected Universes of abstract parameters juggled by the quantum mechanical Mixmaster. I think most of us who really pull our hair out trying to find something to write hit upon the magic secret weapon of channeling. That’s when the words and phrases, subvocalized in your mind’s ear, before you’re about to commit them to paper, are in the precise vocal inflection of your favorite author. But really the secret is to learn to hear the vocal inflection unique to you and channel that. The spiritual depth of a person is determined by how much of their lives are spent in preparation for death. There are others who strongly feel that there is no possible way to prepare for one’s death and so one might

as well devote all of one’s attention to living one’s life. To these people the preparation for death through spiritual or philosophic study and reflection represent a mistaken notion of death’s meaning as some event apart from utter and complete cessation. There appears to be two basic kinds of negation, one operating within a formal, closed or bound system – this is the usual sense of this term. And then there is the less common, more esoteric sense of this term in which, unlike in the first sense, the operation of negation is fundamentally irreversible, i.e., the negation of the negation does not bring us back to some previously defined state or recapture some preexistent feferent with which we began (prior to the 1st negation f the pair). This second kind of negation cannot be symbolically represented withina pre-given system of symbols, but only by that which possesses only a subjective interpretation or reference. Will acts upon ambiguity here, rather than mechanism upon certainty. In the first case there is identity within a system of differences. In the later, there is absolute identity. The second kind of negation exhibits the nature of thought (rather than reaction or impulse). 1 John 3:24 “And he that keepeth his commandments dwelleth in him, and he in him.” Here I dwell in Him and He dwells in me. The self as subject (I) dwells in Him, and the self as object (me) is the place of His indwelling. So here I dwell in me through dwelling in Him as He dwells in me. One’s body is no longer directly and immediately ensouled, but has now become ensouled through Him (Jesus Christ). Jesus may be thought of as the 2nd person of the Trinity as object, Christ as this person as subject. Through dwelling in Jesus (His works, i.e., the Commandments), Christ (grace) dwells in the self. And in this way is the believer ensouled anew through Jesus (the) Christ. This is to be born again. Will and (passive) consciousness are not separate but will may be

understood as active consciousness. Although perception is consciousness reacting to the imposition upon itself of boundary conditions from outside. These boundary conditions are not applied to consciousness as such, but to the individual’s consciousness as (always) already established and in operation. Will may be understood as the imposing of boundary conditions by the individual consciousness upon itself, internally individual consciousness upon itself, internally as it were. No perception may be had without first the appropriate adjustment of consciousness’ boundary conditions (upon its timelike resonance), that is to say, without the proper filtering by boundary conditions of the dynamic of consciousness’ resonant interaction with its transcendent and indeterminate ground. There is of course the necessity of a certain basic pattern of filtering upon which the ego is dependent. The individual consciousness possesses a coherence not reducible to or dependent upon feedback structures sustained by brain activity. Consciousness is a classically forbidden phenomenon. Is it possible that quantum tunneling is an important mechanism underlying the association of consciousness with (rather than its engendering by) a functioning brain? If all possible universes are actual, then does this mean that the conscious observer continually moves from one universe to another (at least each time the observer performs a quantum measurement upon the quantum state of his own brain). The essence of evil is the unity of effort and activity of the 2 nd principle to subvert the order of creation, the manifestation of the 1 st principle, to reorganize this reality in accordance with itself so that this creation appears to have been an expression of its own being rather than that of Being Itself. It is constituted by the reinterpretation of Being as Manifestation and manifestation as being. The dictum that, “nothing fails like success,” may be understood in the

following way. Success allows the erecting and building up of vast, institutionalized structures upon which nations and still larger societies may come to depend for their livelihood and sense of the meaning of existence, but which must sooner or later experience collapse or revolution, resulting in failure on a catastrophic scale. Success permits falling from a much greater height than from the lower plain of mediocrity. There are many examples that can be given for things in culture that exert an upward pull upon the mind and heart on the one hand or a downward pull upon the same, on the other. And as culture is itself a manifestation and concentration of the elements and dynamics already present if only in relatively inchoate, unsublimated form in the natural man existing altogether outside of the realm of culture, altogether outside of the realm of culture, this would appear to perhaps make the case for a fundamental duality of good vs. evil lying at the foundation of the human spirit. But there appears to be also a natural latent ability of many persons to imagine a way life and being based upon a system of values radically different from that held by the dominant cultures into which they have been born. And this seems strong evidence for the real existence of a faculty of free will in such persons and points to the possibility of such a faculty being a more or less universal endowment of the individual human psyche. The world isn’t real because it doesn’t last and doesn’t possess an ordering principle deep enough by which it can sustain its own existence. The principle of being of existence, that is, of all that exists, is not to be found within existence. It is not necessary to choose in the light of greater knowledge, obtained only much later, in order to choose wisely. It is not only important to see things as manifestations of a ground, but to recognize and distinguish one ground from another. That which informs ground is ordered in altogether different manner than is this ground which it informs. This is the principle of the seed in which information is

interjected in programmed stages into the process of the informing of ground which itself does not function in accordance with any prefigured or predetermined programs. Information is not a program and the placeholders for data within data structures are not themselves data. There are “before images” just as there are after images. Transcendental Mind leads to consciousness which leads to information leading in turn to data structures, then to data variables bound or unbound by explicit data structures. The ringing of the bell before the bell exists. The ringing of the bell after the bell exists, but before the bell has been struck. The ringing of the bell after it has been struck though the bell remains in existence. The ringing of the bell after being struck and after the bell no longer exists. The large time scale on which the maturation of wisdom takes place suggests that the gradations by which this kind of knowledge increases are below the threshold of being articulated discursively during the process, that is. After substracting from each individual subject all those particulars, e.g., accidents, conditions, etc. That are not essential to each subject being what (or who) it is, we are left only with what distinguishes each from the other. The human quantum observer is not part of the deterministic order governed by the Schroedinger wave equation although he is nonetheless able to physically affect any such system through deciding to interact with it. Synaptic activity has to be taking place in something, that is, there must be some kind of context for this synaptic action for this activity to integrate so as to refer to something outside itself. This context, whatever it may be, cannot be of the same fundamental

quantum/classical nature as the system of the brain embedded in it. To possess consciousness is to possess psychic abilities, e.g., telepathy, telekinesis, clairvoyance, etc. with regard to the situation and conduct of one’s own self. Perhaps the cash value of the term “consciousness” is in actuality only “self-consciousness,” that is, consciousness with an object- in this case, the object (a social construct merely, perhaps) is the self. Here the situation would be understood as closely analogous to that wherein the dreamer upon awakening wonders if indeed he was conscious might (though not self-awareness unless the relativity rare case of lucid dreaming is concerned here). So are dreams only recollected in the light of the self-conscious self of the awakened state in which case our belief in the intrinsic “raw feels” of consciousness as a kind of continuous substance, one which doesn’t necessarily require any particular form or structuring to possess un-self-aware experience, is quite mistaken. Or if upon awakening he merely recollects the dream as having been a series of conscious experiences. If indeed dreams are therefore, only, properly speaking, composes of conscious experiences in the rare instances of lucid dreaming, and in all other cases, it is only physical memory traces that are being more or less built up during the night’s lapse of normal consciousness, then the experience of dreaming, as humans normally understood this phenomenon, has to be more properly viewed as the backward projection of one’s normally waking consciounsess as the reified context-giving substance (in the sense of experiential medium) for these flimsy sturctures of physical encoding of memory traces within the dreaming person’s brain. Ending these considerations prepares for considering the relatively more radical hypothesis, namely, that every case in which we recollect having been conscious in the absence of a concurrent state of self-consciousness is one in which a false attribution of consciousness is being made in a later-occurring self-conscious or reflective moment.

Our whole debate concerning the question of God’s Existence or nonexistence, Platonism vs. relativism, hard AI vs. mysterianism, etc. may turn out to hinge upon the question of whether self-consciousness and consciousness itself (or as such) are in actuality two distinct things (phenomena, concepts, etc.). Is there pure consciousness, in other words, or is this concept based upon the kwd=reification of a projection? Plato had been speaking about suchness but only the suchness of form and not of substance. We have all along assumed that the act of reifying our projections does not translate to any enduring disturbance or alteration of the real (whatever this is/be). If consciousness as such or “pure consciousness” is really only self consciousness and its various backward pointing projections, then pure consciousness as such should have no basis as a properly distinct concept (distinct from that of self-consciousness, that is.) In this case consciousness is self-consciousness, that is to say, consciousness (as self-consciousness) is a form or function (or form of functioning) of some system, and so-called pure consciousness is the medium of the subject’s self-conscious experience reified as underlying substance that is structured into a consciousness of self as subject of this conscious experience. There is all kinds of stray inductive “cross-talk” between the various densely criss-crossing axons of the human cerebral cortex. But either these stray inductances are below conscious threshold or there are really no messages as such criss-crossing along these myriad neural fibers. Rather, thoughts and perceptions are triggered actuated, and perhaps modulated by all the complex networks of ion currents bound to the meshes of neural interconnections within the neocortex. But without the validity of a concept of pure (individual) consciousness referring to an objective as reality we have all along supposed it to be doing, the entire metaphysics of mysticism is completely undercut.

Moreover, one cannot then use the notion of a transcendental Mind based upon the notion of general, that is, transcendental concept of consciousness, to argue for the reality of God’s Being (if not, however, His Existence). 

fcbk= September 2013

"Can a person who has only ever experienced a single color, e.g., the color "red" (a philosophy of mind favorite) possess a concept of color? - An affirmative here does not appear reasonable. Similarly, the individual, who has only known consciousness from his own unique and individual case, cannot possess a concept of consciousness. A concept of consciousness is therefore a "transcendental", i.e., conceivable only by a being capable of experiencing more than one distinct individual consciousness. However, common sense dictates that the individual indeed does possess a concept of consciousness - a concept which it seems could only have been revealed to him." We know that consciousness is rational although this cannot be demonstrated by human reason. . fcbk=

”I'm being insane yet Rational . Peace?” – Naomi Jakins

fcbk=

So rationality, like integrity has multiple bases, which is to say, degeneracy. We must not only be rational, but also start from just premises.

Broken Symmetry, GUTS, and the Human Sense of Beauty This book title occurred to me as I was reflecting on the bilateral symmetry of the human form, many particular examples of which, are considered beautiful by almost all who behold them, e.g., runway supermodels, Olympic Decathalon champions, etc. and reflecting further on how rather unattractive or unbeautiful most of us “guts” of any human person. Then it occurred to me that “GUTS” was an acronym from theoretical physics meaning, Grand Unified Theories. Further, I recollected that one of the basic assertions of most of these “GUTS” was that of broken supersymmetry or just simply “broken symmetry.” Physicists consider this broken symmetry exhibited by nature to be “ugly” when compared to the supposed aboriginal cosmic state of supersymmetry. Supersymmetry possess a greater elegance through its

greater simplicity. For example, the more highly symmetric is a collection of data, the more redundancy is built into this data set, allowing it to be more greatly compressed, say, for purposes of speedier transmission. In theoretical physics, asymmetries are the phenomenal manifestations or constructs of a deeper symmetry level. The theistic view is perhaps the converse of this. God, the real Author of Creation, according to the theist, Himself possesses no redundancy whatever, but represents an utterly unique, infinitely asymmetrical (or perhaps nonsymmetrical is a better term), precursor to the created order, i.e., the Universe. Rather than viewing the asymmetrical as due to a kind of disruption of some original or starting symmetrical state, perhaps it is bette rto understand the symmetric as distinct internal coherent resonances within the starting asymmetrical state. Although almost all religious belief systems make reference to a world beyond the contemporary earthly one, believers’ reasons for continued adherence and subscription to the religious systems of their choice is the ability of these belief systems to empower the believer in his daily existence. And the real cash value of most religious belief systems is their therapeutic and motivational advantages they offer the believer. The theological questions of God’s Existence and tha tconcerning the immortality of the soul can be seen to be intimately connected as strictly philosophical questions through the more fundamental question of whether consciousness can only existe as a structure of consciousness, i.e., as consciousness with an object (even if this object is only that of the ego) or as pure consciousness or consciousness as such. The coherent structure (and function) of counterfactuality is needed to help account for the rationality and coherence (and cohesiveness/robustness) of the order of nature that is actually given. Factuality vs. counterfactuality may merely constitute the end or

terminal bands of a continuous spectrum of factuality/counterfactuality. Each (apparently) actual other person represents a counterfactual state of being/ existence for myself. The factual-counterfactual might have manifested itself as, for example, the fact that many potential persons never become actual, on the one hand, while many actual persons have never been potential or possessed potential existence. For the Many Worlds Interpretation to be consistent with the observed consistency and coherence of the World that appears to us as the actually given one, there must exist an underlying degeneracy spectrum of protoworld states such that, any given MWI QM theoretic world (among the vast number of possible MWI QM theoretic worlds) is highly overdetermined form the standpoint of never-manifested (within spacetime, that is) protoworlds of the multiply degenerate continuous spectra of actual protoworlds (as opposed to potential actual worlds). So here we have introduced a distinction between what we might term “unmanifest actual worlds” (the proto MWI QM worlds) vs. manifest potential worlds (the actual MWI QM worlds). @$

The DNA as a system of possible distinct DNA molecules must possess a rationality that will support the integration of independently occurring mutations into a single new molecule such that these independent mutations combine synergistically to produce environmental adaptation of an advantageousness perhaps greatly outstripping that conferred upon the new organism by the swimming together of the advantages respective to each. There is not reason to assume that the “Unknown” so-called is a single thing, that is, unified and not plural. Each individual resolves this unknown differently along the lines of his unique historical biography of experience. No matter how many individual consciousnesses experiencing and resolving the unknown, there may have been brought into existence, each diverges from the other as all continue further and further resolving

the multiply structured unknown. If the energy uncertainty of the brain like that of any other quantum system, originates from outside (since brain is just a collection of boundary conditions), then the reduction of the energy uncertainty of the brain cannot be consistently represented as the flow of uncertainty out of the system. Can information only be transferred from one open system to another, say, through tunneling or some other nonlocal process? Universal consciousness is the field that selects the degeneracy of would-be individual consciousness observers. Data has no content – only information has content. transmitted through spacetime – information cannot.

Data can be

Establishing a nonlocal connection between a QM system and an open system induces an irreducible change in this system’s state, i.e., collapse of the system’s Psi function. By disconnecting from the intersubjective reality network in which the impulses of irrational wish fulfillment on the part of the network’s component subjectivities normally cancel each other out and being equipped with only an incomplete and fuzzy memory of the rules (and of how to internally implement these rules) governing the externally collectively projected world of causal relations, one becomes able to dominate the process of the informing of chaos through force of an unopposed will. The disturbing thought for some philosophers of consciousness cannot be indifferent to the forms and representations inhering and transforming through it. But then this means that consciousness is not a passive medium of representation but participates in the “life” of the forms to which it gives rise, but then so too do these forms participate in the dynamism of consciousness (as such?) Does this mean then that the notion of pure consciousness is ust an intellectual hallucination – a false

idea? An implication of the Platonic Theory of eternal forms is that of pure consciousness as the purely passive medium of these forms’ subsistence. But isn’t this notion of pure passive medium merely posited to satisfy a metaphysical prejudice, having no other purpose or function? Nonlocal fields need not possess boundary conditions. Associative thinking as a broader and deeper basis for thought than class exclusion and inclusion. Enlightenment may be likened to the fish realizing he’s swimming in water. Pioneer spacecraft acceleration anomaly can be explained in terms of my mock gravitation mechanism based on the effect of general relativity time dilation on the strength of the vacuum energy density time-rate-ofchange spatial gradient. Gravitation as the result of the disturbance of vacuum supersymmetry by non-supersymmetric matter. Automaticity/ behaviorism and insight/intuition as not components but forms of embodied consciousness. Religious/church hymn composer inspired by mastery of the canonical forms and devices of composition within this genre. Of course, one finds oneself occupying the top species of intelligent life. This is due to conscious embodied existence being the intersection of the descent of being with the ascent of biological evolution. January 2012An additional, seemingly reasonable assumption is required here, namely that, the more intelligent the biological system, e.g., neural network, the

more completely does this system resonantly tune to the vacuum entanglement information frequency spectrum of descending transcendent being. This explains one’s vertical placement within the chain of biologically evolved life’s chain of being. The lack of more advanced intelligent life in the Universe may also be explained along these lines. The anthropic quantum solipsistic cosmological principle explains the existence of the horizontal order. January 2012 Similar to the notion of time scale reductionism, the structure of looser cosmological constraints is determined by a more finely detailed structure of tighter cosmological constraints. To wit, the Anthropic Cosmological Principle is a subset or corollary of the Solipsistic Cosmological Principle. This suggests the principle that what is called the universe is really a multiverse, which is itself an interconnected structure founded upon an array of uniquely tweaked/tuned fundamental physical constants. We should contrast with this here the instantaneous values of the physical constants (in a metaphorical sense to be explained later) with the average value (or expectation value) of the fundamental physical constants in relation to the distinction of universe with multiverse. Universe is to mind as multiverse is to society. It is no coincidence that the anthropic principle is part and parcel with the concept of the multiverse. @$ I am unaware if anyone has examined the relative magnitudes of the number of possible “anthropic universes” versus the number of possible distinct human personalities or selves. It is possible that the number of distinct anthropic universes so dwarfs the number of possible selves that the allied concepts of anthropic universe and multiverse conjointly carry the dangerous implication of metaphysical or cosmological solipsism. June 2012 “Some physicists believe that there are an infinite number of parallel universes, created for each possible quantum mechanical outcome. The collective name for these universes is the multiverse.” No interpretation of quantum mechanics that I am aware of has done an analysis of the role of multiple observers in the collapse of the wavefunction. Doesn’t each individual mind in some sense correspond to each independent outcome? Cosmologist Alan Guth proposed a multi-verse solution to the

Fermi Paradox. In this theory, using the synchronous gauge probability distribution, young universes exceedingly outnumber older ones (by a factor of exp[1037] for every second of age). Therefore, averaged over all universes, universes with civilizations will almost always have just one, the first to develop. “However, Guth notes "Perhaps this argument explains why SETI has not found any signals from alien civilizations, but I find it more plausible that it is merely a symptom that the synchronous gauge probability distribution is not the right one."” July

2013

Very similar to how SETI the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence, determines that the signal they have detected is from an intelligent source by virtue of the sharp frequency spectrum of the signal detected, one can know that one's own signal is intelligent if it is of a sharply defined spectrum of vacuum electromagnetic field fluctuations. A reasonable answer to the Fermi paradox is that the Gaussian distribution of extraterrestrial civilizations ages is such that it is unlikely that there are any civilizations similar to us in level of technological development therefore their activity their communications for example would be completely invisible to us. In other words it is by far more likely that Earth is surrounded by civilizations that are 100's of millions of years older and more advanced than to have a relatively close by neighboring civilization that is only 1000's of years more advanced. The greatest probability, of course is that we ourselves are indeed one such 100 million year old civilization which is merely running an ancestor simulation of a 5, 000 year old civilization. Boltzmann brains = Descartes deceiving demon and God = the beneficent dynamic principle of the transcendental unity of consciousness by which the Boltzmann Brains are knitted together into rational biographies. July

2012

From

a

Physics

Forum

posting,

http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=76618 HYPERLINK "http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=76618&page=3"& HYPERLINK "http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php? t=76618&page=3"page=3 : “So, given that the human brain consists of approximately 109 neurons and each neuron can be connected to up to 2x105 other neurons, you can come up with an estimate of the possible number of brains using. n!/n−m (Of course, the poster does not take into account the density of microtubules and tubulin dimers within each neuron, which only boosts the effectiveness of his argument.) “Where n is the number of neurons and m is the number of connections. Due to the magnitude of these numbers, most calculators cannot give a meaningful answer. Special methods can be used, perhaps some will grace us with the number. Given the number of possible brains we then need to assume a rate of generation and compare this time (how long to generate all of them) to the life time of the universe. If the time required exceeds the life time of the universe then it must be considered impossible.” March 2012

“If you apply the anthropic principle to you yourself, you are of course right that the probability of you being yourself, once you exist, is 1. When Richard probably means though is that the absolute probability is very small that you in particular should be born, while the probability is very high that some human will be born given humanity exists. The equivalent on the cosmological level is - given a sentient lifeform exists, what is the probability that it look exactly like homo sapiens and sits on a planet that looks exactly like earth. In the cosmological version, we can only guess, but it is bound to be very low. In the personalized version, it is easy to calculate - take the number of humans ever born and divide by the number of possible variations of the human genome. It's a

really really small number. But that's not in contradiction with the anthropic principle”, c.f., http://richarddawkins.net/discussions/488454the-anthropic-principle/comments?page=1 Does the anthropic cosmological principle apply to the question, “When is now?”? Paradoxically, the subjective nature of experience distinctive to each individual conscious mind, by transcending an intersubjective definition, must be objectively real in a deeper sense than entities within any particular universe of discourse. If we assume that there are different states of pure consciousness at least potentially accessible to each conscious person, then wouldn’t we have to view each of these pure consciousnesses as distinctly different forms of consciousness as such, and hence not really states of pure consciousness at all? If each individual consciousness is in this way a particular form of consciousness as such, than the operation of the transformation of one such form into another while preserving the underlying substance of pure consciousness should be definable and so possible. Moreover, each individual consciousness becomes now just a particular state of the pure (or absolute) consciousness. The relative difference of these particular forms of pure consciousness would not be accessible to each, but only could be compared and contrasted by the transcending pure consciousness. I cannot even say what it is like to be me. Indeterminate in the past is continuous with nonlocal, eternal present. Onset of irreversibility with cleaning of degeneracy of would-be quantum observers.

We said that the unknown had a structure because of there being a different unknown in relation to each mind. The question is whether the unknowns of each individual person eventually merge or remain separate. We are here inquiring about the topology, if you will, of the unknown in relation to the duality of duality vs. transcendence and plurality vs. unity. It is probable that these two dual distinctions cut across one another, creating an inherent difficulty for rational mind in its quest to submit all of reality to its descriptive grasp. We have to realize that knowledge transcends the discursive, transcends the capacity for description. If consciousness is figure, what is ground? Analogy is necessarily to intersubjective communication. Why should it be at all necessary for intrasubjective communication, say, for example, from an evolutionary standpoint. We seek answers that can be communicated, but still more, those that cannot be communicated, but only known to the individual and without this what’s being known by the individual’s possessing any analogue for another. But this knowledge should still be knowable for The Other? Nora’s reaction to have a dream – adaptation of the general human nature to the particulars of the individual’s circumstances rather than human nature being just abstractions. (predestination vs. foreknowledge) Back-reaction is an altogether different thing from reversibility. In fact, it’s the underlying cause of irreversibility, if you think about the vacuum that’s supposed to be the very ground of physical being itself be surprised by some sudden development within other wise dead, inorganic matter, say with the 1st switching on of life or consciousness. I think that the way inflection influences the content sometimes in very substantive ways, the content of what we are saying that’s inflected

indicates something of perhaps deep importance about the proactive nature of something that’s not exactly pure individual consciousness nor purely formal or linguistic that’s taking possession of the otherwise ordinary process of reporting information. Fundamental particles of matter are indifferent to the passage of time, and yet it is thought by the same people that somehow the vastness itself geologic intervals of time makes evolution of complexity more probable. Einstein’s derivation of the inertia of energy is based on a thought experiment involving the scattering of a photon between two mirrors. Time dilation derived form considering the reflection of a photon from a mirror when this photon originates from a body moving relatively to this mirror. We may conceive of the mirror as analogous to the orthogonality of the energy component of the 4-momentum, relative to the components of three momentum, combined with the fact of continual exchange of energy between all matter and the quantum vacuum reservoir of energy fluctuations. Observation by a quantum observer causes back-reaction of phenomena upon their ground state. A replacement of the merely abstract entities, i.e., atoms, molecules, in my brain over time does not affect the continuity of my conscious identity because the ground of which these entities are abstractions has not been substantively effected. Overdetermined of experience is essential to stability of the sense of the self and the external world. Space and time are aesthetic intuitions of consciousness so it doesn’t make sense to talk about consciousness being in the brain. Modernist cultural artifacts are characterized by their appeal to

phenomenology, by their representation of the ordinary at reduced levels of percetual/cognitive processing (and perhaps at greater levels of such processing, e.g., the introspection of a protagonist, etc.). Consciousness that is isomorphic to the underlying brain processes that are supposedly responsible for not only structuring but also producing this consciousness would lead, if concrete substance (and its causal powers, c.f., Searle) are truly irrelevant, then this functioning of consciousness would in turn produce another layer of consciousness. Contrary to the case of the understanding of atoms and molecules, there is no larger framework in which consciousness may be understood that does not altogether transcend the capacity for understanding of any finite individual mind. The structuring of consciousness is dependent upon spacelike inputs, which are locally connected but the coherence of these structures into an integrated form is dependent upon nonlocally connected timelike inputs. Nonlocal coneectivity cannot be explained in terms of mere local connectivity. Although the phenomena of self-consciousness as a high level structure of consciousness may be explained in terms of brain function, consciousness as such cannot. Archetypes  Elementary Ideas  Folk Ideas To permit genuine creation, limitation had to ensue only after Being had irreconcilably whether this applies to each apparently distinct species of intelligent life. That which requires no sustaining of itself was not founded upon an act of the determination of ground. There is a blurring of the distinction of question, assertion, command

and explanation. and symbol.

Polyphony and rhetoric as non-separability of sign

The difference which is a difference but makes no difference epistemologically – only ontologically. Because consciousness itself is not within experience of the individual, it makes non difference to the quality of experience. Solution to the otherness problem here. But there wold be a difference between consciousnesses to a transcendentally consciousness. A new organism can be trained by downloading of instruction sets without need for participation with an environment (context), that is, its training can be symbolically represented, if it is not capable of conscious encoding of experience. To ask if God Exists is similarly misguided as the question whether consciousness is an experience. The active principle of language is its intrinsic tendency of exhibiting the speaker’s intended denotation. How can symbolic description be passive and purely abstract, when the symbol back-reacts upon and self-extracts deeper meanings? Consciousness as pure epiphenomenon, then the rays, if you will, of consciousness radiate outward forever, at infinite velocity, and never hit anything – never strike the screen, as it were. As monumental as seems one’s evolution from the 1 st tentative stirrings of infantile consciousness to that height of consciousness represented by the pinnacle of one’s intellectual and spiritual development – this amounts to but the tiniest amount of metaphysical labor. That is, the sum total of one’s experiential opus manages to enlarge creation, but only by the tiniest increment.

We must think of this transformation towards which some of us realize we seem to be accelerating is entirely outside, nor should it be thought of as something unfolding entirely within the selves of harbinger souls, if you will. (Intersubjectivity of each person’s Other). It’s perhaps a collective self fulfilling prophecy. Maybe if we all talk about it and look for it enough, this will make it an inevitable event at some stage. All of the non-pedestrian states of consciousness fall into one or another of the Psychiatric diagnostician’s categories. But does that necessarily invalidate these extraordinary experiences? Perhaps it tends to invalidate the practice if not the theory or psychiatry? To be able to rationalize in the sense of channeling along societally defined as useful pathways, the peculiar impulses and vagaries of the individual or to simply shut these out altogether when no conventional way can be found for in this way channeling from – this is the principle object of the institute of the psychiatric profession besides the generally applicable professional interest of making lots of money. So when someone somewhat gets to know you and then this only to decide that one isn’t all that interesting, then, apart from the consideration whether this person hasn’t just decided that you’re no real use to them, you shouldn’t raly take this to heart or too seriously because we are each of us transcendentally mutually other. Machines don’t communicate with each other because what is exchanged between them doesn’t mean anything (to them). One thing that psychedelics can teach us is that all of the forms that might be manifest in culture both past and for the foreseeable future (and perhaps beyond) that all of these forms are latent and hardwired within the operating system of the human psyche. Does the Napster metaphor work as an analogy of the sharing of images

between individual unconsciousness who are the author, necessarily for at lest a small percentage of the images within their personal each of stock, archetypal images? But these unique images, particular to each self have to be adapted to some common format if they are to have currency in the collective. Certainly there had to be some sort of error correction system arise by which the brain could differentiate inside from outside stimuli. Space and Time versus Visual and Auditory Whoever discovered water, it certainly wasn’t a fish. McCluhan

– Marshall

Mind as conduit or terminal rather than repository/ computer. The human mind had to be able to form generalizations form just the barest handful of particular instance. This required a highly developed capacity for abstraction, the positing of assumptions and induction from those assumptions. One system for the brain protecting itself from incidental fluctuations in itself would have been to link all these fluctuations together into a rational system through streamlining and filtering to produce basic elements that could be permuted and combined. And anything entering this mix that didn’t bear the imprint or signature of this filtering procedure should be interpreted as having stemmed from outside. Outside sensory stimuli, other words, modulate fluctuations within the matrix of internal glitches. Isn’t it uncanny how all the reasons we give for what we love about our mates have so little to do with our original reasons for being attracted to and liking them. I don’t know whether I’m having an insight or just being paranoid. To

act alone is to risk acting out of madness.

********************************************* 01***************************************

06-05-

The “nice guy” has much less insight into his actions, reactions and motives than does the more obviously self-interested person. The nice guy does not appear to be after anything – at least earnestly enough to reap success. The gods say, sons and daughters, I have sent you away into the world. You are not allowed to return until you become prepared to instruct us. The circles and cycles of biological and ecological systems are extracted from their ground, but not through mere abstraction, in the sense of filtering or lifting latent structure out of a matrix, some preexistent features. Though the function of abstraction prima facie appears to be a positive action on the part of consciousness, it is essentially the construction of a category through the systematic negation of all those details or features inessential to what is to define this category. In this way, the empiricist and rationalist epistemologies seem substantively interrelated. Coherence of a collective of eigenfunctions is not really possible. Although each is differently weighted - in a sense they possess identical weighting . How does the adoption of Bayesian probability theory change our understanding of the phenomenon of Psi-function collapse? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monty_Hall_problem A discontinuous change from classical to Bayesian probability occurs in the Monty Hall problem, which could in a quantum context be interpreted as “wavefunction collapse”. Bayesian probability applies not only to a single observer who keeps learning, i.e., acquiring additional information about boundary conditions of the experimental setup over time (even by altering the experimental setup), but it also applies to the case of multiple observers who take turns learning additional details about the particles and the observational context (again, experimental setup). Lime Cat "No need to invoke any Jungian quantum voodoo bullshit - just take into account that there's a sleight-of-hand switch from

using intuitive, classical probability theory (before Monty opens the door, revealing a goat) to using Bayesian probability theory (after Monty opens the door). It's this secret use of a mosaic of two different probability theories for the same puzzle that creates the appearance of a mysterious result - if, like the contestant, Monty does not know which door the car is behind, then it doesn't matter which probability theory is used. We should distinguish between negation and the transcending of a duality to which the negation belongs. So when something transcends “A” it is “not A” though without being identical to “not A” in the sense of the simple negation of A. This is very much related to Gödel’s idea of theorems being true without being provable by positing of a contradiction within some particular system within which the theorem may be symbolically expressed. This culture that commits slow genocide upon itself by choosing not to reproduce but to rather attrit, is in part motivated by some sense that its act of self-extinction is noble and significant. But what if it could but observe the myriad other unfortunate cultures throughout the Universe who have chosen for themselves the very same fate as this, i.e., collective suicide? Might a determinism be uncovered which would rob the act of its illusory nobility and heroic significance? The disorder represented by deviance from the social norms is rationalized as being a manifestation of some alternative but equally grounded principle of order. But pattern is not simply manifestation of some preestablished mainstream or fringe. Rather new principles of order may be brought into being by any experiential pioneer or conscientious reinterpreter of ordinary experience. Random mutation/variation is just the raw material or medium utilized as a means for implementing . . .

DNA as quantum cosmic antenna and interface between the transcendent and the immanent or maybe just the means of access to this nexus or interface. Changes in a things potential or latent nature vs. changes in the thing as phenomenon. To survive psychologically speaking in this insane consumer culture, one must practice some degree of principled renunciation. To be godlike is not to be above suffering but to retain compassion for the Other, in the face of one’s own suffering. Without one’s own suffering, compassion for the other is a mere hollow pity, more infused with fear of sufferings spread to one’s self and one’s own than being genuine Mitleid. Knowing that you don’t know foregrounds what you do in fact know so that you know that you know it. This also provides the unknown with a structure. The unknowable is under the action of consciousness forever transforming into the merely unknown. Involution is the development of a concept from within itself and this development being irreducible to a redrawing of a conceptual map. I see that there are certain key concepts missing from the lexicon of critical thought that were naturally selected against surfacing. Rather than God being an abstraction from human being, humans are instantiations of God. It is obvious that the sufficient ground and explanation of consciousness is not to be sought from below, but from a still higher level of being. How is the concept of fetish related to that of presence of “metaphysical presence?” Escaping the determinism of the accounting system of offense and favor.

An essential component of heroism is the unsung nature of its suffering and sacrifice. He doesn’t understand the human experience of love; he is in its surface. Really, love is on the surface of his deeper being. Is consciousness merely a projection of the ego, say, like the free will experienced by a person under the influence of a hypnotic suggestion? We may think of the divine pluriform (c.f., Philip K. Dick’s writings on Gnosticism) reality in the following way. Each person may be thought of as occupying his or her own parallel universe. I am in many different parallel universes, but in each there is only room for a single consciousness? http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php? t=398352 July 2012

One parallel universe scenario that is compatible with the appearance of a unique, classical universe (naïve realist metaphysics) within a system of parallel quantum universes, i.e., a multiverse, which is also compatible with human free will is itself also consistent with each individual human consciousness transitioning to a new parallel universeembedded brain (possibly a Boltzmann brain) with each new freely willed act. The person does not start “branching” as a result of freely willed choices until there is a distinctive consciousness capable of conducting alternate universe transitioning. Self-consciousness may be based not in the functioning of a given individual brain, but in the quantum entangled functioning of myriad similar and quantum entangled brains, each located in a distinct quantum universe. In a real as opposed to an alternative Universe, ground would protrude into the Universe’s continuum. The poetic nature and significance of the of the prophesied event is fated but not the literal manner by which the prophecy will be fulfilled. A perfect example of the collective consciousness implementing of the above principle in the linking of significant events across time through

the initiation/enacting of some moral occurrence on an anniversary. But, of course, there are much more complicated ways of linking events, many ways to serve two principles, one practical, the other ironic/poetic through the freedom of choice in the forms of expression – the manner of acting that simultaneously serves the requirements of the now as well as those seemingly required by the prophecy. The intonation of the preacher’s sermonizing is so perfectly that of a person who is trying to convince himself as much as others of the truth of his utterances. Christianity: the incarnation was unique as opposed to pluriforms. Grace and election – “eternity is now so if you don’t already have it, you never will”, c.f., The Masks of Eternity (a collection of interviews for Parabola by Bill Moyers of Joseph Campbell, shortly before Campbell’s death), i.e., the idea of the elect as “entities,” c.f., entity theory. Augustine and Tertullian `marriage as reified metaphor, c.f., Alan Watts. Intuitions of waking life are equally mixture of projection and insight as are dreams. Insights of dreams are hidden to us just as are the projections of waking life. The ironies of life point to the hidden pedagogical nature of powerful human experiences. The pedagogical nature of human experience points to a creator just as does the design latent and express in nature. By being merely a metaphor a myth becomes more than literally true. Without the conditionality/contingency of reference, the distinction between reality and illusion breaks down; there is no otherness, but only the self, i.e., nothing to bar the self from the door to solipsism. December 2011 But the intentionality of consciousness in the absence of the object implies that an external reference of consciousness is integral to consciousness itself. Although data like energy may be properly spoken

of as flowing, i.e., is a conserved quantity, what is called information does not flow, but is necessarily nonlocal in nature, implying instantaneous two-way feedback. The dynamic integral structure of the brain’s synaptic network – still more of its microtubular network, could not have become what it is, that is, of supporting consciously self-aware psychological states if: 1) a sociolinguistic context and 2) an external reference, i.e., “external world” did not embed and support this network. The sociolinguistic context, mediated via the external world (physical processes supporting ego-alter ego interactivity) is what permits the brain to escape from its otherwise self-imposed “bootstrap problem”, i.e., consciousness not being able to terminate a self-referential infinite regress. The essence of self-consciousness is Derrida’s “always alreadiness” of preexisting recursive process. Surprise and the every present possibility of surprise cannot be encompassed within a monolithic causal matrix. One puffed up as an adolescent because one imagines that the coherence/ crystallization and therefore in live somehow with divine unity. Most objectionable positions advanced in earnest are known to be such by their advocates and there it frequently a deeper and subtler basis for such arguments that initially bump up against the prejudices of those they offend in the form of straw men conveniently ready to be fall apart in almost instantaneous rebuttal. Is otherness actually presence.

Self vs. other. Presence vs. Absence.

Watts: sensations and thoughts are vibrations of the self. The dichotomy of purposeful vs. purposelessness is cut across by the dialectic of the cosmic evolutionary process. Purpose must be opportunistically seized upon. This belief that the joy or pleasure involved in doing and experiencing all manner of different things can be distilled into a pure form, obviating

the need for joy’s attachment/involvement in the intricacy of form makes of these forms nothing valuable of themselves. This is the flaw in the Freudian sublimation theory. Freud’s sublimation theory belies the truth that form is inherent in joy or pleasure – that is to say, there are irreducibly distinct varieties of joy, which can be experienced by human beings. The infusing of the unlimited variety of forms with joy as we participate in them is what keeps the endless pressing of the orgasm button from ultimately becoming meaningless and pointless. The meaning of the Universe as a whole would have to be some transcendental reference. The coherence of the self requires that it possess its own ground and its own distinct, unique horizon, for otherwise there is no room for the development of each into the domains foregone by the others. Concepts  metaphors is pedagogy? Metaphors  concepts insight? Algebra  concept Arithmetic  metaphor Integration ~ conceptualization Differentiation ~ posing distinctions God is transcendent in the sense that he is not a particular being occupying the top position in the chair of being. Rather, God is the author of this chain of being. The individual human consciousness is infinite-particular while God is infinite-universal. Can the infinite be incorporated into predicate logic?

There are many more things that almost were than actually come to be. The temporal continuity of consciousness and its spatial discontinuity are only mediated and structured through spacetime. Or should we say rather that just the converse of this is true? Our basis for deciding whether we are going to like one another or not has much to do with how pleasing we find each other’s more or less unwarranted assumptions we seem to be makin gabou each other, that is to say, how much we like the novel relfection each is catching of of the reflective surface of the other. In the same way that the purpose of the Law was not a divine prescription for how human beings are to behave but essentially the means by which human beings were to obtain knowledge of Sin, the purpose of prayer is not essentially to petition of God good favors, but a contemplative means for finding out what the Will of God is for us actually. The question arises as to how we one able to directly intuit consciousness, if intact, we really do so. Or is it just the ground of experience which is itself experienced without us ever glimpsing this underlying ground of experience, or consciousness. Determination is a result of the collusion of the indeterminate being in itself with the grasp of the intellect. Thought is borrowed insight if it is not itself insight. Intellect never succeeds wholly on its own but depends upon grace. For seeing exactly how something is the case utterly removes the wonderousness of that fact whatever it may be. When making any philosophical or theological argument, scientific argument, etc. concerning some wonder inducing notion, one is always

secretly banking on a higher understanding than one’s own as the perfection or completion of one’s crudely glimpsed wondrous truths. We rely on God to ground our insights in higher reality and in this way vouchsafe our sense of wonder as other than mere illusion. As happens in the case of the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, a truth originally glimpsed as an epistemological principle is later discovered to be ontological in nature. We are forever arguing that something wonderful is so without ever seeing the slightest chance of saying how those things are so. It is here that we secretly invoke God as vouchsafer of ultimate reference. Understanding cannot be measured because based on experiences unique to the individual background of a person. Much is made, you know, of hunches, intuitions and insights, but what we usually find, is that once we have succeeded in seizing hold of an idea arrived at by some keen or penetrating hunch or intuition, we soon discover that there’s a much clearer path to my insight from the one by which I at first seized hold of it, and such a path, one realizes, post insight, could have never been glimpsed from ground level as it were. This very much applies to clever arguments in, for example, Christian apologetics. All this is to say that there is a telos to thought which transcends the affinity of ideas to one another based upon the surface appearance of these ideas individually, that is, based upon how these ideas seem to interlock within a presently held conceptual mapping. God makes possible the common reference of language, he is the implicit basis of community. God brings together otherwise transcendentally separate, cosmically lonely minds. The individual is the expression of the whole activity of the Universe from a particular point of view. Now there are two seemingly distinct

ways of viewing transcendent Mind. 1) The integral expression of the whole activity of the Universe from some absolute and unified point of view, that is, from every possible point of view or, on the other hand, 2) this from no particular view point at all. There are two views on what the processing of information means. In the 1st we’ve manipulated information so as to being about some bit of altogether new information, in the other, we’ve simply turned a piece or pieces of information over in our hands this way and that bringing out features of the information already present. In other words, we’ve used part of a collection of information to give us access to other parts of this information. What appears within the mind as a determinate insight is just the ability of this insight occurring within some larger space, encompassing the mind as well as that lying beyond its horizon and possessing a holographic structure, but a determinate facet of which is at first apprehended by the mind itself. Without consciousness there is no distinguishing of readily from appearance. Absolutely everything is then mere appearance and no hierarchy of being no development within the progress of being is possible. What evidence can we point to of this block or governor within the mind? A Baysian probability formulation for the wavefunction of a QM system brings with it the notion of the state of knowledge of the (an) observer being integral to objective quantum reality. A passing away and a coming into being cannot possibly be continuous with one another. The Tao is the same as the Now, but there is a different Now for each of us, isn’t there? Quantum uncertainty and probability are relative to the particular observer. But we must distinguish between epistemology and ontology

here. The 3rd Way is pointed up simply this way: we intuit the ground of our mental figure, i.e., perceptions, sensations, feelings, etc. – something other than figure and ground in terms of which it is intuited. If the global indeterminacy of quantum observables of the nonlocally connected quantum vacuum is collective in the sense of being comprised by the sum of all the uncertainties associated with all observers, potential and actual, then the sum total of fluctuations in these observables relative to this global uncertainty constitutes the classical world as intersubjective appearance. If different individual consciousnesses are each individual instances of consciousness, then there exists a concept of consciousness but not one that can be abstracted from out of the experience of any one particular individual. Hence, the concept of consciousness if it exists, is transcendental and this concept, therefore, may only be entertained by a transcendental mind.The alternative to the individual’s consciousness not being itself an instance of such a transcendental concept seems to be that of solipsism in which what each individual terms consciousness is completely incommensurate with what is termed such by any other person. “For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart." - Hebrews 4:12 While we mourn the loss of our dear beloved Cindy, let us pause to reflect how God knows the condition of our own heart far better than do we know it ourselves. (Funeral guest book posting for Cindy Ann Marcotte Gates). In this way belief in the existence of other minds (i.e., other consciousness more or less akin to one’s own) carries with it the tacit assumption of the existence of a transcendental mind, i.e., God. @$The

individual mind is not itself an abstraction, but is rather an instantiation of mind as such. So it appears that a favorable approach to a new proof of God’s existence might be the demonstration, first of the existence of a variety of transcendental concepts, even if such concepts go beyond any possible human attempt at their specification or description. Such a proof of the existence of God or transcendental mind would be itself an “existence proof” much after the fashion of those constructed as mathematical theorems in which the entity itself cannot be constructed, but can nonetheless be proved to possess mathematical existence, i.e., subsistence. In light of the discussion thus far it seems that no more faith is required for belief in “other minds” than in the existence of a transcendental mind. In this way the otherness of one’s fellow human being points to the concept of otherness as such, i.e., otherness in relation to all possible finite beings. We have a concept of consciousness by some means other than abstraction from experience (in the sense of synchronic experience). Where all of our other concepts are concerned, we tacitly assume a ceteris paribus principle where time/temporality is concerned. It turns out that temporality is not a concept either, but according to Kant an intuition. The concept of consciousness is arrived at through abstraction from diachronic experience and so consciousness is never/has never been an actual given within a given moment of experience (experience, rather, is always itself within consciousness). The concept of consciousness is arrived at through the integration of experience from outside of the moment. The intuition of the passage is, in fact, one and the same. Or is time within consciousness rather than consciousness being within time. The notion of consciousness being within time seems to require the presence of some broader consciousness within which the consciousness it contains might evolve temporally as a whole. Is personal, egoic consciousness, then the product of the integration of small portions of the contents of some universal consciousness? Or does this content itself depend upon the

context provided as a result of this prior integration of consciousness? Is there no essence to anti-Semitism? Is anti-Semitism merely a historical phenomenon possessing no unique and unitary cause/origin? Romanticism was not so much a reaction against the Enlightenment as were both reactions against medievalism. Rousseau embodied both reactions best of all thinkers of this period. The notions of nation-state and national sovereignty are fairly modern inventions. Hitler Youth became the Young Pioneers. The best communist is a former Nazi and vice versa. The reason for anti-Semitism is not hate, hate in this case is mobilized against the Jew for political purposes other than the mere hatred of Jews/Jewishness. Two examples of the integration of thought’s context of thought in order that thought be present and integration of thoughts as discrete elements that provide context collectively for each of these thought elements. Either way the brain provides the basis of this integration by providing a means for the building up, i.e., complexification of quantum correlations of the fields for which the brain also provided dynamically structured boundary conditions. These boundary conditions supplied by the brain provide means of selecting, filtering, amplifying and interconnecting of preexistent but ill-defined vacuum information signals. September 2011 There is certainly some mystery involved in the way that information can be rationally transformed through a changing of context. The not so mysterious part is that information is in the first instance an artifact of context. Information is by its very nature multifaceted, and the mysterious part is that this is in a manner that is open-ended. Recursiveness in the absence of closedness. Something defined in terms of itself wherein identity forever eludes any complete or crystalline determination. Consider that aperiodic patterns possess the far greater capacity for storing or carrying information, while a crystal represents the most information-frugal way of taking on mass. Schrodinger’s aperiodic crystal that stores information recursively would contain the encoding of its very own structure. It is like instead of being limited to any particular basis of orthogonal functions in terms of which to encode

or represent a certain class of continuously differentiable function, one has found the universal basis of functions, one not limited by any particular topology, or any particular system of Gödel-numbering for that matter, in terms of which one can represent any arbitrary function. Any sudden alternation in the structure of such an aperiodic, information-dense-coding crystal, though it might be caused by a random occurrence, would always produce a change that was meaningful though this meaningfulness would always be limited by an inherent modularity within each given level of description. These otherwise distinct levels of description may become mutually entangled, evincing a disruption of optimal functioning within one or more of these qualifiedly distinct levels. Randomness is actually essential to permit transitions between levels of description, leakage between compartments of the system state space that enable reorganization and transformation of the system. The advantages of a filtering function, which is necessary to get around the limitations imposed by Gödel-numbering, can only be realized within a system that possesses stores of unassigned state-space addresses. An isolated system contains a deterministic set of internal signals that possess no reference, i.e., they are not “about anything” and so possess no content. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/content-externalism/ A radically open and infinite set of such signals on the other hand seem to be about everything in general, as opposed to the earlier case of the isolated system, namely one where these signals are about nothing in particular. Our true identity transcends any such that might ultimately be established by our actual historical biographies whether seen through the eyes of others or our own. Rather one’s truest, deepest identity would be more closely approximately by some unimaginable integration of all possible alternative biographies; for this is the only clearly conceivable way of factoring out the extraneous influence of contingency and circumstances. Certainly an indefinite number of such alternative biographies involve genetically altered or engineered versions of my

physical self in which my brain is several times the size and complexity of the one I happen to possess and also in which I’m born into a vastly more advanced culture than that of late 20 th/early 21st Century America, etc. It is a widely understood fact of human embryological physiology that the brain of the newborn comes equipped with approximately 100 times the density of neural interconnections as one carries into mature adulthood. The reason for the loss of such a very large percentage of the initial complement is simply on account of lack of use. Human infants are apparently still being born into cultures too backwards to provide adequate means for sufficiently stimulating the newly formed neural circuits, which must then wither on the vine like leaf and flower shoots starved of adequate sunlight. It is a mystery as to why nature would have prepared each of us to survive and thrive in a culture millions of years more advanced than the one, which we designate as being the present one! We are reminded in this connection of the Sagan Hypothesis argument for our living within an “ancestor simulation”. One possible and perhaps disturbing take on the Many Worlds Interpretation of QM is one in which each observer’s brain is linked to or embedded in its own, unique quantum vacuum constituting his or her own quantum and nonclassical consciousness. The observer’s body observes and/or interacts with are constituted by deterministically evolving Schrodinger wave functions. These same objects are presumably described by a different set of wavefunctions. These same objects are presumably described by a different set of wavefunctions, one for each other observer or prospective observer because the brain’s of these other persons are embedded in, and interacting with, altogether disparate consciousnesses. The other persons with whom I, for instance, interact are linked to my quantum vacuum only thermodynamically via locally mediated mutual interference. The wavefunctions of distinct observers form with one another only statistical mixtures while the wavefunctions of a single individual form with one another an actual quantum superposition of nonlocallyconnected (quantum-correlated or entangled) states.

Detailed examination of the dynamics of the quantum brain’s functioning disrupts the nonlocal-connectedness of quantum entangled states of the brain, revealing only a combination of random and deterministic relationships between these quantum brain states. We should try to distinguish internally versus externally entangled quantum states, especially with regard to the problems of decoherence and wavefunction collapse. In this way, all persons are mixtures of determinism and chance with exception of the person in question’s own unique quantum brain states. We might term this model of the relatedness of persons’ relative state quantum solipsism. This points up the difference between each individual’s privileged access to his own brain states (by acquaintance, in Russell’s sense) and his access to the brain states of other individuals only by description, again in Russell’s sense of the terms. Is the quantum vacuum energy fluctuation spectrum of public spacetime composed of the projective overlapping of a virtually infinite sum of largely orthogonal time dimensions each with its own associated spectrum of uncertain energy? Only a single observer’s consciousness can “track” a particular single trajectory of composed of a specific sequence of bifurcating of quantum universe wavefunctions. So each individual’s consciousness is characterized by its own unique temporal evolution. This temporal evolution is constituted by the integration of the observer’s continual remeasurement of the quantum state of his own brain. This reminds us of the illusion of continuous time produced through too rapid succession of discrete movie projected still frames. How the wavefunction of the quantum brain of the observer collapses every few milliseconds is naturally determined by the state of the virtual energy, i.e., signature quantum vacuum with which this brain exclusively interacts. The world that each individual occupies is perfectly fine tuned as to,

e.g., physical constants, etc., for the engendering and continued existence for that individual. Well, then, what can we say for the case of the other individuals occupying one’s physical environment? Aren’t the physical constants equally well (hyper) fine-tuned for these other individuals? And if not, then how is this situation to be reconciled with the admittedly logically arguable absurdity of solipsism? The hypothesis of each conscious individual inhabiting the precise center position within his or her own uniquely specific quantum vacuum state offers itself as a plausible means of effecting such a reconcilement with the rejection of what we might facetiously term anthropic cosmological solipsism. The collapse of a QM system’s wavefunction is brought about by a discontinuous selection of a new ground state for the vacuum in which the system is to be “embedded.” The brain of the individual may be immune to such discontinuous selections of the vacuum state of his own brain because he is continually selecting the vacuum state of his own brain through his act of conscious existence. The system collapses in accordance with that observer who has the most direct and hence least mediated access to the observance of that system’s quantum state, in effect. The retroactive causality of the kind that seems to be permitted by the concept of quantum nonlocality cannot be that of some determinate (predetermined, really) future upon some system occupying a moment in absolute past of this determinate future’s Minkowski light cone. Such a retroactive variety of causality is ruled out by the Heisenberg uncertainty principle which disallows a determinate (though perhaps unknown or unknowable) trajectory of quantum observables in the configuration space encompassing these two separated temporal parts. One might suppose that however some determinate set of eigenfunctions with respect to various future quantum observables may be able to backreact causally.

However, the spectrum of eigenfunctions for quantum observables itself depends upon classically describable boundary conditions upon the quantum fields with which the eigenfunctions are necessarily associated. And these classically describable boundary conditions can in principle be pulled within the scope of the state function, resulting in a perhaps fundamental modification to this state function and rendering heretofore classically describable components of the overall classical-quantum (semiclassical) system quantum-describable. Clearly, only the unconstrained (“unboundaried”) vacuum fields occupying this future are permitted to have a retrocausal influence, but then, only directly upon the unconstrained vacuum fields of the earlier moment in question. It is difficult to see how vacuum fields of the type we have been alluding to can be attributed occupation of some particular temporal region of spacetime. These quantum fields seem to collectively possess the character of some kind of eternal present. Human Existence is the application of our choice of whether and of how we served or defied the Will of God. It is God’s demonstration to us of how we chose and the meaning of this choice so that we shall know that His judgment of us was both just and merciful. It is also the means by which those who chose to serve God could glorify Him. Fred Alan Wolf says that we can agree on the Holocaust as a historical fact, but we cannot agree on what was in the German Mind during the holocaust. fcbk=

The past cannot be changed per se, however, that which was indeterminate in the past, e.g., a mixture of quantum states or quantum superposition, the Heisenberg uncertainty of a given quantum state or mixture, etc. when it was then present and which until the present moment remains indeterminate – this can be changed retroactively in the sense of rendered more determinate in the past . . . by an act undertaken *now*. The temporality of the indeterminate (again in the sense of

fundamental quantum mechanical uncertainty) cannot be mapped or traced along the time axis of determinate, public or intersubjective temporality, but makes contact with and intersects it through the function of direct intuition, i.e., the intuition of the passage of time. In other words, what happens in Vagueness, does not necessarily remain in Vagueness. Quantum versus classical ~ Mind versus Matter Nonlocal Quantum vs. local quantum Fully quantum mechanical vs. semiclassical Disembodied vs. Embodied Mind Nonlocal quantum fields transcend spacetime by being supraliminal and transcend matter by virtue of being unconstrained by boundary conditions. The difference between Culbertson’s Robot that is built and learns German from another robot that is built, “identical” to the first, is the fact of a history of nonlocal quantum correlations that have been built up between the 1st robot’s “brain” and its environment (ultimately with the nonlocally quantum vacuum field in which this environment of the robot was embedded that provided the irreversibility and hence veritable historicity of the robot’s “biography”) The emergence of a new conscious being within the world (spacetime) is phenomenologically reducible to the mutual entangling and constraining and filtering of a virtually infinite number of preexistent wavefunctions. At some stage the system back-reacts upon its quantum substate, becomes stable and in addition to its stable energy ground state acquires furthermore a stable information ground state. Somehow the developing brain in its growing resonant interaction with its energy ground state induces a cleaving of a degeneracy of a particularly special nature, that of the spectrum of possible would-be observers. Some field is switched on that removes the degeneracy by virtue of some heretofore inert or passive structure, i.e., latent structure that has

developed to a critical point. This latent quantum structure must be tied to a relevant quantum number and hence to a relevant quantum observable. Hypothesis: all quantum systems possess some degeneracy, i.e., degeneracy with respect to at least one definable quantum observable, except those systems “possessing” conscious states. A question arises at this stage concerning the relationship of the switched-on quantum field (in conjunction with any other fields that are already present) and the spectrum of fluctuations supported by the collective boundary conditions represented by the physically realized system. Can there be a correlation of the “external field” with that of the system’s fluctuation spectrum, one, which encourages their convergence? The fact that time does not appear 0 dimensional, collapsed into the otherwise infinitesimally “thin” timeslices of the present is due to the action of consciousness presupposed to possess at least some capacity of memory. The “rate” at which time “passes” should perhaps be largely, or perhaps essentially, determined by the phase relations of the infinite, myriad and bundled together objective times. Perhaps it is only the very manner in which these phase relations are integrated so as to produce a phenomenological time (or temporality) that determines the nature of subjective time for the individual and perhaps the individual identity of the person (within time as a potential subject of experience). Now to avoid an infinite regress which threatens the discussion at this juncture, we must not allow that this “process” of integration, at its ultimate level, that is, become itself temporal in the interaction process. This suggests that the integration of a given bundle of an infinite number of “times” lies somehow with their intrinsic coherence. It seems that three of the four basic attributes of time, rate, direction and duration are all somehow dependent upon the faculty of memory – the other, time order, does not seem memory dependent and so may well be objective,

and the “direction” of past time flows may not have any real bearing here. Rather then saying that a system, facing a choice of different states, causes a split at “the universe” into several parallel ones, why not just suppose from the outset that the computer, as a physically realized piece of hardware, is itself the product of a superposition? The human brain manages to sustain itself, or various parts of itself, at various times, in quantum superposition states – even at temperatures approaching 100 degrees Fahrenheit. The brain does this through some as yet to be discovered isolation mechanism – something about how the brain functions prevents influences from the external environment from collapsing its internal quantum superposition states. Expectation value ~ intersubjective and can be measured repeatedly; an expectation value is an overdetermined quantity. Fluctuation ~ subjective and can be determined only once; a fluctuation is an underdetermined quantity. Energy from foodstuffs only supply the bias voltages of the network of neurons. The real work of information processing occurs at the fluctuation level. Attraction as a patchwork of fetishes that appears to fuse into a seamless whole. When a general state of dissociative consciousness begins to develop, this patchwork begins at once to unravel, causing a decay in the natural-seemingness of ones physical and social environment. The Heisenberg Uncertainty principle must have a close relationship to the Pauli Exclusion Principle since the strength of the exclusion force between particles of approximately identical quantum states must be proportional to the degree of overlap or coincidence between the probability density functions, for example, in the case where particle position is concerned. Similar observations hold for probability functions with respect to other quantum observables, e.g., energy,

momentum, angular momentum, etc. We can perhaps ground a distinction between two types of vacuum energy fluctuation in analogy to Kant’s distinction of synthetic and analytic propositions. The structures that cannot be anticipated by the vacuum in the sense of not having a correspondence with any purely timelike fluctuation in the vacuum’s energy – these we may term synthetic vacuum structures, all the rest for the time being we relegate to the term analytic vacuum structures. What may prove interesting to investigate would be the analogous breakdown in the parallelism of analytic versus synthetic with respect to a priori versus a posteriori, pointed out by Kant for propositions, now with regard to vacuum, structures as objects of thought versus objects of empirical observation. November 2011 @$ According to Kant, sense perception is not of objects in an external world, but of predigested and reprocessed sense data. The perception of the world may be overdetermined in part because the physical world is energy degenerate with ever finer additional details existing in potential awaiting application of the appropriate new fields, e.g., magnetic fields for removing energy degeneracies. The principle of causality is synthetic a priori in Kant’s theory of critical reason. The possibility of metaphysics, as well as the efficacy of insight and intuition seem to require the possible nature of the synthetic a priori. Naturally, the faculty of consciousness is necessary in order for synthetic propositions to be known a priori. What about analytic a posteriori judgment (what Kant considered impossible), c.f., Quine. If one is to be open to communication to “receiving information,” that is, then the system constituting ones mind must posses reducible energy uncertainty. If energy uncertainty mediates the passage of time, i.e., temporality, then perhaps exists an energy uncertainty unique to each individual consciousness that intuits its own temporality. And furthermore, perhaps the total energy uncertainty of the quantum vacuum may be

decomposed into multiple fluctuation spectra, with the correlations of fluctuations within one spectrum being mutually distinct from how these fluctuations might become correlated across distinctly different spectra. Each such spectrum would possess its own unique structure of energy uncertainty and hence its own, unique temporality. Each timeline for each individual could indeed be “orthogonal” to that of any other even though each corresponding four dimensional spacetime continuum possess three spatial dimensions in common. In this way each consciousness would be spacelike separated from every other. Through the action of gravitation, the energy (otherwise purely timelike) fluctuations within each distinct vacuum energy spectrum, i.e., subjectivity, could be communicated to each other through affected 3momentum fluctuations. We may self-consistently assume that the quantum vacuum energy fluctuations within a given spectrum are nonlocally interconnected while the fluctuations from distinct spectra may only become locally interconnected. With the initial impulse of the Big Bang directed perpendicularly (locally) to the three dimensional hypersurface in concert with local conservation of four momentum, (3-momentum is separately conserved, at least approximately, in weak gravity fields). The reconstitution of the 3-hypersurface from the vacuum energy of the 4-hypervolume “bound” by this surface occurs approximately along a direction orthogonal to this hypersurface, in the case of only weak gravity fields being present, therefore the “direction of time” is locally approximately independent of position and velocity along the 3hypersurface. For a rapidly moving spaceship experiencing relativistic effects, additional effects due to global spacetime curvature become observable.

To be an open system, a system must possess historicity, that is, it must

possess a spacetime history. The system must be properly speaking embedded in or connected to spacetime, c.f., Culbertson. This spacetime itself must be an open system by virtue of being a continuum sustained by some activity. If two measurement apparatus are adjusted in such a manner that the first prepares the system as an eigenstate with respect to a particular observable while the other applied to the same system in measurement produces a state of quantum superposition with respect to orthogonal axes of some conserved volume? Orthogonality of two functions implies their linear independence, but is the converse of this also true? Gravitation disrupts the linear independence of the orthogonal components of conserved quantities. Intuition and feeling necessarily involves a grasp of the relatively weighted probabilities of component possibilities forming with one another a spectrum (superposition?). This is why the terms expectation value (of an observable) is a doubly appropriate term for the average or mean eigenvalue of an observable.

How does the notion of transmission differ between eigenvalues and expectations values when a gravitational field is “switched on” within the wavefunction’s defining region?

As the gravitational field strength is increased, the quantum mechanical system becomes in some sense more cohesive but less coherent (the eigenfunction spectrum becomes more anharmonic. The orthogonality (linear independence) of the axes of subjective time would be guaranteed by the independence of the energy uncertainty of each individual’s brain from that of the brains of other individuals. The possibility of transcendent, transpersonal reality presupposes the

plurality of consciousness in which the individuality of each consciousness is irreducible and mutually incommensurable with respect to any other such consciousness. This makes the identity of this plurality fundamentally indeterminate. The cosmos arises through collective act of mutual determination on the part of these various incommensurate consciousnesses. The relatively incommensurate nature of individual consciousness implies the impossibility of superpositions of conscious states of distinct persons. In other words, conscious states possess no externally obtainable (measurable) eigenvalue. Consciousness is the ultimate step in the causal chain of the forming of an observation. Positing consciousness itself as a possible observable is therefore a contradiction in terms, as the observation of a consciousness, i.e., conscious state would itself be the ultimate step in the aforementioned causal chain with consciousness itself being the penultimate (or earlier) step in this chain. The essential nature of consciousness, rather than its innate and continuous self-observation, is actually not in any manner whatever observable. An essential property of what is properly called mind is the transcendence of Mind’s conditionality by its counterfactuality. This is due to Mind’s nature as not merely passive, but possessing activity of its own, both causally and categorically, mind’s reality-defining, creative property, otherwise stated. The manipulation of data by various, interacting subsystems of the brain can only be maximally integrated through the brain’s interaction with some active and dynamic substrate within which it lies embedded. The notion of each subjective will acting within a temporality unique to its own consciousness is supported by another notion of each individual brain accessing and interacting with its own unique vacuum signal spectrum – the same on that originally guided the wiring up of the

developing embryonic brain’s fine structure, i.e., its 3-momentum fluctuation correlation matrix. There is no direct coupling of timelike and spacelike momentum fluctuations in the absence of a gravitational field. Off-diagonal energy tensor component fluctuations are responsible for the expectation values of these off-diagonal components of . Dualism: vacuum fluctuations are both transient perturbations in energy as well as being a signal (representation) and potential input/output connection between, e.g., brain and vacuum or bias input for altering vacuum’s self-interaction (within or between vacuum spectra/domains). September

2011

The other minds problem may someday be addressed empirically through analysis of the vacuum electromagnetic field spectra uniquely associated with individual consciousnesses, e.g., microtubule protein dimer (tubulin) resonant structures, from which necessary general features of these spectra may be determined, which generally characterize consciousness as such. If there is no possibility of generalizing from individual instances of consciousness to a general concept of consciousness, then can it be concluded from this that it is not the instantiation of consciousness as such that constitutes an individual consciousness? If brain physico-chemical process/biophysical processes do not produce states of individual consciousness, but merely tune to, resonate with and in turn, filter, channel, inform, shape, suppress, dampen, amplify, etc. specific vacuum spectra that are uniquely associated with the identity of the person whose individual consciousness it is, then it might be supposed that there are features of these quantum entangled/correlated vacuum fluctuation spectra that form a necessary component of individual consciousness-mediated personal identity. The key question here is whether the development of the human identity is the result of a dialectical, give-and-take, “blind” collaborative process between brain embryogenesis and the formation, processing and reprocessing of quantum entanglement signatures within the particular local vacuum state of that epoch or whether indeed the key component of personal identity lies with vacuum entanglement signature

networks that preexist, only perhaps playing a hand in guiding brain embryogenesis (at the tubulin level) once an initial resonant compatibility has already been established between the vacuum fluctuation sub-spectrum and the differentiating fetal brain tissue. If more than one of these “sub-spectra” could be identified as essentially underlying the cognitive states of the individual, say through further experimentation along lines pioneered by Stuart Hameroff and relevant differences and similarities between such distinct spectra analyzed, then perhaps the problem of other minds could receive input from empirical science. Symmetry breaking and the Plurality of consciousnesses. The event of state vector collapse cannot be thought to take place instantaneously, but within and effectively over the course of some time internal ~ /\t, the time uncertainty of the system described by Psi, the wavefunction undergoing this collapse. The Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics requires a state vector for each observer of the system. A change in the rate of subjective passage of time could only be perceivable if subjective time is mediated through the degree of mutual dependence and connection of the brain’s subsystems, e.g., will, perception, sensation, abstract reasoning, etc. Can Psi(r,t) = Psi(r)Psi(t) be Fourier transformed into a function Psi(p)Psi(E), that is, as Psi(k)Psi(w)? The corresponding probability density function is square integral with respect to (r,t) and is quadratic in the momentum and energy variables. Momentum and energy densities may be shifted through shifting either the quantity of substance or volume (or both). Ambiguity of experience lies with the polyphonic nature of narrative. The indeterminacy and degeneracy of the present as embedded, living,

as opposed to isolated, determinate invites the retrodiction of future experience. Memory prevents reversibility and reproducibility and therefore blocks the crystallization of identity, c.f., Culbertson’s Robot with a historical past versus a copy of this robot that is suddenly switched on. A first point of difference between the two is the fact that the “historical robot” can point to no experience within its memory of having been switched on with a heavily laden memory bank already in place. This robot has the experience of accumulating new memories at various points within the process filling up its memory banks, including memories of the revision of still earlier memories and their meaning and significance in the light of accumulating of new memories. The phenomenon of the revision of memories (formally requiring the operation of a 2nd (and perhaps non-orthogonal) dimension of time) suggests that memory is not stored in the brain only means for addressing memories that are not stored locally ~ implications for the mind-body problem, question of immortality, etc. As the state vector of any quantum system is unique to each prospective observer, therefore so to are the expectation values of each of the system’s quantum observables as well as the squares of these observables unique though the state vector uniquely corresponding to each prospective observer. In the case of each observers own brain (as each is a bona fide example of a quantum mechanical system), the observer is not merely prospective but always actual. In this way the brain of each observer may be supposed to respond (via fluctuation resonance) with only a given set of quantum vacuum fluctuations out of the total spectrum of such fluctuation in which his brain is practically embedded. And this may, of course, be presumed to change in complexion on account of the temporality of the quantum vacuum that is continually driven forward, as it were, by the uncertain energy (energy uncertainty) of this vacuum. Although different such sets of partial vacuum fluctuation spectra may periodically or coincidentally couple and decouple from one another, the coupling of the fluctuations to one another that belong to the same set (partial spectra) must be fundamentally different in nature from transient cross-coupling of

fluctuations between set (partial vacuum spectra). The brain of each observer as a quantum system resists collapse of its state vector when itself made the object of another observer’s act of observation (quantum measurement). Because of a fundamental lack of coherence of vacuum fluctuations within which so-called inert, i.e., non-living/non-conscious quantum systems are embedded, no resistance to state vector collapse, i.e., “inertia” is exhibited by the system in response to acts of measurement, but the manner of collapse is in this case nonetheless determined by the nature of nonlocal, resonant connection of the object/ systems vacuum fluctuation substrate to that of the quantum observer performing the act of observation. Some of the “inertia” and coherence of the partial vacuum fluctuation spectrum (in which his brain is embedded) is effectively communicated to the system being observed. The different state vectors that are permitted to result from a given observers’ act of observation is orthogonal to any other state vector resulting from another’s act of quantum measurement. So the orthogonality of the various possible state vectors resulting from acts of observation may be thought to be closely related to the fact of the orthogonality of the time directions particular to the brain of each quantum observer (as mediated through each observer’s unique quantum energy uncertainty, that of his brain as a quantum system.) When the observer collapses the Psi function of a quantum system (and all material objects are constituted by some quantum system or other, with possible exception of the brain itself because of the non-unitary nature of the brain’s wavefunction), the would-be infinite regress of quantum observation is terminated ultimately by the observer’s act of quantum measurement of the state function of his own brain together with that of the original external object of quantum measurement. So collapse proceeds from the influence of a nonlocally connected quantum vacuum field in which the observer’s brain is embedded and to which the external quantum system in conjunction with that constituted by the observer’s brain has discontinuously become coupled. This

discontinuous coupling of the newly forged nonlocal connectivity of the components of the composite quantum system to the preexistent nonlocally connected vacuum field, i.e., that constituting the conscious identity of the observer, which is responsible for the discontinuous collapse of the Psi function of the composite quantum-object/ quantum brain system. Since a distinct state vector describes the quantum system constituted by the external object of observation, one for each distinct possible observer, while the origin of Psi collapse is seen to be generally materially transcendent, if follows that the consciousness of each observer is irreducibly unique and distinct from any other while being at once, each of these consciousnesses, transcendent entities. The quantum vacuum is constantly engaged in a chaotic activity of selfmeasurement with these acts of self measurement being themselves caught up in further acts of self measurement. Within this selfmeasurement flux of the quantum vacuum, there is not enduring division of subject, i.e., quantum observer from object, i.e., quantum system. There are an indefinite number of such self-measuring quantum vacua. Any finite quantity in mathematics divided by an infinitesimal quantity is granted to possess infinite magnitude. A finite quantity divided by “0” is said to “blow up.” Blow up to what? It is commonly assumed that such a “rational” function as say, any finite whole or counting number divided by zero must represent an infinite magnitude, facility conceived of as “simple infinity.” But the above is to assume that “0” and an infinitesimal quantity are generally equivalent. a/b is a “rational number” provided b does not equal 0 even though in this very special case “a” and “b” are nonetheless both integers. We might deny that “0” is an integer in the sense of being a “counting number” since to note the absence of anything, i.e., saying there are “0” X’s or such and such’s is “not to have counted.” If the quantity, a/b where b=0 is thought of as a function of integers taken from two distinct number lines, then there appears to be no function that generally compensated for the independent redefining of

“a” and “b.” A mere concourse of atoms would have no motive to impress upon another such atomic collocation the fact of human beings being constituted from a mere concourse of atoms. The more modern version of the psychological metaphysical truth illustrated by Socrates questioning of the slave boy about geometrical theorem’s (an interactive-dialectical process, by the way) might be to suppose that the consciousness of each individual person is a kind of dynamical hologram of partial information, embedded in a network of physical traces (c.f., Derrida’s concept of “the trace”) associated with the mechanism by which recollection of earlier experiences can be evoked by appropriate sets of sensory stimuli.These stimuli induce a reproduction or reenergizing of the memory trace networks which causes the consciousness of the person to link up for a moment with the rest of the hologram, represented by the original experience that was shorthandencoded into the brain’s physical structure, the vast majority of which is not local to the brain itself but nonlocally encoded in the quantum vacuum in which the brain is physically embedded. We must distinguish active versus passive recollected experience-information from possible new experience from experience only possible at a later time, if at all, from experience only possible for some other mind, etc. May 2014 Language is a system which enables the piecing together of the shattered hologram of the other's thought. The shattering occurs whenever thought is first put into words. May 2011

One bit of physiological evidence for Sheldrake’s morphogenetic field is how the relearning of an utterly forgotten task comes so much easier than the initial learning of this task. It is as though the needed interconnections in the brain that formerly supported the physical encoding of the task, though now withered away, have the ability to reengage each other, growing together once more as if guided teleologically by the abiding presence of a ghostly template of those formerly networked neural interconnections.

Inertia is mediated by the coupling of matter to locally-connected quantum vacuum fields; is individual consciousness mediated through the coupling of the brain’s quantum mechanical functioning to the nonlocally-connected quantum field? The so-called “binding problem” within the philosophy of mind does not encompass as usually stated the subquestion of how the temporality of the properly bound conscious states are represented within consciousness, i.e., the temporal integration problem. The spin of massless particles (usually spin 0, according to the prior art and we maintain always spin 0) is directed along the direction of motion, while the spin vector for massive particles (usually spin ½ , again, according to the prior and, we believe, always spin ½ ) orients itself along the direction of the particle’s motion progressively, as the particle is accelerated to higher velocities. This strongly suggests that spin ½ particls also orient their spin in the direction of motion within spacetime, but that this is not perceived because spin ½ particles, which are “at rest” have a direction of motion that is entirely timelike. Acceleration of a spin ½ particle merely results in the observation of the particle’s angular momentum (spin ½) in progressively foreshortened Lorentz frames. Spin is the nonvanishing component of a particle’s or system of particles’ total angular momentum, Jtot = Ltot + Stot with Ltot  0. How is spin defined through the use of commutation relations? Uncertainties seem to be better behaved than entanglements, c.f., [uncertainties + correlations] vs [fluctuations + correlations]. No perspective is more confining than the one from which one appears to be “so right” about another person. I can see how absolutely right you could have been about Suzanne and would have been about me, as well, but unlike the Oracle at Delphi’s prophecies, knowledge of you prophecy permitted and perhaps created the possibility for another reality – one in which your lofty, highly considered opinions turn out to be/have been short-sighted. It is a

knowledge that it is only possible to have gained through an exercise of the will rather than through the intellect. Working within the intellect alone and its associated current state of knowledge keeps one confined to only a single, projective branch of the ever-bifurcating tree of possible realities. Interviewer: so how is it that no graduates of your “how to be a hero/heroine” course ever seem to receive any sort of medals, honors, etc.? The Myth of the Oracle tells us about how our fates can become determined through our cooperation, however unwitting (on the surface) with this fate. One can stay within or move between ego-centered continua. Staying within one of these means being the creator of it. Moving one of these means being the creator of it. Moving between means abandoning recursively structured concatenation of will and intellect by which the ego and its worldview is validated. We may, for example, speak of the continuum of Leslie and Suzanne, which has been traversed. There may well exist a deep inconsistency between a fecundity principle (serving as the input upon which the Anthropic Cosmological Principle is to operate) and any necessary principle of internal coherence (and consistency) on the part of the partially self-subsisting entities/creatures that must also be embedded within some subspace/continuum of the total set of possible continua. Coherence may dictate the capability of self-renormalization of the state function, say, or some global Psi of the Many Worlds Interpretation set, the admission of the modal (meta) category possible-possibles and, hence, of the concepts of metaphysical work and its performance (by organisms, say, through back-reacting upon their embedding continua/vacua), as well as a further modal metacategory, that of contingent necessity, and so on. In other words, the coherence of certain types of entities requires, additionally, coherence on the part of their embedding/contextualizing

continua/vacua. All of the possibilities within the total set must not possess, as it were, equal “stickiness.” Must there obtain a real distinction between laws, e.g., the structure of the physical constants, and their sometimes fallible manifestations? (as being merely the expressions of relative probabilities?) Causality as it manifests itself in the phenomenon of coherence and cohesiveness, say on the part of living organisms, cannot be reduced to a dynamics of change in relative probableness of pure (or mixed) quantum states. Sensory stimuli trigger a reprocessing of vacuum fluctuations within a specific spectrum, changing the configuration of this spectrum in terms of the relative proportion of filtered versus unfiltered fluctuations. The division of the vacuum into fundamentally distinct spectral classes, corresponding to distinct individual consciousness (as opposed to different states of a single consciousness). There are two distinctly different notions of what is called an open system. One, that of a single, embedding substrate in which everything inheres but which itself is beyond definition or limitation. The other, a disjointly different and noncontiguous substitute for each point of spacetime when one tunnels down into from this entry point downward, as it were and in a direction away from the continuum encompassing all of the possible distinct starting points for such hypothetical tunneling or “burrowing.” To suppose that every interval dimension must ultimately link up with every other at some sufficiently fine or detailed scale of each is to have denied the possibility of distinguishing “internal” from “external” by subsuming the former within the latter as a more appearance (to whom, we might ask, however). As we have already stated on numerous occasions elsewhere, the paradox of an infinite regress threatens whenever we attempt to understand the temporal integrity/integration of personal consciousness in terms of a process occurring within consciousness. Rather does consciousness itself appear as the very activity of this process of temporal integration. Looking at things as they appear in the frequency domain, this

integration process/ activity is that of coherence and cohesiveness being imposed upon a frequency spectrum of energy fluctuations. It is the rendering of a spectrum of orthogonal frequencies into one possessing an irreducible anharmonically (aperiodicity) that in the time domain, conversely, must be represented in terms of an aperiodic function. So what is commonly termed the “flow” or “stream” of consciousness is either merely a representation within consciousness or it is the effect of continual disturbance of (perturbation of) consciousness from outside itself. To paraphrase Pascal, Man is situated between the extremes of Nothing and The infinite. Yet it turns out, as is tending to appear ever more likely in light of recent developments in fields such as quantum physics and cutting edge computer science, nothing is the infinite and the infinite is nothing. This would place man somewhere on the arcing trajectory of the infinite exploring and “fleshing out” its underlying finitude and returning again. This path would not be a circle as this should represent mere repetition, reenactment and play-acting, but a hopelessly complicated kind of spiral – the trajectory of which cannot be specified by pre-established independent parameters. The function would, in other words, perturb the space in which it otherwise should have been represented. All the wonders of existence within society/culture of being in God’s presence: every glory in the self a twisting and perversion of the proper giving of glory to God. @$

Unbefangen: (1) uninhibited; (2) impartial. Here we see two concepts, which in English can only be brought into close relatedness through effort of philosophical reflection, but which in German possess a built-in connection with one another. Here we are brought to a notion of impartiality as unaffectedness. “Die Roboter hielten sich nicht an Gefuehle und Vermutungen. Sie waren programmiert und taten ihre

Pflicht, die ihnen vom positronischen Gehirn diktiert wurde. Sie hielte an Tatsachen und sonst nichts, "c.f., Vorstoss Nach Arkon, p. 155, Moewig Verlag KG Rastatt. Aber was ist genau fuer einen Roboter eine Tatsache? God is not a being, nor Being itself, but the precondition of Being itself. Since light always moves at 300,000 km/sec relative to the quantum vacuum and movement of massive bodies relative to this vacuum is not possible, i.e., 0, it follows that the velocity of light relative to massive bodies is always “c” regardless of the state of motion of said bodies. It is easy to understand the meaning of the German verb, “ausgerechnet,” although this word is not really translatable into English. A chess expert calculates moves, i.e., looks ahead a number of moves, the grandmaster “feels his way” around a position, intuitively, c.f., Chess Psychologist, Reuben Fine, Ph.D. The most fluently bilingual people are simultaneous translators, although the very signal of one’s passage to fluency in a second language is when one suddenly no longer finds it necessary to attempt simultaneous translation. The same is true for what we might term “fluency of thought.” One achieves it once one becomes free of the necessity of translating one’s thoughts into words when thinking outside the social context, i.e., internal or external. For instance, I became able to think outside of a permutational/ combinational conceptual framework only in my 30’s. October 2011

Imagine a chess machine that decides its next move by always keeping its eye on the “won game lines” or “shortest won game lines” or “most brilliant shortest won game lines”, etc. for its color, i.e., white or black. Each move would have a virtually infinite number of both “won” and “lost” game lines to which it belonged. Determining a “best move” appears to come down to probability given that the computer cannot predict what moves a human player might make. Of course the

machine’s choice of “best move” at any juncture would be overdetermined in the literal sense of there being an indefinite number of won game lines in the “down line” of that particular move choice. But there would be almost an equal number (or perhaps even a lesser number?) of “lost game” lines associated with that move choice. In light of this, the capacity for abstract thought seems unavoidable for a machine who’s move choice algorithm is to be “truly optimal”. But it seems that such abstract categories can only be developed in the light of experience. Does consciousness obviate the need for the otherwise per impossible teleological “fine-tuning”? Jesus is spoken of in the Pauline Epistles of the New Testament as being “the Second Adam.” (We should differentiate here knowledge of good and evil by its fruits (actuality/fact) versus this knowledge in a more abstract and unmanifest sense (potentiality/ hypothetical). There is the taking into one’s mind that which would not otherwise have occurred to one versus the interpretation of one’s spontaneous manifesting of one’s true nature by the other/others. Is the difference between Jesus and Adam merely that one chose to maintain the connection to the transcendent self whereas the other chose to break this connection? Fourier analysis suggests to us that there is not one time which “flows” but myriad times, in fact, an infinite number of them, all bundled together, and what we think of normally as a single dimension of time, and what some of the more philosophical of us puzzle over – the fact that time has, or appears to have, only a solitary dimension, turns out upon further reflection to be an assumption about appearance, which could be further from actually only if time appeared, rather to possess no dimensionality whatever. This is because a temporality which stretches from everlasting to everlasting if treated as a time function, must be represented in terms of an infinite number of functions of frequency. Two contrasting views of the organization of physical reality is one in

which the highest order, most sensitive and subtle processes are those of the highest order and the other in which the greatest subtlety of process occurs at the lowest (simplest) order. For purposes of stability of an order understood as a feedback control system the greatest sensitivity of the system to outside influences must lie at the highest order and subtlest levels of the systems activity in which the backward propagation of influences from the higher orders to the lower level orders are energetically swamped – or the simpler processes at the lower levels are informationally swamped moving upward to the higher order (more complex) levels of the system. Aging in biological systems may be due to the unconstrained interaction of higher order and lower frequency processes/activities. Paradoxically, lower frequency physical processes as they manifest themselves in relatively short-lived biological systems, are not subject to natural selective boundary conditions. This seems to suggest that life evolved from shorter to longer lived individuals. Fertility compensates for shortness of longevity, however both are indices of viability and health of an individual, but not necessarily of a group even species. Clearly selection must be taking place at levels beyond that of the conflict of individuals within and across species. A cannot be supposed the cause of B, if B is presupposed by A – another factor – “C” must modulate and mediate the causal connection of A and B. Contrast the high school/college yearbook phenomenon with the necessity of the metaphysical uniqueness of the individual consciousness. @$

The chaotic flux is forever offering itself up to be shaped by the hand of reason, but is usually ignored for reason is usually content to doze. Individuality ~ onset of cell differentiation in embryological development. How are monozygotic identical twins’ identities differentiated and at what stage of embryological or postnatal

development? Continuity of connection to a unified open system versus continuity of substance versus sameness of form/substance as determining identity. Active maintenance of this connection through vigilance of will. The reader’s subvocalized, narrative voice perhaps only heard in “the mind’s ear.” The fluctuations in the ego’s fabric of thought otherwise know as petit perceptions, may well only possess a kernel principle ( which can always be applied more generally) provided that the mind proactively seizes it in order to make of it something (which perhaps later will pass the threshold of becoming self-sustaining/ disseminating). Compare the metaphysics of the Many Worlds’ Interpretation of quantum theory with a Many Consciousnesses Interpretation of a certain theory of mind. Is one consciousness just as good as any other as an infinitely upgradable subject of experience? How could it be possible to distinguish the case of multiple egoic structurings of a single consciousness apart from each distinct such egoic structuring inhering in its own, distinct and individually unique consciousness? What order of consciousness could have such a distinction within itself as a “clear and distinct idea?” Clearly an order greater than that constituted by a posited individual and unique consciousness among a field of possible other consciousnesses. Such a higher order of consciousness would possess the ability to track changes to itself that involve its undergoing a division. Insidious softening of one’s will to live as one important factor in the appearance of degenerative disease. What we have been calling “consciousness” is actually almost the converse of what would constitute real or true consciousness. We can only have recollection of consciousness experienced or intuited through

the distorting lens of the various forms inhering in this consciousness. Is each consciousness evoked through brain activity actually a different person been tuned to and pulled in from out of the ether? Can more than one tuner tune into the same signal in this case? To paraphrase Pascal, Man is situated between the extremes of Nothing and the Infinite. Yet if it turns out, as is tending to appear ever more likely in light of recent developments in fields such as quantum physics and cutting edge computer science, nothing is the infinite and the infinite is nothing. This would place man somewhere on the arcing trajectory of the infinite exploring and “fleshing out” it s underlying infinitude and returning again. This path would not be a circular one as this should represent mere repetition, reenactment, and play-acting, but a hopelessly complicated kind of spiral – the trajectory of which cannot be specified by preestablished independent parameters. The function would, in other words, perturb the space in which it otherwise should have been represented. The question arises as to whether the continuum constituting entity should be transformed by what befalls the implicit underlying domains of finitude when processed and rendered explicit. I have not the slightest doubt that, within the space of six months, you could find the most excellent unsuitable partner with which to spend the rest of your miserable life! Descartes’ “clear and distinct ideas” and the question of how Man ever conceived the notion of a transcendent Divinity in the first place – also relate clear and distinct ideas to the notion of metaphysical presence. All the wonders of existence within society and culture are derivative of the primal experience of being in God’s presence: every glory in the self a twisting and perversion of the proper giving of glory to God.

The more original seeming are the pronouncements of a balanced and rational mind, the more likely do these statements reflect some actually perceived feature of some domain of reality. It has been said that paradox is just truth standing on its head in an attempt to attract attention. The truth of this statement is most readily seen by those blessed (or cursed) with a highly active dream life. web=

Example (1): “The love that you withhold is the pain that you carry,” c.f., paragraph 1, p. 10, www.andromedaninsights.com/resources/transcripts/global1.html. Example (2): “This ego ideal is the target of the self-love which was enjoyed in childhood by the actual ego.” (Freud, 1914, p. 94) Without conditions and limitations for the manipulation/ (“mani”“pulation”) of spontaneity, insight dissipates by processes just as “speedy” as those by which it is originally engendered. Such a situation would prevent the linking together of different insights so that ideas would not be enabled to build upon one another. Shifts in ground underlying the transpiring of events cannot be characterized by mere alterations in the weightings of preexisting possibilities constituting a closed set. “Consciousness is the space within which consciousness evolves,” c.f.,web= www.andromedaninsights.com/resources/transcripts/global1.html. Epiphenomena of different, substantively disconnected processes become linked within experience and consciousness to establish context for the production of new phenomena, as opposed to epiphenomena. Epiphenomena always inhabit the outer reaches of phenomenal manifestation.

It is easy to become cynical about a person, losing all interest in them whenever they “tip their hand,” revealing what is driving them to be something very basic and simple. Discuss the fallacy of unspirituality, that I like to term, “the eternal Winnebago travel vacation” concept of personal fulfillment.” Such nonsensical confusions of the conceptual faculty occur in dreams as, for example, one’s explaining/ receiving an explanation of the interesting fact that a given phrase in a certain language means one thing when properly translated into one’s own language, but something altogether different when translated into say, German. Some outstanding characters, e.g., president Bill Clinton, possess the unique gift for making a thoroughgoing narcissism appear to be a virtue. Other examples of the emergence of causality and rationality in dreams: the observance of and attention to time and time keeping devices, e.g., one arrives at an appointment an hour early only to find that one’s associate has not yet arrived, nor is the establishment prepared to offer one a table/seat., the frustration of dream character (protagonist’s) mercurial, impulsive irrational will by the tenacity with which mechanical, electrical, etc. devices operate according to consistently logical though unknown principles. A causal remark concerning a developing situation that one fails to take note of in the present scene reaches a dominant state of development in a later scene, e.g., a small, heretofore unnoticed particular growth on the side of one’s face. Or perhaps, one has been inserted into a dream sequence with only “inadequate funding!” The problems of substance interpreted in terms of the distinction of borrowed versus printed money. There must be a grounding context, e.g., “Mind of God” for any informational system, which is already in place before there can be a processing of raw precursor material that becomes information, c.f., science fiction movies where the protagonist is received by those already

long present – analogy with being called forth from the void. Vor|stellen 1. Tr. V. jmdn./sich jmdm v: introduce sb./ oneself to sb.; (bei Bewerbung) sich ~: come/go for [an] interview; dir Uhr [um eine Stunde] ~: put the clock forward [one hour]; 2. Refl. V. sich (Dat.) etw. ~: imagine sth.; Vorstellung die a) (Begriff) idea; b) o. Pl. (Phantasie) imagination; c) (Auffuehrung) performance; (im Kino) showing. Idea; imagination; performance; showing are the different acceptations of [Vorstellung] translated into English. Denotations analogous to foundational, “context-free,” Platonic forms (ideas), connotations to derivative, relative, and contextual emanations of the corresponding founding denotations. But might not the reverse process be true also, or even the dominant process of the pair (of processes, yet to be designated)? It is an innate and defining instinct of consciousness to appropriate itself as a subject of study. Clearly if consciousness were a closed and finite system, phenomenon, what have you, it could not properly separate itself from itself so as to make itself the proper subject of its own study. Such study seeks the discovery of some of consciousness’ own objective and independently subsisting features. Yet if consciousness corresponds to some open and infinite substratum of form and transformation (substance), then how can consciousness be an object at all? With the operation of consciousness, analysis and synthesis cannot as distinct categories, cannot be fully disentangled from one another, that is, in the special case where consciousness’ investigation of its own essential nature is concerned. If the existence of the world is consistent with the being of each and every consciousness, it is only because the world is equally the product of each and every consciousness, as each consciousness represents both a possible and an actual unity of the world. @$Each consciousness represents an equally valid unification of Being as does any other

(potential unity of an as yet unfinished existential order). The index of the truth of a meme is not the information (context-free data, really, since in isolation, a meme is not part of an information system and so contains no information) “contained” by the meme, but how adaptable is the meme (and its data) to the requirements of the most successful system of memes of which it may form a part and in which it may participate. Nietzsche would have us believe that the stability of the flux is always internal or internally generated. The flux is always internal or internally generated. The flux informs itself, according to Neitzsche, in other words. There is no outside or transcendent vantage point relative to the flux from which an informing influence may issue. Sometimes characters within dreams may utter puns and quips the symbolic significance of which is only realized upon awakening. Also, dream characters may make references to events which have occurred only in the immediately previous scene even though the dreamer’s character himself is caught in the immediate moment of the present scene having totally forgotten that to which the dream character is referring, again, only realizing this remarkable fact upon awakening and recollecting the dream in its greater entirety. Dream characters may even repeat or rephrase their remarks or questions in a seeming attempt to refresh the dreamers diminished short-term memory or in an attempt to evoke understanding of what the dream character is talking about. Sometimes blatant logical or causal paradoxes are inserted into the fabric or action of the dream, the unconscious purpose of which perhaps seems to be that of awakening the dreamer to a state of lucidity within the dream world itself. March 2013 In the world of the dream, context is turned inside-out; the literal is metaphorical, the metaphorical, literal. March 2013 kwo=

“I know my lot. Some day my name will be linked to the memory of something monstrous, of a crisis as yet unprecedented on earth,the most profound collision of consciences, a decision conjured up against everything hitherto believed, demanded, hallowed.” – Friedrich Nietzsche, Ecce Homo

It is an example of a kind of pipe dream with smokeless tobacco and no pipe, or a kind of catchy-sounding metaphor in search of a subject. On the other hand one’s dream character may act within a given scene consistent with the context of the present scene properly interpreted in light of what one’s character has learned/knows through immediately previous scenes, but failing to notice – an important feature of the present scene that is jarringly discontinuous with his interpretation based upon previous scenes. One’s dream character may perhaps correct his interpretation, taking this new fact into account, have it pointed out to him directly or indirectly by a dream character, notice this inconsistency only upon waking recollection of the dream, or, finally, not at all. This is an intriguing supposition about the dream reality, namely, that events occur and information processed, connections and identifications made which the conscious self never shall take note of the conscious self never shall take not of. Moreover, within the dream attempts are forever being made through scenes and actors of the dream ot communicate messages to the dreamer’s dream character, which sometimes fail, or only succeed partially, attempts at communication that will never be recollected and appreciated by the dreamer or his waking self. For example, I have approached as strange residence, gotten the attention of the occupants inside and have cautiously bade them invite me in. My dream character believes he has somehow been brought back to the year 1945 and is on some kind of urgent mission, perhaps to warn the family of some impending disaster. The occupants are a large Hispanic family. I speak with the head of the household who strangely enough is a disembodied head sitting on a shelf. But immediately next to this shelf on a back wall is another person whose head is the same as the disembodied on e through properly attached to a body. So far my dream character is only imperceptibly alarmed by any sense of things within the scene being “out of place.” I fumble for words, finally inquiring of the family’s father what year it is and whether or not is it 1945. I’m hoping my question will be not taken as a prank or joke so

that the family might properly appreciate my desperately lost state of being. The father remains, silent not answering, and then I turn to see an antique television set. I try to correct myself, saying, "“Oh, it must be around 1966 or so -–am I right?” Members of the family answer in general agreement with my guess. I believe I know the future inhabitants of the house and remark, “I’m familiar with some of your ancestors who occupied this house.” I intended by this to have said descendants rather than ancestors. The mother of the family answers me by asking if I know her grandparents. Who lived in the house 34 years ago. I say “no, I mean the members of your family who will occupy this house 34 years hence.” The intriguing observation to be made here is that the dream character represented by the mother responded to the literal content of my question rather than what I intended to ask her and which I believed I had asked her. There has to have always been something since ex nihilo nihil fit. And what better candidate for such a being than that posited by Spinoza, namely, “ a substance consisting of infinite attributes, each of which @$ expresses eternal and infinite essence. Spinoza argues that there could be no cause or reason preventing the existence of such a being. Consider: Leibniz’ Monads as infinite attributes of Spinoza’s God substance. For those who have experienced deep transformation in their sense of in their sense of self and of the world and its possibilities, there is a strange appreciation for the problematic nature of personal identity and even of the concept of personhood itself. This appreciation is perhaps founded on a sometimes profoundly manifested sense of ontological insecurity on the one hand sometimes keenly felt sense of giddiness concerning unlimited possibilities for the metaphysics of the self. Through a sense of the radical arbitrariness of the particularity of one’s worldly identity comes sense of one’s own otherness as apeiron.

A glimpse of inexhaustible hope and of joy as well as, paradoxically, horror become in this way available though at once understood as possibly fundamentally inadequate emotive metaphoricity. Observe that my otherness, not in the sense of its being relative to you as some component, (definite or determinable or not) of all that which is other relative to yourself, but my otherness in the sense of all of that which is other relative to the self that constitutes me and my potentialities and possibilities, is particular or peculiar to me though itself in some important, that is, metaphysical sense, indeterminate because I am but part of an indeterminate totality (paradoxically speaking – more on this later), and that my otherness includes you as well as myself as other relative to all others. But paradoxically and moreover my otherness in this sense is peculiar to myself. Another way of viewing this is that the unknown (as well as the “Unknowable”) possesses a rich though indeterminate or transdeterminate structure. Ground is multiply indeterminate in the sense of potentially being constituted by multiple acts of codetermination that are each individually indeterminate and each incommensurate relative to the other. Ground is only partially unified through these codetermined acts of determination. Indeterminate ground becomes partially unified while remaining partially a multiplicity of incommensurate indeterminate grounds of potential unique self-determination. One’s being is determined infinite or it is indeterminate within God. One’s being is indeterminate but only along a certain direction or in a certain sense, being in other sense determinate. The question arises as to whether each being is uniquely indeterminate through a kind of struggle between and amongst multiple being, each of which is all ways indeterminate or whether the indeterminacy unique to each being has been preestablished in some manner.

After the fashion of the constraints of the canonical forms of versification enabling and facilitating the invention of poetic insights which otherwise would have been discovered only with great difficulty, by chance, or not at all, we glimpse the possible validity of some principle by which limitation actually produces an effect whereby the possible is extended. Here limitation transcends mere filtering, channeling or even structuring but results in a change in the character of a system that is innately free of limitations of any kind, i.e., an infinite system. This is presumably because any finite limitation applied to an infinite system must change the system in some way but altogether without rendering this system finite. Kant’s reconciling of the notions of duty and freedom might consist in essence simply in that our doing something for a reason constrains the time and manner of our acting but makes our action all the freer because of it. On the other hand, aimless activity is informed by the particulars of happenstance, animal instinct, temperament, conditioned reflexes, etc. Moreover, ethical action is not at the mercy of unreasoning feeling and sentiment although many different ethical systems are possible and the choice of which one submits one’s free volition to may be determined largely by personal preference borne of temperament. Words are after all only sounds. Because the sounds in our heads form words and the words combine to form message we assume there must be someone there in our heads speaking those words. But is it that there is only someone who’s listening. Speech is more intention than representation the listening to it, more the other way “round. We should all of us feel anxious to see “how will turn out.” As noted before, the otherness of the other does not usually return us to

the self (although, c.f., I-Thou relationship) and that even the otherness of all others does not unproblematically lead us back to the self. (This is a “0-scholarship” article in the sense of containing no definite references) Consciousness and the Interpretation of Dreams II, an essay topic. In the absence of revelation, the world becomes a mere closed room filled with things which are nothing more than they are. On seeming way out of this impasse is the endowing of objects with magical quality, i.e., fetishization; another is the endowing of the space itself with a “magicalness.” C.f., the retired middle class couple’s Winnebago propelling itself through the Void versus exploring the inexhaustible riches of God’s Word. I have always been sort of nonplused by the assertion that “time is an illusion.” But I finally got what I thought was a handle on this most paradoxical proposition once I realized that I had been all during this time under the instinctive if philosophical (and secret, I might add) assumption that by this assertion we must equate the unreality of time with mere “stopped time” or with a kind of “halted temporal flow.” Of course, such a notion of time’s unreality should be one the mind can’t wrap itself around as the criticized interpretation of “time is an illusion” affirms time in order to make it the subject of a negation. I only freed myself of this self-contradictory acceptation of the phrase once I realized, all that can be consistently, i.e., non-contradictorily negated with regard to time’s reality is, to wit, that 1) time possesses (objective) directionality and 2) time possesses (again, objective) magnitude, i.e., “rate” (of “flow”), and 3) that there might be moreover, no real subject of temporal change may be considered an additional component to one’s most full-blooded assertion concerning time’s unreality, though this might really “only” amount to the assertion that “nothing exists,” i.e., that reality itself is illusion - such an assertion must perhaps be seen by all as self-contradictory, since a certain school of metaphysics that is complete unto itself (though ultimately false, i.e., the Heraclitean,

because not encompassing in its system all of reality – reality as a totality is a distinctly Parmenidean notion, by the way) and so asserts much more than just the unreality of time. So we see how, on the one hand, the denial of time’s reality is contradictory. But there is another sense in which the admission of the reality of time is itself also contradictory – that of conceiving of time as the regiving of totality. If a totality (as such) exists, it can presumably be given only once. And this, then, brings us to the notion f time as eternal now or eternal “nowness.” Blending and hybridization are in no wise independent of the manner in which the phenomena are produced (as representations). An example, of this might be the blending of the vocal inflection s of two persons, regional accents, etc. The hybridizing of the characteristic tones produced by the different band/orchestra instruments provides another example. Aesthetics in this way transcends the physical limitations of technology or vice versa, technology opens up possibilities of representation transcending the subtleties of refined aesthetic judgment. Anthropic cosmological, fractal, self-reproducing, Many-Worlds quantum universes are a simple manifestation of it – the overdetermined nature, with respect to theoretical descriptions, that is, of the nature of being. The predicate oft repeated within Anselm’s ontological argument is that of “none greater than which can be conceived.” This predicate is used by Anselm in a fashion seeming to identify conceivability with possibility, which, with but a little honest reflection, is at once seen to be the grossest of metaphysical presumptions. There are certainly mathematical propositions, for examples, that, though true, are quite beyond the possible conception (conceivability) of any finite mind. Moreover, on the view of Existence as constituting a kind of limitation of Being, then even should “existence” be granted status as a bona fide

predicate, it cannot necessarily be considered to be a “perfection.” A Being that can only be contained within existence through limiting itself (in some humanly inconceivable fashion) is of such a type that it becomes less perfectly what it is by merely existing. But this grants the possibility of a being that is neither conceivable nor which is in existence but which nonetheless can be considered to be part of reality. This notion is consistent with that whereby “existence” is understood as merely “a mode of being”. Every existent is a potential (or actual, in the case of brain circuitry, say) instrument of mind. This is also true for abstract entities such as mathematical objects, theorems, etc. Psychology as a feature of the mind/mentality is a conditioned mode of mind’s functioning and expression. That which seeks a relationship with us is hat out of which everything is made and which makes everything. Usually in this situation of the would-be communication between disparate intelligence’s there is an interchange between cultures, one more and another less advanced, each with its own collection of notions some of which are denotative concepts that all members of the culture (except possibly the shamans or medicine men – more on this) take literally and seriously. Now the superior must find some manner of communicating with the lower (and vice versa). When attacking, they always leave either their flank or rear exposed. What manner of being in four dimensions, cast 3-d projections after the manner of these humans? The horse/horseman metaphor for transmigration and metempsychosis. The more rational minded point out that God’s so-called Word is replete with images, symbols and metaphors and therefore is probably just an extended, collectively produced myth or fable. These very same critics seem not to have asked themselves in what manner might it be necessary

for a higher intelligence to communicate with a lower one, or how a communication gap might be bridged between minds of perhaps radically different patterns of mental organization? Presence has two natures, the familiar, that of which the pattern has been keenly etched and enhanced through repetition; the other, the novel, the strange, mysterious and unusual. Somehow it is thought by such people that they are immune from prosecution as religious intolerants if they themselves profess no faith, and yet the very same will blame most of the carnage of the last twenty centuries on the very same prejudice’s. For example, God may well not be a person in any sense presently ascertainable to us. However, there is nothing to prevent a course of evolution of our concept maps wherein we may come to recognize the personhood of God. So concept maps are effective in part due to their continuity with earlier versions of themselves which paradoxically cut across each other though with another nonetheless continuous. The continuity of the coherent grounding of topological transformation is an essential feature of what is called mind. Such operation of mind transcends substance but not essence. After all, a given intersubjective spacetime is characterized by only a single topology. Discuss: relationships among the concepts temporality, topology, computers, chess rules, connectivity/graphs, group theory  symmetry  conservation (of substance, of course)  spacetime transformation group; spacetime is spatialized uni-topological continuum  multitopological spacetime? Where deconstruction and Existentialism intersect and overlap is where

the notion of the arbitrary and convential meaning of all human institutions. Transformation of means into ends granted ever more signficance with the progressive excresence of culture. Once I reflected upon my insights into 1) the arbitrariness and even grotesqueness of the human form and physiognomy as well as of that of the human vocal tract and all the various utterances peculiar to my native tongue, I at once understood the essential insight of Derrida and the other postmoderns conceiving this idea of the metaphysics of presence and its deconstruction (and also of the political importance of the deconstructive agenda/ project). The key to the insight concerning to critique of the notion of metaphysical presence is that of the dissociative state and of understanding as clearly as possible the nature and significance of such states. January 2012

Is culture is the ground of metaphoricity? But metaphoricity in turn appears to also be the ground of culture. Bootstrap causality, supervenient causality (“top-down” causation), cultural conditioning of metaphoricity, i.e., social determination. Libet’s experiments held firmly within the light of the tenacious illusion of free will bespeak supervenient causality. Paradoxically for postmodern criticism is the probable basis of dissociative states in a transcendental function of mind. I say transcendental because it should have never occurred to mankind to question the very foundation and ground of the spontaneous secretion of this erstwhile forever hidden epistemic ontology of what Husserl termed “the natural standpoint” and what Heidegger called Dasein. Somehow Man has managed to surmount a vantagepoint from which he became able to glimpse sein as Dasein, thereupon detaching, in effect the “da” from “sein.” To progress as a student of the Deriddean metaphysics is at once to embark upon a possible dangerous if controlled experiment in adopting a schizophrenic bent of mind.

You say all of these things are but abstractions, but doesn’t this imply that while reality transcends all abstract entities and concepts, it also encompasses and embraces them! It is here that to us is suggested an intriguing if disturbing idea, the psyche that one inevitably mistakenly identifies as being the self is actually only a secretion of the self in concerted response to a collection of irritants the combined action of which is never in any particular exact manner orchestrated. There is no such thing as a couple representing a “match” in the sense of mathematical or near identity. This is because the individual human does not possess so clear and definite a context-free identity. Identity which is an artificial concept of the representational mode of being, must always be supplemented by the complementary mode of the participatory, the realm of Schopenhauer’s Will, if identity is to truly be realizable. This is an existential notion to be found in Schopenhauer, if one is intent upon finding it. Not only is the psyche, human or otherwise, suggestible, but so is Nature herself. If the mind is itself an artifact of nature and natural processes then the characteristics of mind should be present in nature or potentially so, or at least there should exist some potential mode of interaction between mind and nature, initiated by mind from its side, that enables and elicits the expression of such potentialities within nature. The stable set of traits and characteristics of the psyche that one comes to identify as those peculiar to the self are really only artifacts of the psyche in equilibrium with a longstanding environment composed of stable but intrinsically changeable conditions. It is always possible for conditions to change drastically or quickly enough for aspects of the psyche (self) to manifest that the person would not recognize as belonging to him. We may say that Will is subjective but can become intersubjective,

representation starts out as collective, but may become subjective. Although the normally constituted human psyche is relatively inured against the suggestion of a message uttered only once or twice, this same psyche possesses no evolutionarily selected defenses against the suggestion’s being firmly and deeply implanted as a result of the message being repeated 1000, 10,000 or even 100,000 times. The timelessness or near timelessness of certain works of art or more generally dimension to time, apart from that associated with the supposed ineluctable forward march of reason in the guise of technological progress. Actions of punishment, the real motive and reason for which being two quite different grounds, the one, individual and prejudicial, the other social-collective and rational (though perhaps rarely always, too, from the standpoint of the individual), these two distinct grounds are confused and produce in us a misguided metaphysical notion of Sin. An act, word or thought can only be rightly deemed as “sinful” if it is traceable within proper etiology to pride. Therefore the very same act may be sinful for one that is not for another. Conceptual framework that one has inherited serve as a scaffolding on which the individual is meant to build his own edifice of thought only then kicking away the superstructure of this scaffolding. Growth of the Mind in a direction too far askew from that along which one might most quickly more fully participate in one’s transcendent to the self’s proper principle of sustaining itself. The vestigial impulses which no longer have a direct object of reference may become directed towards socioculturally enhanced representations thereof. It is always possible to stumble on a pattern of words that provokes an

insight well in advance of one’s intellectual maturity to have freely willed the inadvertently enabled conception into consciousness, for this reason a peculiar kind of ontological insecurity or complex may at such a juncture be engendered. A context-free entity is never “engendered.” Investigate: Christian existentialism’s notions of grace, radical freedom, etc. Feyerabend’s notion of “anything goes.” The word “reality” does not necessarily refer to a totality and saying so depending upon one’s reasons and motives may be to substitute “semantics” for sound metaphysics. Reality is overdetermined with respect to its past acts of determination, underdetermined with respect to its future such acts, and only determinate in its very moment of its act being implanted. How could we have expected it to be otherwise? Horseman analogy of the soul/body relationship. Reunification of the plural impersonal in the form of the collective personal. The paradox of the subject of experience by virtue of its simultaneously being over and underdetermined; overdetermined so as to be able to change “within itself,” i.e., change while retaining identity, and underdetermined in order to enlarge this identity. Application of less than clearly and completely defined concepts and definitions which despite this remains robustly intelligible and coherent. The three persons: the Self, the Other, the other of the Other, corresponding to the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd, persons. Also, there are the obvious permutations of persons from the perspective of persons, i.e., 1st-1st, 1st-2nd, . . . 2nd – 1st, . . . 3rd – 3rd. And, of course, these interpersonal perspectives may themselves have a 1 st, 2nd, 3rd person perspective. But notice that the permutation of personal perspective

involving the 2nd and 3rd persons, exclusively involving the 2nd and 3rd persons, exclusively are subsumed into the 1st person perspective at the next higher level. Consciousness is capable of being the subject of change, which admits of no coherent or unified characterization or classification whatever. Such changes nevertheless possess both cohesiveness and a kind of unity of a non-abstract nature. Changes in the structuring and dynamics of ground are one thing; a sea change shift in this substantive, underlying ground is something altogether different.. Consciousness in other words, is naturally equipped to register stresses, shocks, twistings tearings and rendings of its fabric, the warp and woof of which are presupposed by any proposed analysis of the form and content of this consciousness whose aim is the illumination of the “consciousnessmechanism” itself (in all its mysteriousness). But a general notion of consciousness would need to grasp what is similar between any two consciousness, over and above what can be divined from the most subtle and ingeniously minute analysis of what are merely analogical relationships between the structurings and dynamisms thereof, of these two consciousness. The development of such a general notion of consciousness would demand, and this general notion itself appeals to a hypothetical common ground for consciousness (as such) transcending the ground of each and every individual consciousness. In essence then an “explanation” of human consciousness would effectively invoke the existence of transcendent Deity. On the other hand, an admission or concession within the metaphysics of mind that each individual consciousness is irreducible in the sense of arising out of its own unique and individual ground, would be to promote each individual ground, would be to promote each individual consciousness to the rank of a transcendental and in some sense, eternally prefigured entity, where each such is therefore eternally separate and incommensurable from the other. On the first view of consciousness the distinctiveness of identities among consciousness would be based upon spatiotemporal, contextual and

historical differences and, of course differences in initial and boundary conditions to which each consciousness is subject. On this view consciousness is just a passive medium of representation that possesses no active function. Individual consciousnesses are here different in the same way that the different water streams of a sprinkler system are separate. In other words, each quantity of consciousness that happens to be gathered together and subject to the proper boundary conditions of a single nervous system (that is, one of the appropriate sensitivity) shall perhaps develop the appropriately recursive dynamic structure that allows it to say “I.” Giving man the power to choose the world he lives in without granting the knowledge that Man has this power renders the greatest justice. This makes Man’s choices truly free and not influenced by calculated selfinterest. Forms of poetic versification function analogously in influencing ideation in at once limiting and enhancing or amplifying the creation process. Human suggestibility may well be a phenomenon of metaphoricity rather than being an expression of some intrinsic feature of the human psyche. The first impulse of self-willing and the emergence of consciousness as a nonfinite, recursive dynamic are perhaps dual structures (of time and space perhaps that must become fused together). The overdetermination of consciousness manifests itself in the persistence through change of a given individual consciousness while the underdetermination of consciousness lies with the indefinite variety of possible realizable individual consciousnesses. The simultaneous commonality of environment and language permits “triangle people” and “square people” to effectively be a single people, possessing a single art, culture, science, etc.

Because there is no such thing as consciousness in general or as such which all beings participate in in common with one another, the being of consciousness is particular only in an analogical sense and so does not represent any limitation or condition being placed upon any consciousness-at-large or –as-such. In this way two or more consciousness may only interact if each is itself limited and each of these systems of limitation are networked together but without an actual, direct linkage between these consciousness’s being engendered. So the collective limitation of the plurality of consciousness is not the result of their as it were pressing up against one another within some preexistent common field, e.g., spacetime, but this common domain or inter-consciousness is an artifact of each consciousness having limited itself through its own self-initiated action – a kind of collective reverse bootstrapping of all consciousness to produce as artifact, the interconsciousness realm. Conservation is only simulated through the defining of spaces enclosed with respect to a set of degrees of limited freedom while nonconservation (and uniqueness) remains with respect to boundaries not yet defined. Again, facilitation seems to require limitation (as in construction of concept grounds within the confines of poetic versification constraints of rhyme, meter, metaphor, theme, etc.) Concerning the fundamental question of metaphysics: “Why is there something rather than nothing?” We may note that should reality not constitute in any intelligible or rational or objective sense (or, perhaps, in any sense) a totality, then this question is revealed to have been fundamentally misguided by the implicit false identification of Being with Existence through another false identification of the two relations, that of identity with that of analogy. This would perhaps amount to an attempt to reduce poetic truth to that of objective truth. For one can only reasonably ask something exists rather than failing to exist if the subject of this question is in some sense definable (as a kind of “thing”). Of course any “thing” as a determinate

being both exists and does not exist so long as it exists somewhere and not somewhere else and we haven’t yet qualified our question to include the condition of place. So this question of “Why” as a metaphysical question about “absolute existence” or being becomes why something for which its being is unconditioned has the unconditional being that it in fact enjoys? And this question is only meaningful if it is meaningful to ask why other beings whose being is unconditioned nonetheless possess no being whatever. And the only possible answer that does not appeal to the notion of conditional-ness would be the arbitrary choice of such beings to not possess or take on being – any other account for nonbeing would necessarily invoke conditions for the being’s vacuity. Existence is always being within which is being with and unconditioned being are being not possessing existence. All existents are beings (within existence) but not all beings exist, in other words. The naturalist would point to the seemingly almost universal availability of a highly developed state of consciousness to members of the human species as a phenomenon of cerebral cortical hypertrophy borne of an evolutionary momentum carrying into a late epoch in which the natural selective pressures in favor of increased intelligence are virtually absent, but which is nevertheless being sustained through a continued (if not actually sharpening) unleashing of earlier built up potential via the still continuing evolutionary pressures posed by sexual, as opposed to, socalled natural selection. But we may equally well choose to view the phenomenon of a hyperdeveloped consciousness (and capacity for such consciousness) as a divinely providential infinite upgrade-ability of the mind of the individual human being because it is clear to any unbiased thinker that human consciousness has already exhibited a state of development far in excess of the minimal level necessary for the survival and prosperity of the human race as a whole in relation to the competition posed by the other species of the planet with whom we have been forced to share limited, locally available resources. One should note here the vast chasm separating human intelligence from that of its closest, most challenging competitor species. April 2011 Because natural

selection never had the adaptation of the individual in view, @$but rather the adaptation of the breeding population as a whole, a great variety of genes (and higher order regulatory genes) would have been selected for, which later can be brought together in novel combinations never anticipated by the evolutionary process, and which nonetheless possess an expression as beneficial phenotypes for the individual offspring. This points up the rationality of the genetic code, which itself must possess an evolutionary history predating the emergence of sexual reproduction by at least a billion years! It is this anticipatory nature of the genetic code, which seems to point to the providence of an intelligent designer, e.g., “In the beginning was the Word”. The interpretation of individual genes in terms of how they should be interpreted within the multi-level gene regulatory network, i.e., linguistically, while the assemblage of this network, being based in the self-organizing principle of atomic and molecular matter, points up the latent, linguistic dynamical structure of fundamental matter as an expression of the underlying quantum vacuum as creative, intelligent ground of being. December 8, 2012 The incidence of Asperger's amongst the children of Engineers (both parents) is 10x that of the general population, c.f., Economist magazine. The predisposing high-level regulatory genes are in the genome because they promoted the survival of the tribe over many 100,000's of years of hunter-gatherer life and hence were selected for by nature. Humankind came very close to extinction in sub-Saharan Africa and later during previous ice ages, and the "genetic bottleneck", c.f.,e.g., mitochondrial DNA studies, is perhaps as small as 15,000 individuals. It is likely humankind would have already gone extinct had it not been for the expansion of an otherwise too limited genetic diversity brought about by the evolutionary contribution of surviving Asperger's Syndrome behavioral genetics. @$

Existence can only develop well within the confines set by possible being (coextensive with actual being when unconditioned or absolute being is considered). But where no totality has been posited, there is no equating of existence with something that is nothing more than conditioned being, that is, as just being subject to conditions or limitations.

To reiterate, there can be no accounting for that which is in no rational sense a totality. And this principle likely applies equally validly to consciousness. But since as we have already argued, there can be no consciousness as such, i.e., consciousness that is both unified and impersonal, consciousness must be defined through itself alone so that ironically, it is personal consciousness which is consciousness as such. Persons therefore are transcendental beings that only acquire selfknowledge through self-imposed limitation. Another way to say this is, the distinction of personal versus impersonal consciousness is merely a relative and epistemological distinction. Ontologically speaking, consciousness’s are distinct though each is essentially an unconditioned being and the ontological distinctness of individual consciousness’s represents a transcendental order of the plurality of being, this plurality only becoming realizable through the various unconditional acts of selflimitation on the behalf of the various transcendental persons. Spacetime is an interconnected, dynamic latticework of distinctly originating temporalities. Spacetime is a linking together of timelike fluctuations into a network that transcends any instantaneous arising of multiple fluctuations. Each temporality represents the action within and upon spacetime of transcendental beings, most of whom remain unconditioned. Rational action is collective, mutually limited action that possesses an intersubjective exchange medium supervening upon the peculiarities of each individual agent. Potentiality is a phenomenon of collective, mediated irrational (in the sense of reason-transcending) action in which irreconcilable differences are set aside or bracketed out. The ground of rational representation is a kind of universal translation medium the mechanism of which can possess no rational representation, that is, possesses no coherent description in terms of discursive, intersubjective symbols. A particular application of this principle is the transcendental nature of language as such or the irreducibility of linguistic capacity to a principle possessing a discursively symbolic description, i.e., coherent representation in terms

of natural language descriptions. Language is necessarily, that is, by its essential nature a transcendental phenomenon of the individual consciousness. More generally, we may say that the acts by which individual consciousness limits itself so as to enter the concourse of intersubjectivity transcends all notions conceivable to this consciousness when in its self-imposed state of limitation. Self-limitation of consciousness is the archetype of consciousness’ transcendental activity. There are no necessary conditions for the archetypal act of consciousness’ self-limitation since consciousness in its essence is unconditioned being. And yet consciousness’ will to act thus (in initially limiting itself) is all that is sufficient for this act to be carried through (realized). The act of self-limitation is on necessity a freely perpetual act, in other words. au=Aquinas thought that each angel was the lone specimen of its species since angels were not supposed to possess bodies, c.f., A History of Western Philosophy, p. 459. This is the exact situation for each individual consciousness, if imagined free of all limitation and condition. The differences between each consciousness, as we have alluded to, are facts of a transcendent nature, and such differences can never be grasped by an individual consciousness, but such truths themselves only possess being by subsisting within the knowledge and understanding of a being transcending the being of each and every particular absolute, unconditioned though particular, infinite being. This being is being itself or universal being. A natural language description cannot contain an explication of the general nature of language any more than can a system of logic demonstrate its own consistency. Means moreover cannot comprehend ends; fact cannot comprehend value; particle physics doesn’t explain the fact of physical existence; form cannot comprehend substance; ideas cannot comprehend consciousness; no particular can contain the universal, and so on. So that which accounts for existence as such cannot be a mere existent among other existents, but must belong to an altogether higher, broader and deeper order. @$@$But then this makes it possible for existence to be predicated since it is seen as a limitation and

qualification of being. This casts Anselm’s famously clever argument for God’s existence in a new light. Continuing to (maniacally) apply this principle, we must say that the origin of order itself possesses no determinate order whatever. Order is seen here as a function of limitation that most generally originates in an act of the unconditioned in limiting itself. The aboriginal act of self-limitation would have been the establishment of a transcendental order composed of an infinite plurality of infinite beings, i.e., an unlimited number of things, each of which is unlimited, i.e., possessing no limitation in the sense that no one infinite being is capable of entertaining a form within itself that cannot also be entertained by any other such being. Note that although none of these beings are limited with respect to its substance or essence, each substance of each such being distinct from that of any other, that is, peculiar to itself. It is clear at this stage that God, the author of this transcendental order, is Himself not limited with respect to His enjoying only a single, distinct essence and substance. Each infinite essence may be understood as a mere facet or projection of the Deity. Who Himself is the integration, rather than the mere summing together of, each and every infinite essence. This is because the transcendental order of infinite essences was not a dividing or fragmenting of the original Deity, but is a creation by Him of an unlimited number of His images, each being a kind of “host.” These images are holographic in the sense of retaining a dim recollection of themselves despite reduction to occupation of a spatiotemporal realm, which means also being contaminated by other essences’ incomplete recollections of themselves. On this view God does not “exist” though His facets are imperfectly represented within spacetime and though God himself is the harmonious integration of all possible infinite being, He Himself is not a being as such. We might better characterize God as the suchness of all possible infinite being. It is clear from the discussion thus far that God does not exist because any one of his infinite facets constitutes a being transcending “mere existence.” And though each of

these divine facets possesses identity as beings (transcending existence), the identity of each is utterly lost as they are each and all perfectly harmoniously combined within God’s transcendental nature. In the history of the human race there are myriad examples of man attempting through religion to counterbalance his less than supreme position within the great chain of being. If not the individual person, then his consciousness in its deepest and broadest aspect is of the same substance as is the Divine consciousness, or man will surely evolve, either collectively as a race or individually in a spiritual afterlife to a level equal to that of Deity, and so on. We try to counterbalance in our minds God’s infinitely greater worth by in one manner or another conceiving of ourselves as in some important way equal to Him! And yet what God has in store for us in the way of our future evolution in Him is far more than we could ever hope for or imagine. Were He to give us a glimpse of what it should be like to be greater than what lies within our absolute potential for being for which He has created us, it would not be in our highest nature to either want or recognize this. Man’s desire to be equal to God is indeed a senseless and incoherent extrapolation of a purely blind ambition. This being is infinitely degenerate and perfectly symmetrical. Perhaps each of God’s infinite facets is itself a perfectly harmonious integration of all of the infinite number of remaining infinite facets. In this manner God is continually transforming into Himself from out of Himself on an infinite continuum of “harmonics,” so that God encompasses both Being and Time. Each human being’s incompletely recollected essence is “contaminated” as we said by the imperfectly recollected essences of all other selves. In this way both the individual human being and Humankind itself are made in the image of God. Christ in His humanity is the son of Man, i.e., Mankind, in His Divinity, the Son of God. Christ had access to a greater recollection of Himself in a way that no individual is capable of, and this because of the absent interference of Original Sin. When Mankind (through Adam) first realized his identity as a fact of Divinity, he did so only in part, but mistaking this as a glimpse of his own divinity.

Adam mistook the image of divinity within himself as divinity itself. It is common for the exceptionally gifted or talented to imagine themselves as perhaps being the most talented or the most gifted. And most of us, when struck with a sudden clarity of vision concerning some pressing state of affairs, tend instantly to assume that this must be the insight into the situation. But there is almost always more than one, many in fact, widely divergent ways to interpret the meaning or significance of something that appears right and exclusively so, should this interpretation, rather than some other, equally good (or better) one have “fallen in” one’s head, c.f., “etwas wunderscheones ist mir ganz eingefallen!” This tendency of impulsively presuming the truth of notions themselves borne of an impulse is surely a characteristic feature of magical thinking concerning one’s faculty of judgment. Although nature may well have long ago ferreted out this tendency of leaping before looking where the dangerous sudden challenges of a concrete physical environment are concerned, this tendency may have actually been encouraged, on the other hand, where more abstract or less immediate threats are involved. Of course numbers don’t really exist, just their relationships. We may follow au=Leibniz and summarize what has been said thus far concerning God, Man and Man’s relation to God by just saying that the perfected being that is woefully imperfectly represented by any individual human being is the being of God from a single, confusedly rendered point of view or from the point of view of one of God’s facets, confused by the confused points of view, to varying degrees, of other facets of God. It is a natural assumption that creation ab initio somehow requires greater effort of explanation than does the persistence through change of this created order once the hard work has been put behind whatever to which it owes this existence. And this presumption is to secretly invoke

the notion of the world being, in part, indifferent to the passage of time. But if reality is indifferent to the passage of time, it is always a different and changing component of this reality that possesses transitory indifference to temporality. C.f., web= Because the negation of a determinate entity must be an equally determinate, if unbeknownst absence, very much after the fashion of the physical relation of matter to antimatter, and thus requiring negation to be within some preexisting system of determinate relations, if such an operation of negation is to be definable in its effect; the negation of the world would not be defined should reality constitute a “world” in name only, being actually indeterminate. On this view, what is called “nothing” would be just one among any number of unlimited indeterminate states and so not possessing the special ontological status usually accorded it within systems of metaphysics, and so no special explanation is required in accounting for deviation from such a state as might have otherwise been supposed to be represented by the existence of an actual “world” such as the present one in which we asking the question find ourselves. Any limitation on the part of the unconditioned beyond that required to produce an order shall produce disorder (relative to the order represented by the first minimal act of self-limiting). If existence as such is a function of limitation (in its broadest scope), then the explanation of why there is “something rather than nothing” lies with a motive or reason rather than with a cause. Note that if nothing in fact existed, there could have been no reason or cause for this fact, according to any principle of sufficient reason, that is, without the invoking of being transcending “the duality of existence versus nonexistence.” So perhaps we may conclude from this that there must be some sufficient reason for the fact that something exists rather than nothing since there can be no sufficient reason for nothing existing – other than itself! So the reason for “nothing existing,” in the case where nothing exists must be either nothing itself or nothing only “exists” (is the case) contingently (perhaps necessarily so). It is not clear what a contingent nothingness means, however. September 2011 If all

possibilities exist or are realized, then nothing is left over as a faculty of creation and imagination in the background as it were. All phenomena then occupy the same level because everything is present and it is as though there is no longer any ground for or context of all the phenomena. This is reminiscent of the concept of “the wavefunction of the universe” (an isolated wavefunction is not thought to have any physical meaning in the theory of quantum mechanics) itself composed of myriad correlated and uncorrelated density fuctions. A similar idea is that of the mass-energy system, composed as a whole of equal amounts of positive and negative energy such that an observer altogether outside the system encounters merely a void. The proposition, “Nothing Exists,” necessarily though perhaps secretly involves the notion of nothing as a kind of completeness or totality. If nothing is conceived of as not so much a total absence of something, but as a kind of backdrop against which something exists or not, then it follows that the proposition, “Nothing Exists” is always true regardless of whether something indeed exists. This conclusion is clearly a misstep on many peoples’ view because it treats the proposition as a positive assertion concerning that fact of existing of a reified nothingness. On this apparently mistaken view, existence is always relative in being always existence against the background of a reified nothingness. Nothingness can only be consistently reified by considering all positively existing things as abstractions borne of some limitation within absolute being. Here thingness is a manifestation of limitation within the monolithic totality of harmoniously unified being. And here nothingness is identified with the absence of all relatively existing entities, that is, as the monolith of absolute being in the complete absence of all limitation upon its being. The English word, “exists” is taken from the Latin “ex-sistere” meaning “to stand out.” So in this metaphysics, ruin and decay lead us back to a greater fullness of being and the complete destruction of the created order constitutes the

negating of all original negation within absolute being through which creation was originally manifest. The indeterminate is being and nothingness mixed in unfathomable proportions and so intermediary between them, unless, of course, the two indeed interpenetrate in a way which alters the substance of both, the equating of being and non-being is the contradiction from which everything follows. There has to have always been something since presumably ex nihilo nihil fit, and what better candidate for this highly peculiar something than that possessing the potential for all things and to which all things that exist ultimately owe their origin, c.f., cit=The Zero Ontology – au= David Pearce on Why Anything Exists, hedweb.com/witherall/zero.htm. September 2011 Of course, if au=Parmenides is right (“Nothing does not exist!”) and “nothing” has been reified (made into a predicate) by an invalid extrapolation from what exists, then “existence” itself is also an invalid extrapolation to an improper general concept – invalid because there is no “outside” to existence, which has to be excluded so as to form the abstract category of existence qua “existingness”. September 2011 Being only transcends the duality of existence vs. nonexistence if being and nothingness are indeed one, namely, being as such is always apart from mere existence. Becoming is a change in degree characterized by the participation of both existence in being as well as of being in existence. One way of trying to understand the distinction of being and existence might be to observe that existents change through alteration in the manner and degree in which they participate in being and the plurality of being. In this way existents become and transform, then ultimately passing away. The indeterminate functions as a kind of tertium datur here as it is neither a being, nor participates in being unless it becomes the subject of an act of determination. Is there only one indeterminate? It seems reasonable to grant this since a plurality of indeterminates is just one among many possible partial determinations of an indeterminate

ground. Perhaps we can bring some order to the discussion by positing the indeteminate, the existent, and a given being as three successive degrees of the determination of (indeterminate) ground. On this view, all existents are composed of a mixture of greater or lesser relative amounts of being and nonbeing. Notice here that the role of nonbeing is played by the indeterminate. If we have been correct in supposing that existence is always characterized by limitation (of some being), then the most we can mean by the proposition, “God Exists,” is that the Being of God manifests itself within the inter-subject realm of spacetime, but if we intend by this proposition to assert that God is fully contained within existence as one existent among the multiplicity of all other existents within the world, then the truth value we must assign to this proposition is, namely, “false.” For God cannot fully participate in His Being by merely existing. Since the fullest being of the individual human being is only known and vouchsafed to God, it is only through a relationship with God that one may develop in the direction of fuller participation in one’s transcendent being. Each being within Existence possesses the spiritually instinctive and yearning desire for that which brings greater coherence and harmony to its state of consciousness and is naturally attracted to any belief system, philosophy or persons seeming to offer this. Though there are many systems of thought and belief capable of delivering on this promise of enabling the individual achieving higher states of integration of the self, there are many of these which can take the individual along his spiritual journey only so far, ultimately leading him to a plateau of spiritual stagnation that once perceived within the depths of this person’s soul, triggers feelings of disillusionment in him and facilitating his fall to a spiritual level in his communion with God and with fullest being lower than that at which he had with great hope started. Any spiritual progress made by the individual that is not also accompanied by a growing sense of compassion and humility will lead to this type of disheartenment and disillusionment. As they say, “pride cometh before a fall.” Such

persons become bitter and come to covet in resentment, though perhaps only secretly, the joy of those perservering on a more successful path to communion with God. Those who have taken a false path to God and who have failed in their spiritual development feel betrayed and can become a danger to other seekers when this deep bitterness enlists the aid of the flawed wisdom gained from their now abandoned spiritual path. Pride provokes these poor souls to everywhere attempt to discourage those who aim for a spiritual goal that they themselves bitterly failed to achieve, c.f., the necrophilous character a la Fromm. May 2012

I found it interesting how the producer of the 2012 show, cit=Nasa 360 shows the bloopers from each episode during the final minute of that episode. The subtext of this practice is perhaps a kind of antiRandian message that it is not the greatness of the individual, but the greatness of the collaboration of inviduals with diverse talents, abilities and flaws that produces, collectively a great and informative science show. December 2011 ess=

When a fellow human being is not in emotional control of themselves, does one take pains to treat the person compassionately or blame the hapless soul for this lack of control, “wash one’s hands” of responsibility for the person as an end in themselves, only willing to revisit the person’s status as such once their behavior comes back into line with civilized expectations? Policy, regulation, guidance, hierarchy, institution, ritual, ceremony, collective, group think, procedure, algorithm, rhetoric, politics, metaphor, analogy, subconscious, subliminal, epiphany, insight, intuition, modularity of mind, sociolinguistics, sociology of science, precritical indoctrination, social conditioning, inbreeding, self-selection, sexual selection, behavioral genetics, modulation, filtering, amplification, enabling, symbiosis, syncretism, synthesis, derivative, influence, automatic writing, muse, trance, paradigm, norm, mores, expectation, nonverbal communication, neurolinguistic programming, mimetics, instinct

God, like nature herself, manifests Himself in accordance with the manner in which the spiritual devotee or seeker questions and interacts with the numinous transcendent. Whenever we make the move of reduction of phenomenon to category or reality to totality, we either sever connections within the system or between the system and its ground, resulting in either case in a fundamentally inaccurate description of the system or the dynamics of its components. “The proposition para [italics mine] has in it the idea of transmission, “c.f., Understanding Galatians and the Law, p. 16. Take, for example, the following “para” words: paramedical, paralegal, paramilitary, paraprofessional, parapsychology, paranormal, paradox, paragoric, etc. “Para” in all of the above carries the notion or indication of almost as in the prefixes, quasi, hypo, sub, demi, semi, etc. However, the manner by which the prefix, “para” operates within the above given examples is also deeper and subtler than that connoted by those other, similar prefixes already given. “Para” carries the idea of a similarity on account of the development or nature of some discipline’s having been inspired by the method of some “proper science” or legitimate process. The interlacing of subjective and objective (i.e., intersubjective) is an account of the fact of the necessary mutual incursion of data and information upon one another. A proper understanding of the self, the Other and the world seems one of a radical ambiguity posed by two equally broad and deep interpretations of being and existence, an existential interpretation informed by the principles of evolutionary theory on the one hand, and what might be called an essentialist one informed by a notion of Plotinean descent, on the other. And if this ambiguity is sharp enough, if one will permit the metaphor, then but the slightest or most slightly developed bias in one of these fundamental interpretations or the other puts one on the path of extracting all of the meaning or desires along one leg of this forking path or the other. One

is virtually free, or as free as one can possibly be while still possessing the integral nature of being-in-existence to choose one or the other of these hermeneutical paths. Language is the means by which the enabling of the intellect’s selforganizational abilities is marshaled. Language presents the perfect example of that which, is in equal parts, ready to hand and present to hand. Reality is, with respect to the forms of representation, underdetermined, with respect to the operation (choice) of will, overdetermined. Here consciousness is less than a unity (within existence) while will constitutes a multiplicity. So reality is both under and overdetermined with regard to theism’s being true or not, i.e., with respect to the truth or falsity of the proposition, “God Exists.” Whichever interpretation of reality one chooses, one will find powerful and persuasive confirmation of one’s chosen interpretation. And this is why one’s choice to submit to the Will of God (or not, as the case may be) is a radically free one. It is error therefore to look for merely passively discernible confirmation of God’s existence for this would render man’s choice unto a belief in God a less than radically free one! God consciousness is, properly speaking, an attunement of the individual to the divine will and so transcends the realm of representation, i.e., that of forms/ transformations tending or not to confirm or disconfirm theistic belief. Grace is the antimony provoked by Being-in-the-World. And this is why the wisdom of Man is but foolishness to God. Without the realityfiltering action of will, this reality can only manifest itself to a drifting, passive consciousness as an underdetermined, fantasmagorical display of forms possessing no stability or integrity. The active filtering of reality by a focused act of willing reveals the multiplicity of reality’s capacity to cohere. William James’ notion of a “Will to believe” is here an exceedingly relevant one. One’s power of choice makes one’s will responsible, whether this is recognized by the passive understanding or

not. Will mistakes the passivity of the understanding for its own powerlessness. You say that it is all a matter of interpretation - all the more reason for choice being a decisive factor in determining one’s reality. One would otherwise give up ones birthright for the mere price of its asking. And this is precisely the cynical hope of all of God’s enemies – that the victory will be conceded by a more powerful opponent without a fight – easy enough to achieve if one’s opponent can be convinced that he is powerless and that “resistance is futile.” The inflicting of physical pain as well as psychological suffering in the form of intense mortal fear, causes a complete short-circuiting of the cultured artifact which is the victim’s sense of his own unique identity now revealed to have been a precarious and illusory aggrandizement of the true, common denominator identity of a mere specimen of human animal. Human suggestibility and the ineffability of the subjective nuances of thought and perception should be understood through the analogy of a “hall of mirrors” rather than that of a “house of cards.” Such networks of incommunicable nuance contribute to the “project” (as collective “projection”) of intersubjective intersubjectivity as objective intersubjectivity. The subtler features of humankind’s linguistic endowment are bound up in a collectively held, private language-based superstructure of high level cognitive processing, which had been gradually, (but only in part) in service to the social (as opposed to psychological) function of interpersonal communication. By mistakenly supposing that the real “goal” of the evolution of language and linguistic ability was largely and primarily that of the development of an augmenting superstructure of perceptual/ cognitive processing, psychologists and linguistics researchers alike imagine, quite uncritically, that the intelligible verbalizations of a common culture, i.e., those utterances of natural language speakers must somehow be fully

analyzable in terms of transmissible meanings and nuances of meaning. This slowly emerging hulk of a new paradigm at once broader and deeper than any which has come before it, may be understood to be signaled by the supplanting of the representational by the participatory or involvement paradigm of science. “By 2050, physicists will have learned how to teleport a molecule.” We are familiar, perhaps from the horoscope column of our daily newspaper, fortune cookie messages, etc. with the phrase, “declaration of love,” as in, e.g., “you will receive a . . . “ These are states for the most part internally generated in the unfortunate individual who is convulsed by the paroxysms of infatuation, c.f., “fatuous,” “fatuity,” etc. And the perhaps as yet unbeknownst to him or herself even more unfortunate person, finding themselves in the path of one of these what I like to term, “protestations of love,” should best realize that there can indeed be little that personally connects them to the true object of the love-struck unfortunate’s obsession. Nonetheless, “classically forbidden” pairings are known to occur, e.g., professional female – blue collar (or even “brown collar”) male, gay or transgendered persons of the opposite sex, political commentators of opposite party affiliation, etc. Sometimes odd pairings, when unusually frequent/ concentrated are whimsically explained in terms of there being “something in the air.” Now in the realm of modern physics, all classically forbidden phenomena are ultimately accountable to the mysterious and spontaneous action of the quantum vacuum fields, what classical physicists of the previous century might have uncritically termed “the ether.” But the exact manner in which these fields bring about their highly peculiar results is dependent to an extraordinary degree upon the available particular set of initial and boundary conditions in force. To say that the dynamic is itself determinate is at once to suppose a

complete physical description where only the initial and boundary conditions have been specified without our having specified to what these conditions must be applied. There must be a residuum of spontaneity in nature to supply us with the subjects and media of change and so, too, temporality. We are reminded here of Paul Davies’ impassioned question, “what breathes fire into the equations of physics,” which makes these equations descriptive of some really existing order? Whence arises the substance, which assumes the forms described by the equations of mathematical physics, in other words? The substance, which is the underlying subject of the change, is also the cause of this change, and necessarily so, for this is just one of the staple metaphysical notions of self-existence and/or self-moving. Substance, paradoxically, is a nonlocal “phenomenon,” and this, because existence is necessarily an open-ended act. We say that a process, physical, psychological, or whatever is open-ended in this sense of transcending a formal description as a deterministic process if the process itself participates in the act of existence of the elements of the process (themselves abstract entities, of course) by virtue of a deeper participation within the act of existence of the very medium constituting the process and its elements. And so the notion of substance as universal, conserved quantity is revealed to be an inconsistent one. There is a tendency for these boundary conditions of which we have so much spoken to gradually and usually imperceptibly imprint themselves as semi-permanent aftereffects upon the otherwise spontaneously fluctuating medium which had for a time fallen within their scope. And the necessary eventual dissipation of such impressed effects never quite succeeds in becoming a total diminution, but remains encoded in the very fabric of the former host substance. And this encoding may later become entangled with further such encodings of future boundary conditions. Substance is not utterly passive as it is usually presumed to be, but different substances possesses distinct affinities for different types of conditions to which they may become subject.

One mind seeming to itself inspired by, but really carried on the impetus of some idee fixe, imagines driving with unassailable logic, straight to its conclusion as though following a beeline, though greater minds may glimpse a gentle arc forming some portion of a circle in reasoning. If a flash of insight is always the completing of a circuit in the brain, then it should not be surprising that there might always exist a vantage point of superior logic from which this flash loses its dazzle, transparently revealing underneath some inevitable piece of circular (and hence questionable) logic. But this is not to assert that the conclusions to which insight leads us are frequently wrong. Bertrand Russell was famous for remarking that the whole edifice of mathematical thought was nothing more than one enormous tautology. The mathematician, Kurt Gödel, effectively disproved this disparaging assertion of Russell’s by showing, via his incompleteness theorem, that truth is a stronger notion than provability. The unity of mathematics lies outside the realm of mathematical description. There is more to reality than mathematics. September 2011

I have a sneaking suspicion that Gödel’s Incompleteness Theorem has some important application to and poses nontrivial interpretational problems for the concepts of initial conditions, boundary conditions and dynamic field. This in turns suggests that the distinction of real versus virtual particle/field in quantum mechanics may indeed be problematic, as well. Culture is the context by which the capacity for meaning in experience is prepared, which requires temporality and still more historicity, namely the participatory dialectic within temporality. Esar-hadden, the son of the Assyrian King Sennacherib, made sure to restore the God BelMarduk, restore his temple, and make his piece with the god. Is this a perfect illustration of an instinctive behavior formerly satisfying an evolutionary societal function, elaborated within or adapted to historical, cultural context? H.G. Wells, Outline of History (1961 Edition), error on p. 177 where a

date of 3750 BC is associated with Sargon I. The narcissist somehow cannot brook the indifference exhibited by those of his habitual environment of whom he has taken some degree of notice. Rather the narcissist prefers to imagine that the appearance of an indifferent attitude on the part of such persons is really only a façade concealing a vascillation between sympathy and active disfavor or even contempt and then back again. One important element in the abstract nature of scientific method is the systematic denial of any possible role of the intentional content of scientific observation and experimentation in the possible enforcing of, e.g., the principle of the uniformity of nature, etc. Transcendental unity is just the unity of all those entities that are mutually transcending of each other. The unlimited development of each entity in no way necessarily threatens to bring one into contact, coincidence or conflict with the other. This suggests that the otherness of each entity is particular or peculiar to itself. So here we encounter the notion of the otherness of the other. This otherness of the other includes within its scope neither the self not the self’s otherness - here understand “the self” to mean oneself or one’s self. Although as Campbell has noted, that religious traditions are patchwork facades of metaphor, which pose a kind of barrier between the spiritual devotee and his God, these traditions, paradoxically, also serve at once to conduct the devotee away from the masking realm of conventional appearances and deeper into the realm of the divine. Nothing is more limiting of the creative intellect than the tendency to treat metaphors as literal or denotative categories. Metaphor is an openended principle for ordering experience. The index of intellectual maturity is the facility with which one can penetrate to the core of a

conceptual notion in order to grasp its metaphoricity. When one first hazards to deviate from established practice and common sense embodied in a set of, e.g., safety regulations, the mind is focused and the sense of potential alarm borne of a nagging presentiment of risk all out of proportion, perhaps, to the immediate risk involved in this or many particular cases. . . It is like the setting in which a bank officer or treasurer first engages in the occasional embezzling of petty sums. . . or in the making of a number of small, bad loans to friends, favorite associates, etc. In the process the mind loses, gradually and imperceptibly, its original focus on risk after the habit of violating the letter/spirit of the regulations has had a chance to set in and establish itself. In the same way that a developing seed must access ground to manifest its latent order, an order which must be in part other than or transcendent of itself, the act of experience produces a novel convolution rather than mere continuation of elements plucked from open-ended process. Abstraction always produces novel sets of relationships, simultaneously discovering and inventing one another in the absence of a completed (nonlocal) manifold. All illusions (of insight) are equally convincing. The unity borne of mutual agreement sustained among incommensurable subjectivities is necessarily emergent and open-ended. Any system of representation, if syntactically rich enough, is capable of functioning like a first language, at which point the inertia of mediation drops away seemingly revealing the naked content – but not before impregnating the represented with some of its still untapped structurally subtle potentiality. In this way is it seen that there can never be any neat cleaving of the sign from the signified. We always change what we want to say, saying at once both less and more than we intended to whenever we resort to the mediation of discursive symbols as well as a particular genre of speech (rhetoric).

All determinate perceptions are based in an original confusion and ambiguity, which at some crucial point had to be resolved along particular lines. Bohm says in Thought as a System, p. 138, that, “I think, that matter may be unlimited in it subtlety.” It seems the only viable alternative of unlimited (i.e., infinite) depth and/or subtlety. The term, “reified abstraction” presumes that there is some necessary and important distinction to be drawn between an abstract entity infused with or subsisting in a substance or “substances” (plural) versus such an entity devoid of all substantiality and “hanging in thin air” (or in, if you will, the “mind’s eye.”) My open-ended, under-determined (or overdetermined) email communications to Suzanne and others are partly intended to illustrate the little discovered fact of the possibility of a broader and deeper form of communication (or metacommunication) in which memes or rather “protomemes” can be exchanged between two persons and their psyches brought into a closer and more productive alliance/ interrelatedness, but without either person having made any commitments or irreversible commitments to the use of particular sets of determinate concepts or to the adherence/subscription to similarly deterministic sets of values/judgments. This form of insinuating, metaphorical-laden, risk-taking manner of communicating is intended to stimulate a sense of “physical contact,” if you will between two normally distantly separated minds. It is a form of communication evincing some of the dynamic of a dance. Further there is a sense of pushing, pulling and grappling of the two actual beings deep within the “control rooms” of the minds of each. Communication between two intellects is always an illusion as intellect itself is just an adaptation and a tool. The intellect as “present to hand” contains within itself deep divisions. Intellect as “gear” or as being merely “ready to

hand” makes of all communication a game of the exchange of metaphors between two animals engaged in, e.g., courtship rituals, combat, social bonding, establishing a social pecking order, etc. Saying that secretly all concept is really metaphor undermines the heretofore allegedly long established meanings of both “concept” and metaphoricity itself. But if “concept” and “metaphor” were already secretly undermined (objectively inadequate) as such, then how could the above described deconstructive collapse of meaning be brought about, unless the notion of deconstruction was itself already secretly “objectively inadequate” (as representing its own action, not in its de facto acting upon some system of concepts)? Deconstruction is just as much a genre that necessarily invokes the use of rhetoric/ rhetorical “devices”/tools and praxis to bring about (rather than coherently represent) these collapses we’ve been referring to. Metaphors permit us to describe to others insights that we have yet to experience in determinate, crystallized form, as well as for them to respond to these in a fashion coordinated, in turn, in the absence of determinate notions on their parts. I experienced an unusual form of lucid dreaming this afternoon. It involved a sort of out-of-body experience, as my eyes were wide open as I lay on my right side. I could see that my hand was still within a book I had fallen asleep reading, but I could not feel any hand inside the book, rather, I was at this time able to seem to lift my hands and forcefully clap them together. Although I could still see my real hand in the book, numb and useless, then I actually succeeded in rolling over on my other side and almost falling out of bed. I did this even though I could see that I hadn’t really moved at all. I was still lying on my right side, looking at my hand still inside the book I had fallen asleep reading. I was actually consciously aware of both sets of experiences simultaneously, and my very stream of consciousness seemed to have actually succeeded in bifurcating.

Perhaps one of my cerebral hemispheres was almost completely awake – the other asleep and still in the midst of a dream, and a lucid one at that! Combined with my other experience of having had a dream experience of a flash of blue light that produced a retinal afterimage persisting many seconds after being startled awake (by the blue flash actually), I’m beginning to suspect that I’m starting to show signs of incipient schizophrenia. I think it is chronic high doses of the amino acids, LArginine and L-Ornithine, which are known to be powerful growth hormone releasers. What was recollected as a bifurcation of consciousness was only a representation of such perhaps within a much more unified overarching state of consciousness, hence the schizophrenia was only an illusion. Some principles are broad and deep and actually succeed in encompassing particular cases, the connection to which we can only recognize in retrospect; some simulate prescience by altering or further determining themselves as the field of their domain expands far beyond original demarcations, acting like a proactive and responsive matrix into which each new particular plugs, as if by a predetermined “snapping in,” and others possess an almost uncanny capacity for “self-extracting.” Does the objectivity of “other minds” erode the distinction of subjective versus objective? This brings to mind the distinction of the other of the other versus the other of the self. The body of her son had only now been placed upon the pathologist’s table whereupon the woman was to view the body in order to identify it. The pathologist lifted the sheet and the woman upon viewing her son identified him without showing any visible reaction and remarking more to herself than to the pathologist, “why is his. . . uh. . . so large? The medical examiner with dark humor muttered, “where both of you are going, it is a detail of which you are likely to form the most intimate acquaintance.” Only because I had always anticipated someday encountering a woman

like Mary, was I able even with some difficulty of repulsing the effects of her notable charms upon my wavering judgment. @$

Let emptier vessels grouse for filthy lucre with which they would, they believe, happily fill themselves. The philosopher does not merely passively receive ideas and experience through a socioculturally predetermined set of perceptual and cognitive filters, but tends to critically assess the operation of such inherited systems of processing the data of both sense and reason. The ordinary man on the street does not attempt to develop and experiment with new ways of processing these data but merely absorbs by osmosis as it were patterns of preprocessed data perhaps adjusting by trial and error as needed the manner of applying them. If Man the animal is but the product of blind, evolutionary processes, then why is he himself not “blind,” i.e., spiritually stumm as it were, namely bereft of consciousness? As Schrodinger remarked, a world without consciousness would be a play-acted out before rows of empty stalls. But the logic of mimesis is anything but blind. And we might unassumingly suppose that pure or unadulterated mimesis constitutes the prolegomena of all metaphor however general so that the extension of metaphor to its formally conceived ground as pure mimesis reveals at once mimesis as an abstraction from the concrete ground of metaphoricity and therefore metaphoricity itself as both or at once openended and recursive, i.e., as consciousness in its essence though transcendent of all formal categorizability. Think of these deeper levels of metaphor as analogous to the harmonics, which, though not individually distinguishable or consciously perceived, nonetheless produce subtle interference effects upon these harmonics to which the tympanic membrane of the mind is sensitive.

Just as conceptual thought presupposes metaphoricity, all consciously uniphonic productions presuppose latent polyphony. Pure unity will not stand out: will not “mani”-“fest,” i.e., remain “fast” within or against the “many.” This analysis of the concept of “pure mimesis” may be extended and applied in turn to the upstart discipline of meme theory. The structuring of protoplasm, progressively more complex with time as mediated by the interplay of Monod’s “chance and necessity” with the cohesive structure of the genome (“gene-nome” or “gene-law”) culminating with the advent of consciousness may perhaps be paralleled to a similar evolutionary process involving the meme structure in bringing about the first appearance of the ego. Rather than the Scriptures representing the transcription of the revealed Word of God, we say that the evolving Scriptures reach a critical level of coherence and complexity whereupon the revelation of a notion and intent is facilitated through these texts. Religious memic structure evolves, in other words, to a plateau where divine revelation is enabled and the genic structure of matter evolves to a level on which the enabling of egoically structured consciousness takes place. And although the correspondence truth of a given religion or belief system, with respect to these smaller particulars, subject as they are to evolutionary tinkering, may always be discounted or called into question; this process having served the larger consideration of the overall or essential correspondence truth of the particular belief system in question. For example, although the particular boundary conditions, necessary for the fusion of living substance into a coherent, intelligent system, themselves having evolved in basic accordance with the principles of Darwinian theory, the set of conditions, sufficient to bring about this fusion, certainly include those attributable to a coherent dynamic, constrained and conditioned only internally, through the action of fits own individual essence, when and where it has not yet protruded,

or projected itself into, the domain of boundary conditions and limitations. Because the mentality of the intelligent organism can only develop through its interaction with a society and culture, there seems to be no real possibility of properly simulating this development through the mere “downloading” of instruction sets into the gray matter of one of these organisms. What the organism “uploads” to its social culture, and how this culture responds to this information, imparted to it by the organism, also plays an important role in the psychological/intellectual development of the organism. In short, the programmer must become actively and mutually involved with the machine they seek to “inprogram” intelligence. But, of course, the programmer is necessarily substantively charged in the process. We may think of consciousness as the ground of representation that prepares itself. Consciousness spans incommensurate texturings of and within itself. Does this suggest that the unity of consciousness transcends all possible forms of continuity (as well as contiguity)? How would this question being answered in the affirmative condition our understanding of the notion of consciousness’ plurality? “The subbasement of the antechamber to the mind’s sunnier productions. ..“ If the unity of consciousness transcends that of the individual person, then are we to admit here that there is no possible barrier to the dissolution of the self upon similar dissolution of the boundary conditions to its transcendental dynamism? We cannot arrogate this dynamism (or its logic) to the temporal self. The sacrifice of Christ was necessary because God wished to create other free souls who would choose to love, worship and serve Him. Nothing risked, nothing gained. Our attempts to penetrate the mysteries of Christian faith are doomed, so long as our attempts toward

representation/correspondence rather than will/coherence. Deconstruction of deconstruction. Derrida presumes presence in order to deconstruct presence, and so deconstruction is in reality no critique, but mere usurpation that is politically motivated. I like to consistently apply the principle, “no one is great, nothing is great, except He who made me.” These representations can be stimulated passively but without the participation of intention, there can be no associated meaning. Somewhat reminiscent of Hume’s complaint that nowhere could he ever catch a glimpse of himself, we note here that although consciousness is necessary (as a kind of embedding ground) for the entertaining of “conscious experiences,” consciousness is not itself actually a quality (or “quale”) of said experiences – consciousness is not contained within experience, but quite the contrary of this is true, we deduce, rather, the presence (or existence) of a conscious state (in both the case of oneself and in the case of another) through the witnessing of willed or intended action. Experience that is “conscious,” in other words, is experience “within” consciousness. On just this view even thought is conceived under the rubric, “action.” I am also reminded here of the scene from the movie, War of the Worlds, when a captured Martian remote or robotic eye is energized and the recorded images it casts before astounded onlookers are commented upon by the clever scientist demonstrating with the device in effect that “this is the way a Martian sees us.” The very oddness of the distorted brightness and color evinced by the reenergized images (which is, of course, a distinctly human perception, is completely entangled or interfused with the allegedly more objective properties of the brightness, and color themselves (in addition to, e.g., luminosity, contrast, resolution, etc.). And so, the comment of the scientist is rather

hopelessly stuck in naïve realistic, and therefore to him hidden, assumptions (about the character of a certain class of Martian conscious states). Just an expert and judicious stimulating of the brain of a newborn infant and consistently conducted into adulthood, all the while excluding the input of energies conveying sensory data from an actual outside world, could not possibly permit the proper development of a normal and reasonable internal model of the structure and dynamics of objects, their contexts and causal relationships, which inhabit an independent external world. And this provided also that the environment is not permitted to respond to the developing infant’s responses to mock external stimuli. Intention and consciousness must develop more or less in step with one another. And this is perhaps because each necessarily invokes the other function in carrying out its own distinctive action. We should recognize that the breakwater represented by a paradigm shift poses just as much of an obstacle to forward-looking thinkers desiring to glimpse the essence of seminal discoveries of the future as it does to historians of thought attempting to characterize the intellectual environment prior to and fomenting the advent of such paradigmatic shifts. The particulars of a faith adjust themselves over time under the influence of both chance variation and mutual feedback, promoting their coherent interlocking within the particular sociopolitical and cultural context in which they are to thrive. I saw a bright blue flash in a dream, suddenly awoke, opened my eyes and observed an afterimage of a glowing, semitransparent blue patch of light for between 5 and 10 seconds. Does this mean that my retinal cells were powerfully (and actually) stimulated with energies generated deep within my sleeping brain? Does the circuitry of the brain orchestrate the turning of the body’s energies to the coextensive and

collocated vacuum fields of the “seemingly” affected body parts/ tissues? So during a dream, somehow the patterns of stimulation, normally engendered from the influx of sensory data tied to energies impinging upon the various physical sensory receptor cells from the outside world, are in essence properly reproduced from orchestrated internal, e.g., neural, resources connected to the components of the brain responsible for primary or secondary stage processing of various modes of sensory data. What is interesting is that these resources are connected from the internal rather than from the external side of these sensory processing components. It has always been tacitly assumed that the correlations existing between or exhibited by vacuum energy fluctuations, i.e., purely timelike or “imaginary” momentum fluctuations of the quantum vacuum, must have somehow originated (the correlations themselves, that is) with “real” momentum fluctuations somewhere within the past light cone of the vacuum energy fluctuations in question. Any mechanism explaining this, consistent with general relativity (and causality), would necessarily the self gravitation of the quantum vacuum, such that, globally at least (nonlocally also perhaps – in the quantum mechanical sense), both locally real and imaginary momentum fluctuations would possess a mixture of time- and space-like components. Depending on which protein one chooses to trace a distribution for, one deduces very different phylogenies, c.f., Genome Reseach 5 (1998): pp. 118-123. web= (http://www.arn.org/doces/odesign/od192/ls192.htm) Infinite degeneracy of the vacuum state means that an infinite number of distinct vacuum configurations corresponds to say, the same energy of 0. But what about the case of a vacuum, infinitely degenerate with respect to all physical observables? How could we meaningfully speak of these infinitely many vacuum “configurations” being “distinct?” With respect to what parameters could these degenerate vacua be distinct, if

differences between or changes in them can never register in the form of correlated difference changes to some valid, physical observable? Truth may subsist in an implicit, unprocessed form prior to experience establishing a context. Matter continually being reconstituted out of quantities of vacuum energy undergoing “tidal” flows would be observed to accelerate in a manner appropriate to this matter when experiencing a “tidal force.” Realize that there is actually “nothing present” in the component of the vacuum’s total energy density wherever the real (“spacelike” or “timelike,” depending upon one’s method of definition, i.e., relative or absolute) and imaginary (similar definitional proviso as above). The densities (of perhaps only the “unbalanced” component) of vacuum energies at two distinct locations may account for two distinct “rates of time passage.” And even though the density of the vacuum energy is globally decreasing on account of the cosmological expansion, nevertheless, no alteration in the strength of gravity or of the magnitude of the gravitational constant need result from this. An example should help to illustrate this. Say that the density of the relevant component of the vacuum’s energy were 10 parts at point A and 100 parts at point B, further away from a strong gravitating source. According to our simple equating of the relative vacuum energy density to the relative “rate of time,” if you will, during a given interval of cosmic time, if the density of the vacuum energy at point B has decreased to 90 parts, then, according to our simple relationship between density and time rates, the density of the vacuum energy at point A shall have decreased to 9 parts. Here we see that the relative difference in vacuum energies between the two points has changed from a relative difference of 90 parts to one of 89 parts. Certain culturally based truths pertaining to historically context-sensitive realities, such as those from the economic, political, or social spheres,

are truths for which the way had to be prepared and which could not possibly have been arrived at through reflection, say, on the part of some particularly gifted Stone Age thinker. The basic elements of conceptual thought would not be in place and available for application in the forming of still more processed conceptual structures. Now if it is eventually discovered that the Universe itself is shot through and through with evolutionary change to the extent even of variations, however subtle and complex, of all the known physical constants, then what we have just stated about culturally based truths should apply, also, to all of the truths we might propose to investigate, apart, perhaps, from mathematical truths – and these themselves may turn out to be questionable as truths of absolute and unwavering certainty. But along with Descartes, we must note that all of this interrogation of truth takes not at all away from the fact of the consciousness that is engaged in the act of questioning truth.

**********************************(Superfile above)*********************************

Vol.

***************************************(12-0900)******************************************** ********************************(Superfile Vol’s below)*********************************

VIII

I-VII

What is called “unknown” is relative to the comprehending mind in question, however, is this mind ultimately one and unique such that the

unknown is in some important sense itself unique and perhaps also unified? Or is the unknown itself plural because mind irreducibly is? The power of metaphorical language consists in the fact that neither speaker in a pair of communicants needs to have a correct comprehension of what either is saying for a net communication to have occurred even one placing both into a collectively more highly ordered state/cooperation. A discontinuity say, in a text, is both highly suggestive and indeterminate like a potential barrier both encouraging and discouraging quantum tunneling. Both under and over determined communications. Consciousness, being nonspatial, (but inherently temporal) seems as likely as any other to be the anchoring or fulcrum point for the dynamics of the action of the gravitation which is the movement of reality away from mind, i.e., from the temporal to the spatial through the diffeomorphism of progressive and continuous Lorenz-booting of momentum-energy manifesting itself as gravitational attraction. Consider the possibility of a cosmic time direction associated the direction along which the rate of increase of global entropy is maximal. This is to be contrasted with the direction along which the local rate of change of entropy is maximal. One can also consider the time axis defined by the direction along which the sum of the local and global rates of change of the entropy is maximal. Here we should identify the global with the nonlocal in the sense defined within Bohmian quantum mechanics. Consciousness determines the holistic conditions that in turn determine actional motions of will. A manifestation of a higher truth transcending the dual opposition and this higher truth is just the above statement, perhaps.

Indecision is combated through a cognitive mechanism of the individual consciousness. This cognitive tendency is quite the converse of the suggestibility of the social self. Most people never articulate the metaphysical elements of the paradigm informing their religious, political, and ethical beliefs or opinions. If there is any freedom of thought for such persons, it must be within that paradigm. Communication between persons or across the generations and through texts, for example, requires the sharing of context at some level. There are an unlimited number of contexts suggested by the interpretations of passages viewed in relative isolation. Passive aggressive formulations motivated by projections (from old subjects, onto new ones), what might be termed metaphysical perception. The set of intelligible propositions ought to be smaller, perhaps belonging to a lower order or class (in terms of magnitude) than the set of intelligible interpretations (propositional contexts/motivation). By far most propositions have not motivation whatever for our asserting/entertaining them. Can a love-infused everydayness prevail over theoretical insights borne of searching questions? There is local storage mechanism for handling discursive, objectoriented data which has a rendering in the form of patterned, neural firing circuits. All other information, not locally storable as a whole, should not be stored piecemeal as this would cause interference or disruption of functioning of local memory circuits. With the advent of an agricultural based, stable civilization, selective pressure for this mnemonic filtering mechanism was much reduced, and nonlocal,

insight-based information could now be accessed more generally by the individual tribal member. So only nonlocal, individual consciousnesses transcending information was placed into nonlocal storage. Nonlocal realm is beyond space and time and therefore beyond individuation, c.f., Schopenhauer’s, Will and Representation. Without an individual reference for the information, it could be combined with that from other sources. So is individuation by reference only and therefore a mere abstraction. Consciousness is just context of object and would-be objects, this context must either regress infinitely or “bootstrap” itself. The bootstrap structure would be infinite and bounded. Somehow multiple bootstrapping from a single, unitary process is logically inconsistent. The depth and breadth of the meanings that we find ourselves faced with contemplating are such dimension are surely at work. But if these context are purely constructive than whence arises their substance? Normality and naturalness of the human visage as the prime index of what Deridda terms “presence.” The sense of presence is disrupted when the subject’s personality becomes dissociated. SonicNet2 only loads those elements from the Internet not already stored locally. So only change exists in the sense of “the act of existing.” What is indifferent to the passage of time (untouched by change) commits no “act of existing.” But is Being itself founded in an act? The individual person, developing within the realm of individuation, i.e., space and time, begins from a relatively amorphous, inchoate state, and gradually becomes more highly ordered, after the fashion of a crystallization. There are always two distinct ways to understand this incipient, inchoate state, namely as being either underdetermined or overdetermined. Subjective

music

categories

by

phase

within

one’s

personal

history/biography. Not intersubjective categorization? Can coherence/ cohesiveness of the same structure evolve? Does possessing “a particular” consciousness have content, devoid of all content Meme theory as an important aid in deconstructing metaphysical presence; is meme theory adequate for deconstructing really holistic entities? And are all such entities merely kwd=reifications? The “just so stories” of evolutionary theory explain the tinkering but not the coherence and robustness of that which is tinkered together. If the DNA molecule did not embody an intelligible code and one possessing multiple, and perhaps unfathomable, levels of description, we might suppose that a sufficient cause of evolutionary order might be embodied in some exhaustive set of purely “external” conditions. But this would be to forget that the external so-called, is at least partly constituted and ordered through the action of one of its crowning, alleged products, i.e., the human brain. Bertrand Russell said that physical laws describe how nature happens to behave, rather than “governing” anything. But can Russell really be right? What about the physical laws describing consciousness producing/structuring systems? A description that acts as an interpretative metaphor and as a seed or kernel in guiding and being guided by the theory-experiment observation cycle can hardly be the passive knowledge structure as described by Russell. The message as interpretative metaphor (itself caught up in the dialectic of interpretation/hermeneutical circle) occupies the opposite end of the communication spectrum from the animal produced signal, which merely enables a predetermined, programmed, genetically determined instinctive response. Instinctive itself is presumably still evolving so we should expect there

to exist some variation (very wide, across a sufficiently large population or instinctual makeup within humankind. On account of the spontaneous potential of the human will to cause quantum state vector reduction, the action of will (or conscious intention) cannot be determined through the deterministic evolution of some quantum mechanical wavefunction, e.g., that describing the brain or subsystems of the brain, etc. of any potential human observer. Comparing our general state of consciousness as we conceive of it (within our present consciousness!) nowadays with its general state of say, 10 years ago; this difference appears to us as one of distinct patterns of texture infused knowledge and our present state of consciousness is informed by experience not possessed of the former self, just as the former self is possessed of understanding and conceptions, though somehow relatively narrower, themselves informed by experience in many cases largely forgotten by the present self. However, such a comparison of two states of consciousness, both sufficiently removed in time from the present one which contemplates them, as well as sufficiently so removed from each other, has the feeling and suggestion of two states of consciousness not only differing in the knowledge and experience infusing/suffusing them, but also of possessing distinctly variant substances/being. We should qualify Schopenhauer’s assertion that individuation presupposes space and time by saying rather, that this ins true for infinite individuation only. Mathematically, any finite division of the unitary (or unified) infinite may itself constitute a finite number of distinct infinities (distinct only with respect to the particular manner of the dividing each of which remains unified presumably along an (infinity – n) number of potentially distinct lines. In some sense, therefore, finite division of the infinite makes for no real division at all. If order did not descend from the infinite through qualification (downward-telescoping and therefore grounded/contextualized), then it

ascended from not nothingness but from chaos. What are the moral and ethical implications of an order out of chaos theory of order (creation) given what we already know about such implications of a theisticallybased created order? Is all social interaction grounded within some kind of spell or momentum, and is the goal of the responsible/practical realist simply to enhance and extend the duration of lifetime of such momentums, the ending of which we recognize via glimpsing the decay, collapse or undermining of the sustaining ground of a meshwork of boundary conditions, e.g., social, political, economic, cultural, linguistic, etc.? “Perhaps the transient tension in the coiling of circumstances has become denatured in some kind of vacuum.” “Primum mobile” originates disturbances that spread through already extant continuum, collapse the Psi function but doesn’t explain the preexistence of the system Psi describes. Will that is unopposed acts through the medium of its own substance, not at all through the substance of another, and only with difficulty through the medium composed of the interoperability of distinct substances. Here we have the notion of internal versus external distincguishability. If the consciousness of the invidual is truly unitary, then there seems no good reason for a kind of “interior room” or representational continuum in which images are cast. 

reviewing of conclusion, finished product resulting from a collective or collaborative effort.



inercommunicaiton between subpersons, multiple occupants, etc.



final draft of experience after components have been optimally fitted together is surveyed so that inconsistencies or contradictions, not present at any of various lower levels, may be identified.

Do the objects of the imagination ever acquire any kind of independent, mental existence, over and above that of the conditions within the mind that originally produced them? Truth that is unified may surely only be grasped by an infinite may surely only be grasped by an infinite or transcendental mind or, shall we say being. This being, grasping the unified truth that is, by thus encompassing it, must be beyond it, and so such a being is beyond unity, beyond being itself unified and hence the plurality of transcendental being. Can truth be a unity, when one among the truths it subsumes is just that there is more than one truth – at least two equally valid senses of truth must then be possible, one transcendent and myriad’s immanent? In consciousness, there is no limit to the unity of truth. We readily accept indeterminacy interpretation of classical counterfactuals, e.g., prevented accidents (say, through adoption of changed industrial operational procedures) during a company’s last reported fiscal year, etc., but we seem to have difficulty in grasping or accepting an indeterminacy-based interpretation of quantum probability amplitudes (for events that actually are observed) as being somehow radically counterintuitive. Do so-called actual events, possessing a probability of unity, i.e., 1.0, have some special ontological status vis a vis events possessing probabilities falling in the interval 0.0 < x < 1.0. And what about events with probability = 0.0 – special ontological status here as well? In the absence of sufficient boundary conditions, an amplitude cannot even be defined. The dynamics of the real proceeds with or without

boundary conditions. Does this make of ñ just an accounting device? A dissertation of the buddhistic notion of “monkey mind” may be in order at some stage. The Word ~ Monotheism (Polytheism, with Monotheism as a special case?) The Breath ~ Pantheism, but consider that the breath may either be imbued or not with “resonance.” Resonance of the breath presupposes that it is subject to some set of finite boundary conditions. Perhaps this is a good example of metaphor guiding rather than leading us down a garden path. So what literal entity is suggested by the metaphor, breath without resonance? If the quantum state of the observer’s brain and the quantum state of the system observed are merely in mutual superposition, then how can robust, stable and cohesive (as opposed to merely coherent) objects “manifest” themselves? Would not continual feedback, i.e., mutual participation of these two quantum systems, one “objective” and the other, “subjective,” disrupt this superposition, converting it into a statistical mixture? Intersubjective – between subjects and subjective ~ between a subject and the “non-subject.” On account of the spontaneous potential of the human will to cause quantum state vector reduction, the action of will (or conscious intention) cannot be determined through the deterministic evolution of some quantum mechanical wavefunction, e.g., that describing the brain or subsystems of the brain, etc. of any potential human observer. The cognitive filters (representations) that we implement in investigating nature influences the representations through which she answers back just as does the manner in which we act upon her influences the manner in which nature reacts to our probings.

Coherence is composed of two parts, attract, binding to, or communication with a center on one hand and repulsion, disconnection or insensitivity to an outside realm. An unlimited number of distinct structurings of the individual’s consciousness. But how does consciousness register “within itself” the various modifications that it undergoes (caused by both itself and that which is other than itself) without at the same time undergoing an alteration in its self same identity. The phenomenon of quantum mechanical tunneling is probably far more general than just the tunneling of a particle “through” a potential energy barrier larger than the particle’s classically determined kinetic energy. We may speak of an entire quantum system “tunneling” from one state to another in which the “potential” is “abstract,” i.e., of some kind other than that of the original context, that is, energy. Perhaps some kinds of thoughts are of deterministic origin, i.e., reducible while others are not, i.e., nondeterministic and irreducible. Perhaps all sins of commission are at some deeper level of description really of the omission type. A sin is committed through the failure of ever higher levels of will and consciousness to properly channel or stifle, as the case may be, some action prompted by simpler subsystems of the psyche or their lower level coordination. If the differences between individual consciousnesses, or between whatever makes for these differences, cannot be overcome in the sense of such differences subsisting within some larger category (than that constituted by each, individual consciousness), then the distinction which we have supposed subsists between the mental in general and the physical in general becomes problematic and unsupportable. If distinctions are the products of cognitive-rational-linguistic processes then these distinctions are the traces of acts of abstracting and categorization subsisting within a domain in which such differences are

naturally overcome. But such cannot rightly be supposed to be the case where a distinction of ontology (or being) is concerned. A distinction of this sort which readily suggests itself is that of “physical” versus “mental.” Clearly the number of potential human minds is vastly greater than is the numer of actual or perhaps even the number of possible human brains. This being the case, we might wonder how the selection is effected of the particular potential human mind that becomes actualized from amongst those “equally viable” candidates upon there being instituted some particular actual, functioning human brain-physiological structure. Do the “candidates” decide among themselves which will “answer the call” to take up a residence within the space and time of this particular human existence? And how might we suppose that the individual candidates could know that each belongs to the same class, as it were, in order to identify with whom to convene? Is decision ever reached by each and everyone concerned not to form from among their number any connection at all? @$We have been assuming here throughout that a human brain must always be degenerate with respect to some class of individual consciousness. So here we have unwittingly invoked the notion of class within the field of choice (participation) as opposed to that of representation. Abstract representation is the domain of rational consciousness, participation, that of the will. AS the historical working out of arbitrary will is interpreted through representation of the collective rationality of the (irrational) individual metaphor is transubstantiated into concept. Equivocation of sense is the foundation of both what is insightful as well as nonsensical in the process of creative thinking, and moreover by pointing up the determinative influence of inherited linguistic structures common to both performances, inadvertently demonstrates the necessary transcendence of language by thought which is inspired as opposed to

misguided. So metaphor guides thought to greater heights as much as it influences the production of misguided thinking. And so although metaphor may still be supposed to constitute the substance of mind, both rational and irrational, the substance of reason may, paradoxically enough, be both broader and deeper than that of mind as such even though reason clearly appears to be but one among many of mind’s diverse functions! This may be because reason is only a function of mind by virtue of the mind’s invoking of reason. Each person possesses an ineradicable, organic defect in his personality. This defect is almost exactly analogous to the blind spot of the retina where the myriad nerves of this organ of sight bundle together to form the optic nerve. Once one has submitted to the conditions that would determine a departure from inaction, at once a hypnotic forgetfulness takes hold of one and one is propelled forward within the moment, reacting all the while to what is locally occurring and what is stored in memory concerning earlier “local occurrences.” Going through the motions, pro forma-listic life style of weak-willed, characterless individuals. Relationships between metaphysics and morals. Higher levels of (impulse) control and the art of successful living. Looking to circumstances and other persons for an explanation of one’s difficulties, failure, unhappiness, etc. Taking things too personally. Preoccupations

with

conventional

definitions,

e.g.,

success,

attractiveness, spirituality, etc. Spiritual vacuity. Temporality, probability, sample size and their entangled interconnectedness. The problem of mainstreaming probability models in regulatory risk evaluation. The importance of sampling window endpoints and their sensitivity to initial conditions. “Hard cases make bad law” goes the old saying from the rhetoric of the abortion debate. But worst case scenarios (“hard cases”) make for sound regulations. Does this point up an important feature in the distinction of law from regulation? Discuss how technology affects morals, politics, culture, etc., by simply changing the boundary conditions to human impulses. Fantasy Football, Sports Stats knowledge, etc. as important concerns of so-called normal, mainstream, middle class males. Does quantum chaos or the dynamism of this chaos enter into the anharmonic resonating spaces of the consciousness, spontaneously forming ordered structures that somehow manage to represent the structure of the boundary conditions which they have quit before reaching us? The essence (or substance) of consciousness is metaphor. The application of conscious, i.e., will, is free because there can be no rule or law governing the conceiving of a metaphor other than the fancy of a particular person, subject but not determined by the conditions in which the person finds himself. Examples: the skeleton guides the development of the softer tissues, and so on, e.g., the blood vessels, nerves, connective tissues, etc. are normal even within a hand or foot which exhibits severe polydactyla. The

feedback control structure here exhibits a kind of military command and control structure. Is a similar mechanism involved in the interpretation by the sleeping brain of signals filtered from its randomly discharging brain stem. The monkey ideates as though his most tenuous and subjective associations represent some kind of objective logical inference to which only he has privileged access. The direction of time for consciousness is nearly orthogonal to the perceived direction of time. It should go without saying, that if there is a “mechanism” that underlies the dynamics of consciousness’ sustainment as such, that such a mechanism’s action could not possibly be verbally or discursively articulated. Palimpsest is guided by more than one idea sometimes this is revision and sometimes just reusing of the data medium. Logic of revision is not contained within that of exposition guided by a unified idea. What truth is the simplest and yet hardest to glimpse, which is irreducible because uncreated – that truth most directly under our own noses? Consciousness. Can there be any distinction between consciousness of individual and consciousness as such. Discuss Monkey-nature and narcissism/egotism. positive feedback of these projections.

Projection and

Evil possesses a wanton and willful main component, but also a component of senselessness, c.f., vague ideation of hurting the innocent. Is all differentiation just the splitting, i.e., “breaking” of degeneracy’s (symmetry’s)? As the mind evolves its internal symmetry (and hence, order) grows causing a relatively fixed stock of discursive symbols to become more highly linguistically degenerate.

You can’t hold water during the spin cycle. If evil is nothing more nor less than the notable absence of good, that is, the absence of good in situations where we have come to expect its appearance, then vil becomes reduced to an abstract category subsuming all posible instances in wihc good is not “resent.” But this still leaves open the possibility that good itself might still be something more than a mere abstraction, namely that goodness might nevertheless possess a kind of essence. We have discussed already asome of the key differences between what is called an essence and what we term as merely an abstract category or abstraction. But to recap, an abstraction delimits and subsumes a variety of representations (of some “thing” that may itself be projective and nothing more than theoretical or may be alternatively of some essence). An Essence, on the other hand can only provisionally and heuristically be understood in terms of an abstract category, but must be supposed to possess some at least partially independent and self-sustaining being and consequently an active organizing principle, i.e., some ability to bring order to chaos. Of course goodness might possess an essence by virtue of a consistent feature of some broader essence. In other words, the principle of organization of goodness might be external to itself. But goodness may only be after all an idea that survives by being subserved by impulses, motives and feeling that in the final analysis are extraneous and ulterior to its abstractly stated principle. A perfect illustration of this might be the phenomenon of capitalism based upon collective, rational self-interest. January 2013 The essence of being human is always having an ulterior motive. We might ask whether the Universe has always and shall always possess the potential or capacity for producing my particular, allegedly unique, state of conscious awareness. If not, then what is altered or exhausted within the continuum as a result of historical interaction of my consciousness with “the rest of the Universe?”

Contrast the convergence of phenomenon of a certain type within a given locality with the concerted manifestation of phenomena by a being acting locally through or within a particular region of spacetime. C. S. Lewis has said that good succeeds in being good with far greater success than evil succeeds in being bad. So for Lewis evil or “Evil” is just goodness perverted. Being vs. existence contrasted with the duality. Ought vs. should. Perhaps the phenomenon of conscience is just as inherently mysterious as that of consciousness itself. Parallel to the above distinctions of being/existence and ought/should is that of essence/abstraction, as well as that of concrete vs. formal unity. A given truth is but a nexus or locus for the growth of context-based knowledge and is therefore, open-ended and transcendental in the sense that this truth, shorn of its various outgrowths, is not itself anything that can be captured within an articulate description. Only truths subject to conditions may be described. A massive body is attracted ceteris paribus toward a region of spacetime in which its binding energy is greater, away from the region in which this binding energy is lesser. In tandem with this we should state that such bodies move (accelerate) toward regions of spacetime in which the “velocity of time” is relatively reduced and the velocity within the spatial component of spacetime is increased. Metaphors are intended to connote what could have been denoted by other means. Conceivable Possible

practical

Impossible

poetic

inconceivable transcendent ?

C.f., @ page 51 of black sketchbook for diagrams of two contrasts of actual theory versus proposed new theory. Metaphysics as collection of existence plausibility arguments (as opposed to “existence proofs” per se) for “the gods’ “ conception of a given true proposition concerning aspects of the nature of ultimate reality. All statements of literal or denotative truth may be later interpreted to have secretly possessed all along a larger significance by virtue of a metaphysical reference to some broader context. The construction (piecemeal) and reinforcement, perhaps over a great length of time, of a kind of linkage structure within some original, pragmatic or instrumental context may serve at some later occasion as a template to catalyze the seeming self-organization of analogous elements within some initially incommensurate, chaos-laden domain of activity, suggesting the presence of some internal principle of system integrity and coherence (i.e., principle of “internal unity”) which though appearing as self-sustaining, is actually being maintained through the continuous application from outside the system of a set of interpretive filters and negative feedback inputs in which the circuits are completed always from outside the system itself. The consciousness of the individual person possesses much greater prospect for importantly back-reacting upon the person’s brain physiological processes, and moreover possessing intrinsic continuity (likely very important factor in sustaining personal identity over time – especially through the discontinuities or potential disruptions introduced by the continually replaced and reshuffled of the material components, and subsystems, etc. of the physical brain), if consciousness is not merely a pseudo- or “projective” substance continuously engendered by brain activity, but possesses a partially independent existence (or being) is only structured via such brain activity.

There is not a continuum that contains both of an indefinite plurality of distinct, individual consciousnesses by virtue of a commonality of their embeddedness. Sustainment of a consciousness’ origination within time (as opposed to it s origination wholly outside of time) must, at least in part, outstrip an equivalent description of the function of this consciousness within the frequency domain. Existence and “nonexistence” are merely distinct modes of greatest disparateness of (a single) being. The unity displayed by a plurality of existents, however concerted be their (necessarily indirect) interaction/interrelationship shall never approach the unity of manifesting on the part of a single such being. And this connection of manifestations solely by virtue of their stemming and having stemmed from the selfsame, identical being constitutes the irreducible residue of connectedness, which passes beyond all possible characterization – the commonality of authorship here falls utterly outside the bounds of discursive reason and is fundamentally irrational. The relatedness of disparate beings consists in no more than the consistency of the interaction of their respective beds of manifestation relative to the mutually and collectively constituted continuum into which each projects its local, temporal image. If ground does not participate in the manifestations that it engenders, if substance is indifferent to the temporality evinced by its manifold, “accidents,” then there can hardly be any sufficient reason for attributing to a substance or ground any ownership of its various accidents or manifestations. Of course, returning to the state from which consciousness originally arose, makes things just as though this consciousness had never “existed” at all. The human brain, as a metabolizing organ, a utilizer of ordered energy,

(in the form of molecules of ATP), is continually generating entropy – just like any other thermodynamic heat engine. However, the brain does this while at the same time it continually generates new quantities of information. Unlike what is called “negentropy,” the flow of that is theoretically reducible to concomitant flows of entropy, the negation of information does not truly fulfill a role as entropy – the negation of data fulfills that role. In other words, the production of information by a thinking, perceiving human brain cannot be consistently modeled as the flow of uncertainty (quantum mechanical or otherwise) out of this information-engendering organ. Love’s illusion of its self-sustainment out of an integral wholeness is quickly enough dispelled once the possession of its object is irretrievably past. And the jealousy seemingly borne of love is usually unmasked as that of mere possessiveness and the resistance of the ego to a tangible symbol of its impending deflation. If most theistic, so-called “believers” would just for a moment contemplate the proposition of God’s reputed “Existence” dispassionately, that is, without necessary linkage of this proposition to the psychologically necessary corollary of the individual soul’s immortality, many might gain for perhaps the first time an honest glimpse of the ontological insecurity that partly (and importantly) comprises the unique endowment of the human species. Barring the possibility of some overarching, superconsciousness within which each individual consciousness may be, metaphorically speaking, placed one next to another, permitting a systematic, comparative study, no abstract (in the proper sense) features of consciousness per se, as opposed to structurings of this consciousness, are determinable. If the registering of new thoughts and perceptions by persons acting within the context of human experience is tantamount to the performance of some small packet or bit of metaphysical work, then it only makes sense that the explorations of metaphysical explanation should be preoccupied with the application of metaphor, specifically analogy. The give-and-take between respective subjectivities that

underpins the realm of the intersubjective that each in turn therein takes up its conditional (and conditioning) being (i.e., existence), cannot itself be a process that possesses an intersubjective description that adequately accounts for its dynamics. The doctrine that reality is one is at once to imply that there is no room in reality or Being for more than one substance. The further implication of this is that if soul as such exists, the totality of Being is constituted by the being of just this one soul and that therefore the notion of a plurality of beings (as opposed to mere existents) is just a contradiction too broad and deep to be grasped by any being itself in the absence of all conditions, i.e., “illumination.” Having exercised the metaphysical presence (“larger-than-life-likeness) of some feature, thing, person, institutions, whatever, one might say that what has taken place is the deconstructing of some fetishized object. Essence differs from abstract category in the important sense where the various differences in detail between the members of the respective class which are suppressed for purpose of defining an abstract category are altogether lost while these distinctive details remain latent and potentially active/responsive in the case of the determination of an essence. One might characterize the distinction here by noting that an essence is a diachronic, abstract category (abstraction), and an abstract category is an example of a synchronic essence. So the process by which categories are generally brought into being (the very highest level of abstraction) is itself not an abstraction but an essence, namely, the essence of some particular person. So the notion of a person is that of a kind of diachronic and cohesive (if not altogether “coherent”) category. @$ And there is no concept of personhood as such because the details that must be suppressed in order to define the category, person are just those points in which the tentative members of the would-be class, persons become the persons that they transcendentally are. In other words, I am a person through the possession of all of those attributes that make me unique, that is, distinct from that possessed any and all other persons

(and would-be persons). “Anything you know about can’t be you,” or, “The map is not the territory,” au=Alfred Korzybski. Human consciousness is expansive and open in the sense that we can imagine how our very consciousness and sense of ourselves, both individually and collectively would-be radically changed in light of unprecedented historical events, e.g., the visitation of Earth by vastly superior beings, e.g., technologically advanced extraterrestrials. But consciousness is very limited, but possessing great potential in the sense that there are many such unprecedented happenings that we have not and presently cannot conceive of – still less, the impact such events might have upon human consciousness. As au=J. B. S Haldane remarked, “either there’s intelligent life on other planets or we are alone – either way the implications are staggering”. An interesting thing about human consciousness is that logically, since we know that one of these two alternative is true, we should be exhilarated, however, generally speaking no one is. It is as though the natural emotional reactions to either contingency cancel each other out. The human mind cannot somehow embrace two mutually exclusive alternatives and just a generalized agitation results as in the case of gamblers awaiting the outcome of a sizeable bet in a contest which now appears it can go either way. We may contrast those who view divine being as an outward and upward projection of earthly existence into heavenly being with those who view human existence in a manner just the converse of this. The state of conscious awareness is the manifest or, more usually, latent state of priviness to and copresence with the process of the activity of divine creative, sustaining power that underlies the metaphysical and moral universe. The process of evolution can be intelligently guided in the direction of greater good, even without the prefiguring of some determinate, desired

outcome. Now in terms of the proper application of the general term (example of abstract category), instinctive, many human behaviors are freely (as opposed to spontaneously?) perpetrated and so are not (properly) described as being instinctive or “instinctual.” But understanding the term “instinctive” or “instinctual” as denoting an essence (rather than an abstract category), we might say that the behavior of all animals are instinctual in the sense of being instinctually driven. Here intelligence or “ratio,” c.f., Aristotle’s claim that man is a “rational animal,” is understood to be as much an adaptation of an evolutionary process as is the application of intelligence. On this view, since intelligent behavior is still instinctual behavior and “intelligent” and “instinctual” are dually counterpoised, we should say that intelligent behavior is a general or abstract feature of certain types of instinctual behavior. Humanity may be divided into two categories in terms of how human beings handle suffering, adversity, humiliation, disillusionment, failure, frustration, i.e., as a prideful god being imposed upon or, as a humble servant being developed, tried and tested. August 2013 epi=

Be compassionate toward the smug and the cocksure. Their sense of loss is greater than for humbler folk, who count their blessings.

Is self-awareness just one among many possible particular structurings of consciousness or, is it a peculiarly special structuring of the same in which it is important, perhaps, that it is a structuring produced by the very same brain processes that are productive of whatever this self consciousness is a structuring of? epi=

Essence is partly comprised of (historical) origin, substance and continuity, none of which can hardly be submitted to a complete characterization in terms of formal categories. Certainly if we encountered particles possessing the very same

interaction and transformation properties as some of the already discovered elementary, subatomic particles, but of much larger spatiotemporal scale, say, approximating that of billiard balls or, perhaps even smallish planetoids, a hypothesis as to the intelligent design of these objects might easily turn out to be the favored opinion among all the so-called experts. The question here then becomes: how do we explain the psychological significance of spatiotemporal scale in our subjective impressions of these objects as being either of “natural” or supernatural origin? Compassion and wisdom cannot grow but little without a necessary tension existing between desire and obligation, consciousness and will, effort and result that is encountered both within the self and witnessed being played out within the other. How else could character be revealed and realized? Only that which by its formal nature possesses a possible design basis may be built into the created order. Somehow the attempt to form a crystalline, determinate order inevitably engenders discontinuities. The incarnation, ministry, crucifixion, death and resurrection of Christ, effecting (at least in potentia) the reversal of the erstwhile and would-be fate of all of Mankind, precipitated originally by the effective coupling of this powerful, symbolic act to a pervading, metaphysical transformation. The question arises as to whether or not brain processes, taking place at the relevantly substantive level, (e.g., spatiotemporal scale of physical reality) produce their effect, i.e., individual conscious states, i.e., through their symbolic significance (within a preexistent “microlinguistic” structure). Free will is a tool of instinct. Speculate upon the lessons learned about humans by studying mouse behavior. The so-called unity of consciousness is just the fine grain of the mind’s modularity. Self as

projection of survival focal vanishing point. Give a few remarks concerning the psychology of the human belief in substance. Discuss the distinction between essence and abstract category. Essence may be thought of as a concrete concept, as a concept that possesses coherence, cohesiveness, integral wholeness, and a capacity for growth and development. An abstract category may be thought of as sometimes a kind of shadow cast within a projective space of a corresponding essence and at other times, a pure illusion, i.e., not even the shadow of an essence, but the shadow cast by an object implied, pointed to, but which actually possesses no being, i.e., does not exist. Explanations succeed because of the background within which the relations inhere. This is also true in the case of any proper “explanation” of consciousness. Speculate upon a “Sheldrakean” explanation of human consciousness. Ought arising from is and consciousness arising from earthly creation show Will and Representation arising together. Individual substances possess no extension (projective spatiality), but in concert with one another, collectively, spatiality, as a merely relative (and therefore unconserved) quantity projective spaces are constructed and sustained. The arising of mind from matter is just as mysterious as the emergence of “ought” from “is,” c.f., Kant’s reflection on what he considered to be the two greatest mysteries of human existence, i.e., “the starry heavens above and the moral law within?” For a proper science of consciousness to exist as apiece with a larger

multidisciplinary, unified science, the very fabric of the conceptual mapping of reality would have to be dramatically altered – hence, the implication of the existence of secret, higher knowledge, and therefore, by implication, the being (or beings) to possess this knowledge. For knowledge to exist, does there always have to be a mind somewhere in which it “subsists?” In other words, if knowledge is ultimately not abstract and formal, then it requires continuity as part of its basis. If this secret scientific knowledge is not reducible to intersubjective (and abstract structures of relations), then only the most developed possible consciousness, the existence of which is suggested/implied here. God’s giving of himself in instilling his breath in Adam and his giving of himself (in the body) are somehow one and the same act. Violent depictions are not harmful to the mature, developed mind, in and of themselves, but without proper context and guiding explanation/interpretation, it can be positively inimical to the developing soul. Original Sin and the fall of Man continually arises anew in each human person’s biography, in each generation. So it is not original sin itself that disseminates – just its variations. There is a transcendentally separate time for each individual consciousness. There is no universal simultaneity in relativity theory. The fact of nonlocality that is both limited and infinite implies the existence of distinct internally coherent quantum vacua. Interacting partitions of Heisenberg uncertainty as providing a possible solution to the late time normalization paradox (related to the argument for Heisenberg uncertainty) originating with the quantum vacuum, rather than with real particles themselves. The monkey ideates as though his most tenuous and subjective associations represent some kind of objective logical inference to which

only he has privileged access. Reality is –istic and –ological indefinite, ambiguous, and overdetermined. Only abstract features are coherent (formally). Intrinsic coherence/cohesiveness does not have a consistent formal description. Will-phenomena are not reducible to a representation because Will and Representation form with one another a duality, c.f., au= Schopenhauer’s Will and Representation. A healthy growth pattern for the self is one which is outwardtelescoping. One is continually placing the events of one’s (and their pattern) into a larger context. The determinism of individual drama acted out in a heroic setting (c.f., heroes of Greek Myths/Legends versus liberation of the posthistorical/analytical, spectator-like perspective of the Olympian gods. I was the mouse too smart/cautious to try to take the cheese from the trap. Sometimes one must telescope inward assuming a smaller, more earthbound identity in order to get one’s embodied self through the trial/tribulation. Wisdom fondly recollects its youth just as a God contemplates the trials and adventures of his favorite earthly hero. Is intense emotion rooted in the breaking from below of the creature (monkey) or a piercing of the veil of one’s personal heaven by the god embedding one’s being. @$Sartre says that emotion is an attempt to realize one’s desire by magic. It is much more likely that spatiality is a construct of consciousness than consciousness being a construct of completely within spatiality.

The phenomenon of emergence involves the gradual development of new sustaining, mediating ground, which is progressively independent of the ground from which the interacting elements were originally derived. Emergence means the development of internal degrees of freedom, not commensurate with the degrees of freedom of the ingredient constituents of the system. September 2011 Chaos is the ground of ground of existence while deiy is the ground of being. A sensitive, reactive and dynamic medium of delicate balance and coordination that helped the organism respond as quickly and flexibly as possible to a sudden change in environment. Through a feedback process, this medium came to take on a life and will of its own. If such distinctions as those obtaining between, say, wisdom and love are in the final analysis reducible, then human existence per se, “the human drama” is itself an illusion of no objective reality and the redundancy of consciousness, i.e., its indefinitely multiple realization in the lives of countless myriad’s of human beings who have been born of this Earth, striven upon it for a time, and fallen back unto ruin – these shall have all been the fanciful productions of some solitary cosmic being. In this case, the experiences of one person do not become combined with those of any other and there is no such thing as a possible larger meaning for the experiences of individual human beings beyond what they themselves gave to these experiences. The overlapping duplicities of the physical world and the world of consciousness in which physical objects are artifacts of consciousness, intersubjectivity and the indeterminacy and nonlocality of wavefunctions of quantum mechanical systems are manifestations of consciousness that infuses the physical. New data sets as potential templates for the reprocessing of data/information. All information is also data for reprocessing. What is the reprocessing potential of human experience that makes it so metaphysically open-ended?

Tipler’s idea of the Omega Point as a point of reprocessing and uploading of human experience by and into the cosmic central processing unit. Processing is to reprocessing as individual human experience is to what? Like Jack Handey’s “Deep Thoughts” much though that passes for brilliant is at once inspired and totally misguided. This observation would tend to make us very curious about what essentially makes for inspiration if, indeed, there is something besides commonly possessed phenomenological features to the phenomenon of inspiration. A phenomenon as such prompts us to dig down into its causal basis, etiology (in the case of a “pathology”), or its other possible *-logical foundations. Good versus rehabilitated evil, Evil versus fallen goodness. handwritten notes)

(C.f.,

Frailty of the body and mind in others can inspire the impulse to cull weaklings from the litter, i.e., feelings of sadistic cruelty, or it can inspire impulses to be solicitous, pity, compassion, profound concern, i.e., feelings of nurturing. Can a criminal human person be both unfortunate victim of society on whom we should direct mercy and compassion and a sadistic aggressor/predator to be stamped out in a most harsh and prejudicial manner, much like an animal lover dispatches a rabid dog? Imagine a stick figure theater production about an unloved stick figure human being. This would be an excellent subject of study within a psychology experiment in which experimental participants’ subjective reactions to what they are viewing is gauged and recorded. Participants are classified into two categories, as being either compassionate or rejecting (toward the unfortunate stick figure.

We might question whether such a sympathetic character actually exists since human beings very quickly adapt to a harsh and unsympathetic social environment by becoming themselves harsh and unsympathetic, c.f., “nobody ever gave a damn about me, so why in the hell should I help you!” But perhaps this fact should only compound, rather than reduce our feelings of compassion for members of the downtrodden, homeless underclass. Such might point up the difference between true compassion or love versus the lower sentiment of mere pity. Attacking the genealogy of an idea in terms of previous religious or sociopolitical context in which this idea was originally conceived or developed hardly constitutes the adequate makings for the idea’s refutation. A asks B a question about what B values, which can possess only one answer appropriate to the value judgement of B made by A. Now A and B have both for some time been engaged in social-bonding talk and although each from his part understands this to be the case, one or both nonetheless attributes a fact – reporting communicative intent to the other. What is paradoxical about this is that the whole point of engaging in social-bonding talk is that the other participant with oneself in the discussion is himself doing likewise. Data processing based on quantum tunneling should not interfere with the execution of the brain’s commands to contract this or that collection of muscle fibers (which is effected by purely classical/physical means), but can be either filtered out as structureless noise/spurious inputs. There is nothing elsewhere in the brain, in the sense of classical force or momentum that is used by or can account for the fact of an electron or ion tunneling across the potential difference across a neural, synaptic cleft. On the logarithmic scale of brain processing power there is hardly any

measurable difference/ quantitatively between the thought processes of a “genius” versus those of a “certifiable moron.” It is the character and quality of a thought and not so much its difficulty level (by some scientifically based quantitative measure) that provokes the response of terming something “brilliant.” True self organization is not spontaneous assembly of some coherent structure according to some preexisting algorithm, but the spontaneous assembly of both the algorithm and the structure that is to henceforth be its realization. So self-organization can only truly occur within an open system (one not possessing a determinate structure and dynamics) whose action is mediated via nonlocal and nondeterministic reactions and interactions, i.e., processes. Teleology within an open system, i.e., “incomplete” in a plenipotential sense, necessitates an imaginative faculty of will. Similar to our observation about the fact of thought (as such) possessing no abstract description, we might make the observation that entityhood (in the sense of “physical” objects) would not admit an explication in terms of the kinematics and dynamics of entities. Without an established framework of categorical distinctions and recipes for interpretation and action, one is free to develop one’s own system of distinction and supporting justificatory system of implications, c.f., conversation with Blaise Guzzardo concerning responsibility for violations cited against Allison Marine. Discuss the virtue and unintended consequences of a regulatory system, c.f., Microsoft Windows hourglass icon (the predictable “unpredictability” of its appearance on one’s computer desktop. The aura that some of these longstanding philosophical questions have about them is a feeling that less than one order of magnitude would suffice to make their answer ludicrously easy. Many smart people secretly perceive this fact and this perhaps explains the phenomenal lack

of interest in philosophical or metaphysical questions that us philosophy crazed fish questioning the strange substance in which we breath, swim and have our being, (could this be a metaphor for the relationship philosophers have to their own ordinary states of consciousness?) take in such questions. Or perhaps each of these philosophical truths, if correctly stated, would take the form of an exceedingly complex theorem, the truth of which, is not even meant to ever be grasped as a unified and whole insight. There is some gimmick to there solution, conceivable to some preternatural human intellect, which, if it could be conveyed to any philosophically interested person, would perhaps produce an aha experience that one would soon enough assimilate. The profound absence of interest that “ordinary smart people” exhibit concerning questions that are searching and fascinating for many of us not so smart but having been bit by the existence-questioning bug. Truth versus dissemination paradox of the Christian notion of a personal evil (Satan). Frenzied, impulsive behavior of persons who allow the creature to take over and direct their behavior. The question is whether each individual person possesses his own ground for his own being or whether his consciousness is simply supervenient over the causal processes of his own brain function. So much of interpretation, symbolic representation, manipulation must be instinctive or un-selfconscious as there is so much complexity of structure to both semantics/ syntax in human communication which has been mastered only up to a simplistic level via mimesis, but which then seems to develop on its own dynamic, evolutionary (geneticallyprogrammed?) path.

Still less can any explanation for the subtlety and virtuosity of human linguistic and nonverbal communication be accounted for in terms of any available formed instruction. Jesus said, “He who gives up his life gains it and he who saves his own life loses it..” Now if one believed this statement to be literal fact with certainty, then the very logic underlying the supernatural power, the operation of which, this saying of Jesus describes, should be rendered null and void. But if one “merely” believes this statement through faith to be somehow importantly metaphorically true ( say in some transcendent, hyperliteral or, larger than life sense, then the logic of Jesus’ saying has room within which to manifest its most profound truth. So on this new earthly life for the Christian take place within a merely metaphorical setting in which the choices each makes possesses metaphysical or reality-building/defining importance. Feedback structure in which the boundary between phenomena and ground is both approximate and relative and based on historical continuity of this feedback stretching back far enough so that reaveraging effects are negligible or unmeasurable. And the postulate of objective measurability is inconsistent with non-negligible effects of historicity of entanglement of distinct causal levels of description. An example of supervenience (of a statistical law over a causal process) might be that of the tenacity of normalizability of the wavefunction. Discuss the phenomenon of “feminine machismo” and its general symptom of an almost schizoid feminine duplicity. Examine this phenomenon in the particular example of the prioritizing of characteristic to be desired in a prospective mate (vs. lover vs. victim selected during “a girls’ night out.” Because of this duplicity engendered by a conflict between the individual woman’s own substantive needs/requirements vs. those of the group held by proxy, it is almost always fruitless to attempt to cut a

woman out of and away from “the pack.” ; ; October 2013 fcbk=

Sam, there was probably no way that Colin Wilson could have kept the suspense building after the first third of his Book, The Mind Parasites. It was more than worth reading the whole book just the experience that build up of suspense! Few pieces of fiction really deliver on their promises because plot resolution is a left-brain thing (a closed form) while suspense is an artifact of the right brain (openended). In the dream (the archetype of "escape fiction"), the figurative and the literal are largely reversed. Upon awakening both must be put back in their rightful places. Reenactment as victim versus adopting the role (or philosophy/ethic) of “the enemy” paradigm of seeking closure/resolution of past relationshipself issues by acting out within successive relationships. Parton Effect as being due to time dilation of binding force-mediation virtual boson exchanges? Any thing more than the void itself is limitation. Moral Law possesses an inner necessity just like physical law. Reconciliation of God’s Justice and Mercy in satisfying the logic of a real, as opposed to a mock creation. Subjectivity is a radical freedom to define meaning –when there is “no higher appeal” versus when there is a “higher court.” To achieve reality, subjectivity must submit to the intersubjective. Humans are mammals up permanently on their hind legs. This seems a

cause for much of the human creature’s instinctive arrogance. Telepathy is sometimes imagined as a future evolutionary development of human mental capabilities, perhaps only in the extremely distant future of the race. But it seems more valuable to make known one’s thoughts to another only when one wishes them so known. We are not integrally whole, it is just that the pieces of the Chimera that is Man are so very tiny and hence beneath the resolving power of any individual human being’s self perception. Hence we naturally appear to ourselves to possess wholeness (“holiness”) and integrity as unified beings. Any appearance is capable of being sustained in its seeming independent state of animation (for a time) without this appearance possessing a ground for some being-hood. One reaches a point of diminishing returns at the crossover from new horizons being opened by the influence of a powerful, developed personality to one’s growth, becoming limited by terms set by this person’s worldview. Evolution of language is perhaps due to a mixture of collective error, logical fallacy, disingenuousness, contamination by conceptual maps of foreign speakers of the language, etc. Oscillation is the most redundant action. Modes mean the outcome of stimulus or excitation is predetermined by an “infrastructure.” Consciousness is uncertainty non-conserving in its action, of course. One should not judge a book by its cover, but it is wise to judge a book by the volumes in the bookcase lying next to it. Is the individual consciousness a realization of an infinite symmetry

group, i.e., a symmetry group comprising an unlimited (rather than determinate-infinite) number of elements and transformations. Is the appearance of forms within consciousness due to the removal of degeneracies? The action of will presupposes the externality of consciousness to itself, i.e., consciousness’ self-transcendence. Can a parallel be drawn between the way matter and the quantum vacuum interact through the exchange of momentum and energy and the way the brain exchanges data and information with this (very same?) vacuum? What attitude is cultivated by contemplating the being of that which one will never know? Let’s not confound the flowering and proliferation of the unique with the universal. Monod’s statement that the genetic code’s meaning is arbitrary: context can cause elements to more coherently interact. Filtering of experience through narrative metaphor: you live in their house, do errands for, a medieval scholar, unrequited love, chaste life, adulterous thoughts, sublimated by lady and noble servant - dynamics of memes and arbitrariness of meaning. There is the accumulation of missing complementary structure (here what is missing is defined in advance), and then there is the activation of the function of the “completed structure.” There is also the dynamic to consider of the back reacting of this activated structure upon its sustaining ground. This is much like an exploded diagram view of he integrally whole, e.g., human body, jet engine, etc.

Platonism is undermined by the notions of a shifting ground and metaphysical work. Platonism may be styled as “metaphysical special creation.” Not merely relative between elements given once and for all, but the individuals themselves must be relative. Entities cannot persist through a changing ground unless they transcend this ground in their origin and self-sustaining activity. What is the difference between the Bible containing God’s Word and its being God’s Word? In other words, is the phenomenon of language universal or unique? Inspired versus illumined - as in bringing some light to a dark room. Does the structure of the Elsewhere Region (outside the Minkowski lightcone) require the action of nonlocally connected quantum fields? The capacity to detect inconsistencies in thought, perceive the paradoxical, sense irony, distinguish vulnerable or unwarranted assumptions from those that are more robust – these are just a few examples of what makes for critical awareness. Because we do not know if this critical awareness is a necessary component of consciousness, we cannot tell whether dreams, in which this component of consciousness is more or less utterly absent, are actually experience within the moment of their being projected by the unconscious mind or, if they only appear to have been experienced consciously as a result of projection by the recollection of waking consciousness. The distinctness of indiscernibles (“when each is considered by itself”) is the foundation of the realization of number. But number itself as a metaphysical category is itself the foundation of this distinctness. Number (as category) is the basis of its realization. Is this proposition tautologous vacuous?

So-called natural selection must be an extremely superficial manifestation of a deeper process of selection taking place on myriad multiple levels and possessing, unlike superficial “natural selection,” its own internal dynamic and principle of order. It appears that a solitary dimension of time is an inadequate backdrop for evolutionary change. A solitary time dimension, however, is probably an adequate stage for the playing out and manifesting of structures already realized. How watching a “snuff film” on the Internet gave me the insight that Satan fervently wants World Peace. It is similar to the idea of how a large scale, industrical/ agricultural chicken farm is able to produce eggs at such prodigious capacity – by maintaining conditions in which the chickens do not have to compete for food or mates. Temperature, humidity, lighting, etc. and all other relevant conditions are also maintained at ideal levels. The cruelty of Christ’s treatment at the hands of His tormenters who brought Him to the cross and crucified Him provide the clearest representation of “man’s inhumanity to man.” And Christ willingly suffered this utmost manifestation of original sin, this act being the very act by which God chose to reach down to Man in offering Man the gift of salvation by grace through faith. To be properly prepared to receive the gift of salvation, each human being must personally identify with the sin committed against Christ in the perpetration of the crucifixion by Man upon Him. One must essentially see oneself as equivalent to those who tortured and crucified Jesus Christ, if one’s heart is to be sufficiently receptive to the Gospel’s message of salvation. But as long as the individual run’s from this insight into his complicity in the crucifixion, one is immune to conviction by the Holy Spirit. After all, it is one’s own sin which has necessitated God’s act of embodiment in the form of a man and His subjection to crucifixion at humankind’s hand. July 2011 The notion of original sin was invented by mankind because he had reached a stage in the evolution of his awareness of self which permitted him to first glimpse in himself this hideous and hateful

ugliness which he keenly realized had always been lurking there. It was this same hideous self, which was by its nature so vulnerable to the most obscene flattery. Absolute power corrupts absolutely, only because the prospect of absolute power entices so absolutely. Man also recognized that this part of himself was so prideful that it would kill even a great and loving benefactor if it but were given the chance. For such a benefactor, if successful would bring about a moral order in which this greedy, lustful, covetous and hateful self would find no place. @$@$ Recast each biblical narrative, which illustrates mankind’s failings into a DSM style list of diagnostic indicators for various personality disorders. There is this duality of information versus that which this information is about. But there is also the physical aspect of this information as itself a possible content intended or referred to by other information, i.e., the physical embodiment, if you will, of this information. Also, the referent(s) of information may (and usually do) contain information it(them) sel(f)ves. What about the distinction between the meaning of information, its content, and then the that to which the information refers? Nature appears to transgress so many of the boundaries (of vast, projective spaces that are due to extrapolations of abstract generalizations from too limited experience, i.e., the “more of the same” principle) implied by the categories posed by our theories. Nature does this because behavior based upon science’s simulated combination or integration of separate sets of conditions into a whole is an inadequately deep description of how such an actual whole would function as a system. Can the temporality of consciousness of the individual as such really be orthogonal with respect to the direction of the temporality of the transformation of the forms inhering within this consciousness? Wouldn’t this make consciousness’ forms and formal transformations into just an empty shadow play? The temporality exhibited by the

forms of consciousness is derived from the temporality of consciousness as such. How does the temporality of each individual consciousness fit into the physical picture of temporality as being a manifestation of fundamental processes taking place within the quantum vacuum? When nature does not know how to proceed further, she holds herself in abeyance until help arrives, e.g., quantum superposition. Seeing the sin nature in one’s fellow man makes for a disheartening cynicism. Realizing that this appearance is but reflections of that sin nature within one’s own being is a convicting experience. Can perceive its own disunity, Godhood, Godlike, godliness. Divinity of otherness and the impulse to project this to “others” (as self). Coincidence as learning epiphenomenon. Mental illness as equal parts weakness of the will with weakness of cognition. Freud would have been correct in viewing the edifice of culture as being a monolithic monument to the power of sexual sublimation. But Shakespeare had a much deeper and broader and hence more valid theory of what made up the substance of human existence. Not only sex, but circumstance, e.g., of birth as being noble or not, say, fate, and one’s fellow man are also important controlling factors in making man what he ultimately becomes. Another example of logocentrism: the notion of “Man” (with a capital “M”). We realize insights frequently, on the one hand, through the noting of parallel distinctions, but this takes us only so far. Eventually, this parallelism (degeneracy) is removed in light of newly developed conditions. Or were the two distinctions all along and secretly cutting across one another? For example, consider the notions of reproducibility and reversibility. But here we say what is reproduced is

really only a set of appearances, or, abstractions. Is consciousness itself the ultimate abstract generalization? There is always a different set of inputs required to produce the same (appearance of) outputs and yet there is at the same time, a tenacious thread connecting the manner in which the input sets are varied so as to maintain a constant output – this is an example of the nonrepresentational/participatory nature of a feedback circuit. Must there result a shift in the nature of the cases that we have always assumed formed an exhaustive set, once we discover an altogether heretofore unsuspected new case? Deconstruction used to overthrow the oppression of the great masters and geniuses of “the canon.” Metaphysics of presence, logocentrism, etc. We mimic the outward form while entertaining a peculiar acceptation of this form’s content, which influences via the mechanism of society, an evolution of this form as though this cultural form possessed an inner dynamism of its own, and human beings were seized by it as instruments of its working out. The “presence” of the human form and physiognomy, above question, except by those whom the hive-mind suppresses with the label, schizoid, schizophrenic, schizophreniform, schizotypal, etc., because failure to perceive this inevitably natural human presence is the profound earmark of a mind in a dissociative state. But secretly everyone knows in their hearts that presence is not absolute but an artifact of our tacit collusion into which we have all been carefully shepherded by each previous generation. Without children as a constant distraction and disruption to meditation upon the self, its existential predicament, we should many of us sooner or later think our way out of our cozy, wet paper bag – much to our horror and dismay. If there are such things as phantom concepts, then there must be such a thing as real consciousness, beauty, goodness, truth, beauty, goodness,

number, infinity, contradiction. One of the intriguing characteristics of ideas pointed out by meme theory is the marked tendency for ideas to disseminate widely long before they are fully or even more or less well understood. The tragic-romantic-poetic nature of the phenomenon of faith as the one attribute exhibited by man that has any chance of attracting the attention and sympathy of the Gods. @$

Metaphysical presence as a kind of faith underlying all human endeavor, c.f., Santayana’s work on Animal Faith. Because I was offline and didn't realize it. The suggestion of the Mozilla “low-res” dinosaur, which appears whenever one clicks on a weblink when not connected to the Internet, here is humorous and somewhat offensive to us "dinosaurs" who, even as adults, predate the Internet, namely, that everything which happened before the Internet is "prehistory". Reminds me of a paraphrase of Santayana's (the philosopher's, not the Mexican war hero's) remark that those who discount history are doomed to repeat it. Robust cohesiveness of a dynamic system depends on overdetermination itself based in quantum degeneracy. The phenotype-degeneracy of the human genome is necessary for the robustness of the human organism. November 2013 Of course, the phenotype is capable of focusing and filtering the forces of natural selection, c.f., the two theories of how both the self and language started from the outside and work their way “inside” though the enabling of focusing and filtering of natural selective forces acting upon behavioral genetics of say, homo erectus. Are all our descriptions based merely in phenomenology? We so fluently speak with our native tongue that we are normally quite unaware of the myriad borrowing from foreign sources, the historical

crystallization of the arbitrary, and how the flowing complexity of our Muttersprache largely made up of polysyllabic utterances each decomposable into monosyllabic grunts originally only so distinct as to capture the distinctions of perception and impulse available to Paleolithic Man. Consciousness is radically free if essence is but a projection of this consciousness. Essence is then kwd=reification of possibilities conceived by consciousness. Dissemination can simulate the generality of abstract essence that otherwise is revealed in correlated manifestations of this essence, c.f., “every time a bell rings, an angel gets its wings” with “every time you smile, you bless a child.” Creation, if it is to live up to the essential meaning of the word, must always begin as something, though integrally whole, is nonetheless totally arbitrary (without purpose?) but must acquire meaning through the dynamism with which it sustains its integralness. A pure representation is a pure manifestation and so possesses no integral wholeness/ cohesiveness (as a collection of interacting elements, that is). Can representations possess the nature of physical bodies? Are “thing” and abstraction in some sense synonymous? Or does a thing possess an integral wholeness lacking in a representation? Or is the integral nature of representations external, as opposed to internal, as in the case of (physical) things? Insights can never be fully communicated if it takes an entire philosophical opus with which to do it. As a certain unknown limit point of diminishing returns has such an opus can inspire other great and intuitive minds to form philosophical insights of their own. To believe that we can extrapolate evolution forward by looking at our projections of it into the past is to forget that natural selection acts upon

random variations in hereditary characteristics. Do we desire to see God to have our questions answered, or is our yearning for answers to deep questions a symptom of a desire to see God? Various forms of degeneracy are necessary for the growth of structure in which the process of growth does not interfere with those structures already evolved and incorporated into the system. Transformation of newly invented (as opposed to “stock”) metaphors during the course of their mutual influence (semantic field interaction) as they are sequentially incorporated into a composition, is a translogical form of thinking that brings whole systems of semantic relations into play, instantaneously, rather than by sequential addition/construction. The distinction of aliens-disguised-as-humans vs. humans is transformed and taken up into, or modulated by, the so-called entity theory (of personal identity) as a result of our recasting this duality into a form which appears to sharpen it (c.f., image enhancement, pattern recognition, etc.). rsc+Entity theory, so-called is actually prefigured in many gnostic writings as well as constituting a central metaphysical dogma of Scientology. Setting impenetrable boundaries for ourselves helps to strengthen the meaning of the freedom that remains. How does God know that there is not secretly some meta-God above him who remains silent and uninvolved, permitting God to believe that he is the master of Being? May 2011 @$Analogous to how the Universe was originally thought to be alone, but later was discovered to be a “multiverse”, maybe God is only a small part of the “Multi-God”. Creation was in its first attempts a kind of instinctive solution to darkness. Instinctive because it was happening everywhere and everywhen, perhaps at first only in fitful and abortive starts. At first

there was brief light, but then this light was quickly extinguished, then light appeared but with a little more structure and ballast this time so that it lasted longer, but then collapsing back into silent darkness. The first time that this burgeoning, bubbling and gurgling process of mind attempting to bootstrap itself out of nothingness had gained any real, lasting and intellible foothold on being just might have been that very instance in which you came into being! Does God have the same uncertainty concerning the “existence of other minds” as do we His alleged creatures? Presumably not because God possesses a privileged access to the contents of our minds which is even greater and more intimate than the private access each individual has to the contents of his own mind. So there must be two classes of intersubjectivity: that between “small s” selves and that between small s selves and “the big S” Self. (The intersubjectivity of multiple big S Selves so-called turns out to be reducible to the same type of intersubjectivity as that between “small s” selves and this is perhaps the basis for the uniqueness of God’s being qua “being of the ground of being”.) The subjectivity of small s selves must be somehow less private than the subjectivity enjoyed by the large S Self. So the subjectivity of the small s self can be additionally entertained by the large S Self, and this all because the concept of consciousness as founded upon consciousness as an abstract property held in common amongst all small s selves is not an incoherent notion. Consciousness possesses an outside in addition to an inside. The notion of topology offers itself here for consideration. @$

Like a postulate that is “demonstrated” in terms of what is shown to follow from it, meaning-giving metaphors/narratives may be chosen at a stage when they are virtually arbitrary, but upon their dissemination and adaptive radiation and incorporation into the fabric of the culture, these metaphors are “demonstrated” to be anything but arbitrary. Inconsistency and/or conflict between the self-conscious and unassuming modes of presentation. Quantum Marxist-Physicist. The way some of the gods of Olympus admired their favorite demigods.

A conditional presupposes determinate preconditions. The appearance of emergent novelty transcends any system of conditional relations. @$

By “lyrical perception” is meant perception which seems to be the observations of a character within some narrative. Experience is here recorded elsewhere than just in the memory of the person whose solitary perception it is and the perception itself seems to be an event in a story as described by an omniscient narrator. The “all you had to do is ask” logical justification for the nature of Christian prayer. It is only years after the first flush of youth has passed that one gets an insight into how large is the instinctive component of dating and courtship behavior. But eventually even the most dedicated health nut meets with his true aging-driven downward performance, i.e., “dying” curve. @$

It is likely that, on Chomskian principles of the brain’s specialization, that each person goes through life not knowing some otherwise simple principle, i.e., missing some key “meme,” one that almost everyone else possesses! Chomsky was fond of saying that one can only be good at one or two things if one is also very bad at a lot of other things. Certainly this is to be expected if human evolution has always been driven by natural selection operating almost exclusively within a social context in which a certain degree of genetic (and also “memetic”) specialization amongst the various tribal/clan members promoted greater survival for the breeding population as a whole. Contemplate the meaning of the phrase, “lyrical nature of perception.” Feedback cycles of cause and effect within the purely locally connected matrix of the dynamic system cannot produce the same level of selfresonance or an ordered state of integral wholeness to the extent achievable through control mediated by nonlocal interactions. Nonlocally connected systems though simultaneous with respect to one time axis in all distinct Lorentz frames may be nonsimultaneous with

respect to orthogonal time axes. Consciousness presupposes degrees of freedom by which the mind may form an integral description of itself. Conceptual thought ~ logical – Metaphorical thought ~ associative Conditioning of a stimulus-response being through repetitive juxtaposition. Associative mental processes can be superimposed upon language (a phenomenon that transcends “thought” that is exclusively associative) to produced patterned word sequences that are suggestive to the faculties of conceptual thought. Anthropic cosmological principle is an attempt to make natural selection of random variation explain the presence of all order and complexity rather than just that of biological systems, which otherwise would presupposes a graciously provided order of atoms, molecules, and physical law. There is an implied circularity of the Anthropic Cosmological Principle at work here that is similar to that associated with Everett’s Many World’s interpretation of quantum mechanics. Was there then a secret agenda behind the development of the anthropic cosmological principle? Variation, even if random, does not account for the order of that which is the subject of this variation. That which is foundational to the order of a given system must itself possess an order greater than anything that might be manifest within this system. For this foundation could have produced something different from what does exist and the properties or relationships pointed up by a comparison of these variants cannot be exhibited or contained within any one of them singly. This reminds us of the problem of defining or discerning a “concept of consciousness”. @$Consciousness points to the being of God just as the will points to the fact that my actions are not reducible to the vector sum of all of the forces acting upon my physical being from without. But at some level of the reflecting of the order of the individual soul short of actual perfection, the soul realizes its true identity as a broken creation of God requiring repair. It is probably that without the

advent of Jesus, this repair of the broken identity should not have been possible. The presuppositions of faith cannot be arrived at by reason, nor can the propositions or reason, e.g., complex mathematical theorems, be arrived at by faith alone. It has been said or implied in one fashion or another by some unorthodox or Gnostic Christian thinkers that “each human being represents a more or less unsuccessful attempt to create a Jesus.” In other words each of us, according to this admittedly heretical view, represents an unsuccessful attempt of the divine to incorporate itself into the world of creation. This creation is considered by orthodox Christianity to be in a “fallen” state and this view is also shared by all of the more Gnostic versions of Christian belief. The descent of God into His creation, through the advent of Christ’s birth, is a more or less open admission that the first attempt, represented by Adam, was not a workable path toward infusing the divine nature into that of creation, and all of us who have come after constitute nothing more nor less than a continued confirmation of this sad fact. Apparently, it is the mediation of the process of incarnation, via the elements already present within this created order that pose the insuperable barrier to the entrance of the Divine Presence into the world. And this barrier has a very convenient term by which we refer to it. And that term is simply Sin. There is something inherent in the very substance of creation, which, we are told, was not put there by God, but was introduced into creation by Man, having spread like a virulent contaminant throughout the entire expanse of this creation accessible to us. We are all children of God the Bible tells us, and the more mystically inclined of us suspect that the only thing which actually prevents us from being co-equal to Christ, the very first among God’s children, is just the presence of this pervasive contaminant of sin, which blocks the connection between our immanent and transcendent selves. @$

Taking our lead from the word holy, which is etymologically speaking,

closely related to such words as whole, hale, holistic, hole, etc., we may suppose that, given that Christ was holy, and that no individual human being possesses such holiness, that therefore, Christ represents in some sense the entering of the divine soul into creation wholly intact, while each individual human being enters this same creation by being born. And continuing along with our etymologically inspired hunch, we might further suppose that the divine presence exists already in creation, infusing it in some way that is less than integrally whole and complete, and that each human soul that comes to inhabit a newly engendered human body does so through a gradual gathering together of this diffusely distributed, divine soul stuff. But this congealing, if you will, of the divine soul stuff always stops short of a complete unity or unified soul, but continues through earthly existence from this time until death in a state which is a kind of “corrupt version” of that soul which, already integrally whole, entered the human body of the person Jesus Christ. So there is a disorder in the manner in which, either this soul stuff is distributed throughout physical creation, or, if this pervasive presence is itself perfectly ordered, cannot ever become perfectly manifest within corporeal human existence. Or is mind mostly an illusion while only its temporal snapshot, consciousness, actually subsists in reality. Here consciousness, through knowledge of its various other temporal instantiations imagines that it possesses an integrity beyond that which it admittedly possesses within any of its given moments, reifying itself into a transtemporal entity called Mind. This project is only made possible however via the functions of memory and its accessibility known as recollection. Perhaps recollection is only a tuning of the brain to a particular set of resources and memory is just a region (spatiotemporal) of greatly enhanced probability (relative to something else) for the reacquiring of this proper tuning – a zeroing-in mechanism for reaching a resonant state. Consciousness is only a state and function of mind. Mind only presents itself to a particular individual singly and then only in the form of the

slimmest sliver of its entire potential, infinitely varied spectrum. We may say that consciousness is mind merely in its temporal aspect while mind itself appears to transcend consciousness, which is so much as a moving snapshot of itself rooted as it is in a particular spatial and temporal context. May 2011 The unconscious perhaps participates within the time stream of experienced conscious states, its time stream though without being limited to necessarily move in lock step with this stream of consciousness. What is it about a hunch that makes it pan out and what makes for a hunch that misfires? @$

What is being pointed to here be the strengths and weaknesses peculiar to associative thinking. Certainly associative thinking, when one either has insufficient information or when the situation is too complex to be analyzed logically in the time available to one, is a valuable faculty even if sometimes producing less than satisfactory results. But the habit of indulging in associative thinking in preference to making ready use of logical thinking and critical judgement is dangerous, both to one’s physical being as well as one’s reputation among one’s peers. Some people, whom we might describe as intuitive or artistic, show such preference as though they believed their associative mental processes were somehow superior to “mere” logic. The “reasoning” of such types appears to be based upon a simple structural similarity of ideas or a likeness to these ideas’ originating contexts. This kind of reasoning evinces in these people a cognitive style and manner of acting that appears to most of us, who are more rational, as flighty, flaky, and inconsistent, and all this with, of course, for these people sometimes disastrous results. Such persons as these may exhibit a greater impulsiveness than most. Unusual and unfortunate accidents, social conflicts and legal predicaments seem to befall them with great regularity, and their style of living appears anything but routine. Such persons exhibit a pattern of always “reinventing the wheel” at all levels of endeavor, seemingly refusing to develop any pat routines. The tendency of these people to make in any situation many previously

untried, exploratory attempts at interacting with the environment, combined with a less than normal modicum of caution, may explain most of what positively goes wrong in their lives, relative to those of us with more settled ways and lifestyle. “A family is a group of individuals who all make the very same thing or activity the central priority and focus of their lives.” This is clearly an unconventional definition of family. Redefinitions like this are deceptive in the sense of being expedient, rhetorical manipulations where a metaphorical referent is deftly substituted for the genuine article – a tactic, we might have observed, that is more and more commonly used nowadays for political or propagandistic purposes. What permits such definitions to become accepted, with surprising swiftness, I might add, is that usually only a shift of attention has been effected by such redefining of terms. It is indeed true that the members of a family (in the fullblooded, traditional sense of the term) strongly tend toward the same or similar priorities, even if this is just the family unit itself or its members. The redefinition of family above has simply replaced family as the focus of family-hood with some other thing or activity, say science fiction fandom (each can cite one's own example). And so the redefinition here has simply taken what was common to family all along, but which had been in the background, and brought this aspect to the forefront and pushing the traditional subject of the term into the background. No small amount of equity has been vested in a term, such as in our example above – family, and a redefinition like that implied above may indeed be seeking to borrow much of this valuable stock, shifting as much of it as possible, gradually over time to the new entity or activity being labeled by this old term. It was just such sort of manipulations of the terms of public discourse that Orwell used to darkly illuminate the setting of his dystopian novel, 1984. There can, of course, be no “objective” or intersubjective basis for one’s personal identity, in the sense of there being an as yet undiscovered objective reason for my being the particular individual that I am, rather than, say, the person who sat next to me on the bus on the last occasion

on which I availed myself of my city’s public transportation, c.f., Nagel’s book, The View From Nowhere, the chapter on Mind. Structural versus contextual-elemental aspects of metaphors: many different metaphors can be chosen to exhibit a structural relationship between newly perceived elements, but this choice is narrowed when one tries to find the most appropriate content for the metaphor. @$

Quantum cryptography and subjective states: effable ? | objective |

Objective | Subjective |

| ineffable subjective | ? |

The above table suggests that, since we don’t really know how to interpret the conjoint categories, objective-effable and subjectiveineffable, that the two “axes,” objective-subjective, effable-ineffable are not mutually independent or “orthogonal.” Let us try another version of this table.

1

Subjective Subjective2

1

2

Subj /\ Subj Subj1 v Subj2

effable | |

| | |

ineffable

effable | |

| | |

ineffable

| |

| |

Coincidence as learning epiphenomenon. Mental illness as equal parts weakness of the will with weakness of cognitive capacity. Can perceive its own disunity.

Godhood, Godlike, godliness, etc.

“Welcome, professor LXB1802, to the 21st Century!” Divinity of otherness and the impulse to project this otherness to “others” (as self). Internal consistency vs. coherence within cognition/perception. pedagogical design basis of the human dimension of reality.

The

Purposes of consciousness: a clearinghouse of unconscious processing of experience, simulation of mental states of competitors, predators, potential mates, this idea can be expanded in terms of Freud’s instinct theory of the psyche. The simulation of potential mates as a function of consciousness may provide an evolutionary basis for understanding the natural selective value of homosexuality. Interpretation of all current sensory and perceptual data. Platform for comparison and prioritizing of competing motivations and impulses. As a kind of hyper-short-term memory buffer in which evanescent time paradoxes generated by nonlocal quantum processes in the brain are “ironed out.” The relative time order is assigned and/or defined, c.f., timing experiments of Benjamin Libet. Literal mindedness vs. metaphysical presence. Just because one had not articulated one’s intention for action prior to the taking of this action does not imply that the action was unintentional or unplanned. If a man “makes it” to age 40 without having married, chances are that he will remain a bachelor. Besides having passed the phase of being goaded against his better judgment by hormones to take up with what will probably turn out to be an “unsuitable partner,” the critical expectations of women who have been traumatized out of a romantic attitude during their youth the older bachelor anticipates would radically transform (for the worse) lonely freedom in favor of an oppressive and harried existence within a couple.

Moreover, the lies about himself that he told to himself in his youth are not likely to be graciously reinforced by his new, midlife partner, who is more likely to continually remind him of his having become a failure relative to conventional standards of “success.” The un-self-conscious provide the grist for analysis by the self-conscious. All metaphysical riddles can be best attacked by analysis of time’s phenomenology. Consciousness cannot be derivative of the interplay of abstract symbols or things since consciousness is the precondition of all abstraction and abstract processes. Molecules performing computations in the absence of a system of representation as the basis of the evolution of complexity seems dubious. Nothing to distinguish one alternate universe (in the superposition) from another without intention and awareness. The superposition possessed temporal symmetry (time translation symmetry) so that energy was conserved. Paradox of the perception of time’s passage. Combination of intuition and imagination. A name should point up both the ground and the kernel of the organizations inspired, guiding idea and should be descriptive on multiple levels as well as exhibiting some self-referentiability. @$

But on the other side of this question brought up by this critique – no, I say, onslaught upon the notion of presence, is the critique, now long over due, of our blindness to presence that, but for this blindness, would be all too conspicuous. It is what is most consistent about their mode of being and acting and therefore to themselves most hidden while to others the most

conspicuous feature of their manner of presentation. It is like a handle on the person – the most easily graspable part of the person. The difference between miniscule and terrific is only one of a mere three orders of magnitude. Man from the past: “This is all you’ve learned in 1000 years?” Man from the future: “Well, yes, but . . . uh. . . “ Man from 100,000 years hence, “Yes, but it adds up over the fullness of time.” @$

Active political repression creates far more undesirable political activity, e.g., subversion, than does untrammeled freedom of expression encourage the same. Under repression both radical and radicalized elements must be kept in check (or put down) while in a free society only a relatively small number of radical elements have to be dealt with. Historical/evolutionary versus simultaneous/comparative understanding of place, events, culture, etc. Level of judgment beyond what could have been acquired in life and a level of critical awareness which belies a secret acquaintance with more full-blooded, larger-than-life versions of everything we know. The feeling one has of the inevitability of one’s existence. Whether or not the form that this existence takes is itself inevitable is a distinct though perhaps related question. If form is intersubjective, then it should have little if anything to do with one’s personal identity, certainly not its core or kernel. That I am the essence that I am is not something that could have been determined by agreement as essences are by definition (rather than convention) not arbitrary nor are they things, which is to say abstractions admitting of some kind of concept. To say that it could have been possible to have been another person is to say that there is only one consciousness, which is able to take multiple forms with the result that consciousness becomes an entirely passive attribute contributing nothing to the distinctiveness of persons or to the

determination and development of personal identity over time. The concept of an active consciousness medium of experience, rather than a merely passive one, i.e., an intermediary for transmission without additions (or losses – no entropy gain), poses some deep perplexities for traditional notions of consciousness. Either we are searching for that ultimate quantity to which everything reduces, or we must admit to ourselves that at some point the infinite regress reveals itself in our reaching that thing or substance which is defined in terms in itself. @$

Wisdom may be termed subjective overgeneralizations that pass for objective, experience based knowledge for a number of distinct but related reasons: suggestibility to the manner in which future experience is filtered through these generalizations, as well as the altered affinity to people, places, things, and memes that tend to reinforce and resonate with them, and, moreover, the tendency of the “wisdom” of a person to contribute significantly to the structuring of his social environment, e.g., the “guru phenomenon,” We might say here that for the most part, the individual human being does not acquire enough experience in a single life span to develop a truly thorough-going general knowledge of the meaning of human existence, both individual and collective. What is interesting is that there is, therefore, a meaning, and perhaps significance, as well, to human existence which transcends any particular human’s ability to perceive/cognize it. Philosophical and the speculative impulse may well be symptomatic of the incommensurate manner in which the left and right hemispheres cognize the world and process these cognitions, particularly considering the dense nervous connection that exists between these two otherwise largely separate “brains.” This subtle and conspicuous incompatibility between the cognitive/judgment faculties of the two hemispheres probably accounts for the pervasive and deep philosophical impulse, particularly manifest

in the ancient and still pressing problem of the One and the Many otherwise termed the Platonic/Existential dichotomy of “philosophical cognition.” This continual perplexity and “pattern vigilance” may be a key mainspring of conscious awareness or the maintenance of a pitched level of the same, which is clearly of great survival value. Dialectic is the reconciling of the incommensurate. We should not have any valid concept of consciousness. We do have some kind of concept, however, of what we mean by the term. We have an intuition of what consciousness; we intuitively identify consciousness with our perception of this passage of time. Consciousness cannot have itself as an object of its own thought, which is abstract, consciousness itself being concrete in a fundamental or foundational sense. It is for this reason that Spinoza thought of souls as being distinct substances. The confluence of all of these substances constitute the composite substance of the so-called objective world. The essence of consciousness, which is recursive or self-similar, is its endeavor to succeed in the irrational project of making itself an object of thought (an object of itself – to “contain” itself). It can only do this through negation. This can only succeed if consciousness is working within a closed system. But If the meanings of Scripture transcend that of the human level, then at the human level, these scriptures must be metaphorical. Explore the distinction between merely everlasting from eternal in relation to the concept of the soul. Image, insight, example of some general feature, trend or type versus concrete thinking aloud about something from one’s personal life. This distinction points up opposite ends of an artistic/Intellectual spectrum of

human mentality. Many theoretical notions stem from hints given to the analytical (“left brain”) side of the mind by the creative, pattern-seeking (“right brain”) side of the mind in the form of fragmentary images (perhaps in the form of flashes of recollection) or metaphors, themselves more or less fragmentary (relative to latter developments, that is). It is as though the right brain routinely eaves drops on the block-headed subvocal chatter of the left brain, periodically utilizing intense bursts of non verbal communication (an example of which may well be the adrenaline-rush-like phenomenon known as the a-ha experience) as if to say, “hey, silly, don’t you see the implications of what you’re saying (to yourself) here?” It seems the average, uninspired person, caught up in the busy world of Heidegger’s “everydayness” may well operate simply by his or her left and right hemispheres alternatively ceding control to one another as dictated by the immediate situation. The more creative, self-conscious (and perhaps also, more neurotic) individual whom we term artistic or intellectual, enjoys a much closer communication and cooperation between his or her brain’s hemispheres, though in the former the right assumes the dominant role while in the latter it is the left hemisphere that is dominant. The so-called genius, e.g., Goethe, is that person in which this cooperation is more evenly matched. The biggest “what if” that we can imagine might well be the following, what if the principle known as Occam’s Razor turned out to be inimical to the pursuit of objective truth – a kind of short-circuiting of a would-be open-ended (and ultimately endless) process of philosophical endeavor? Occam’s Razor depends for its validity and usefulness upon another principle – that known as ceteris paribus, i.e., “other things being equal.” All truth is subjective because truth is always specific to a particular domain, level or “approximation” of reality, itself too open-ended to be unified, i.e., to allow for what is called objective truth, the “cash value” of which, as mentioned earlier, is just varieties of intersubjective truth. The notion of approximation here is not taken in the usual sense of approximation of what is objectively and precisely the case, but in the sense of approximation as approach to that possessing neither a fixed

“location” nor “trajectory.” Here approximation is relative to further refinements. Part of the process of the evolution of ideas, whether in an individual or collective setting, is that of bringing oneself to a place by bringing about a situation from which one can then start off in a new direction and therefore this process cannot be properly understood as a mere unfolding. An unfolding is simply the exhibiting of the same structure in some new manner – even in the sense of the removal of a degeneracy of latent structure in which newly arising conditions enable causal conditional relationships between two latent, but nonetheless preexistent causal structures, one within the individual or collective mentality, the other, within the external world. The unity of an individual consciousness cannot be understood in terms of physical processes, themselves understood as intersubjective phenomena. The plurality of consciousness, i.e., the fact of consciousness’ multiplicity, cannot be explicated in terms of intersubjectivity itself owing to this very plurality. The objective fact, as opposed to merely intersubjective, fact of this plurality transcends the already mysterious principle underlying the suchness and unity of each individual consciousness. To create a consort or companion for himself, God had to put quite a lot of himself into the project. The original impulse might well have been to make for himself a kind of feminine doppelganger. But to protect against the possibility of unfaithfulness or outright rebellion, God had to build into his creation a crucial flaw. (Perhaps the flaw was itself the making of Lucifer as a feminine personality, but that’s another question best left for later). But the flaw, though it protected God from actual overthrow, itself acted as the seed of the rebellious spirit that was to slowly develop deep within the Lucifer’s heart over the many ages that passed before the creation of the material sphere – the world was still void and without form at this stage as you will recall. The lesser angels may well have been the offspring of many happy unions between God and his not so perfect feminine double. God,

displaying the natural enough relative lack of interest in all that sprung from his loins, appointed Lucifer to the thankless role of Mommy. This may appear to be getting a little Freudian at this point, but it was the out of order appearance of the step children, Adam and Eve, that provoked the crash of good feelings between God and his erstwhile faithful consort. It was at this time that Lucifer provoked into myriad frequent bouts of reevaluation of his relationship to God, to include no small amount of self-analysis, that she hit upon the nature of that built-in flaw placed by God within her otherwise perfectly constituted psyche. That flaw being a more or less complete lack of a desire to recreate the self in the Other. God had all but created Lucifer in his own image with the exception of this single “flaw.” With the creation of Man, God had utilized a seemingly altogether different strategy: create man in his own image, not fully realized but only in seedling form. But in order for this strategy to be successful, the ground for man’s full development into numerous alter, coequal gods had to have already been prepared. To be fully like God man must possess this same gift of the desire to create in his own image. The creation of Adam and Eve was almost immediately grasped and understood by Lucifer as a kind of mocking and cartoonlike rendering of the relationship that she had held as sacred for nearly an eternity past. Perhaps Lucifer had tempted God in a sort of antiparallel sense to that whereby Eve tempted Adam although this temptation was rejected on the ethereal plane the converse temptation, the mirror image of this temptation and its reception might be played out with an altogether different outcome. What significance can be ascribed, if any, to the importation of archaic terms from an equally archaic syntax into a modern one? Belief in an all-powerful and benevolent creator is conspiracy theory turned on its head – in Biblical Christianity, for example, the conspiracy is for rather than against each discoverer of the conspiracy.

The problem with some writers is that the urge to have something to say is greater than the writers appreciation for the seductive potential some ideas have to cause psychological harm. The free marketing of ambition that is politics. Each independently and single mindedly pursuing his or her ambitious course. The overlapping of ambitions of the weaker with the stronger until the tables of power are turned and of the stranger with the weaker. . . A degenerate state of merely personal ambition. Individuals in a community of gossipers are proactive recipients of messages. This introduces drift, but avoids degeneration of messages into complete drivel, but does not prevent the engendering of preposterous propositions. Does energy exchange with the quantum vacuum decrease the rate (or increase this rate) of entropy production? Without the capacity of consciousness for detaching us from the immediacy of being the particular creature that we are, it should be impossible for us to glimpse a general human nature working through our being and then in turn perceiving the remainder which is the unique (non human) self. It is only relative to a set of practices that is accepted, positively accepted by the clan that other practices are held to be taboo – otherwise free experimentation with the cultural forms is allowable by default. Critique of “presence” as destructive criticism of God’s presence, evidence, e.g., textual, for this presence, and also a critique of the coherence and consistency of the concept of consciousness (no concept – no critique of concept that does not subsist). Descartes’ idea that there is no explanation of the origin of God (God’s presence ) which suggests

that the mere existence of this concept (which doesn’t really “subsist”) suggests the reality of that to which it points. The presence of God is really just the reality of consciousness (secretly known to the adversary). This helps us to interpret social and cultural changes that have accelerated throughout the century just past. That empty substance reified into something fuller of near complete spectra of once arbitrary permutations now ensconced in the immemorial of dim dawning primitive awareness. Red traffic light, yellow traffic light, and green traffic light: examine the logic of qubits, trivalent logic, the logic of fringe effects, transitions paradigm shifts, equivocations of sense, etc. . . We speak of how luck it is (“providential” is the word that is sometimes used) that contain limitations that we observe operating (at the particular spacetime scale that we happen to inhabit) are not still greater so that certain functions that we are able (in fact, have evolved to perform or developed the capacity for through cultural evolution, e.g., technology, say) to perform, but with some difficulty, happen not to be impossible, e.g., travel at reasonable speeds on the ground through viscous air, travel on air, i.e., via “flying machines.” The two schools on this is the functions that are not possible in this particular mixmaster universe are simply inconceivable in the first instance, i.e., mind a reflection of the order of the Universe versus mind actually participating with the universe so hat mind through the partially independent action of imagination, can prepare the ground for the emergence of new possibilities. Things to endeavor to do that are truly beyond our capabilities, we have no hope of imagining doing and this helps foster the mistaken piece of circular, question-begging logic of discussions of Man’s capabilities: anything that is conceivable is possible, anything that is possible can be done (eventually), anything that can be done (that Man proposes to do)

Man will do. . . But the enthusiasm that accompanies this logic has usually seen to it that the 1st premise has been secretly replaced with the starkly unwarranted assumption that, “Anything that is possible is conceivable.” The context of information is unlimited because of the unlimited potential for the processing of information ( question this assumption). Is it possible to exhaust the information content of a collection of data? Although there is determinism within moments there is not necessarily a determination of moments. Determination as a will unto interpretation. “Inter-pretation.” Retention of link structures, but updating of links – continuously of structure as being just as important as content. A so-called cool name must be simultaneously arbitrary and distinctive. Better to have a world with evil and free will (and consciousness) than a world free of both good and evil but occupied by nothing more than biological automatons. So many different ways to think of so many different things – low barrier for thought – a connection tunneling underlying the association of ideas. Should we maintain an agnosticism with regard to the meaning of historical events of “earlier ages?” Doesn’t the change of revisionism presuppose that there must be some already present, correction interpretation of historical events? The following are just some of what I consider to be the attributes of a godlike (as opposed to godly) person.

Unassuming nature Immortality taken for granted Pristine innocence Freedom from prejudice Generous Magnanimous Tolerant Well-meaning Pleasant Charming Gracious Confident Forgiving Happy Contented Relaxed Engaging Personable Amiable Disciplined Professional Calm Ethical Compassionate Loving Empathic, etc. Focusing and intensification of information (about nothing, i.e., devoid of intentionality) and in a dispersed, distributed form, into information with intentionality. Laws about appearances of impropriety – as long as no one can demonstrate intent to act unethically or unlawfully, then deniability is maintained, i.e., “cover your ass” (CYA) laws. Accountability to the

sensibilities of the public, however ignorant and misguided these might be seen to be by the ruling class – sensibilities that could be “bestirred” quickly enough and intensely enough to force firings, budget/funding cuts, resignations of officials, investigations, destruction of ambitious careers, ruin characters (or the perception in the public’s eye of characters), etc. Regardless of what happens to the wavefunction, one’s consciousness does not “come to a halt.” The wavefunction we are told represents the most that one can possibly objectively know about a quantum system that is in a pure state (with respect to some system observable). September 2011 This doctrine of the wavefunction is entirely consistent with the idealistic doctrine of the unknowability of the thing in itself. The only thing in itself that one can have knowledge of (in Russell’s sense of privileged access) is one’s consciousness of this moment. February 2013 Access to all other mental states perhaps ought to be described as unprivileged, including one’s own mental states from moments, i.e, “bubbles of the specious present” other than this one. The question arises, of course, how are mental states or sense data of mine at other times to be distinguished from the mental states of other minds at any and all times? How could we prevent collapse of the distinction assumed between metaphysical and epistemological solipsism and moreover between epistemological and methodological solipsism? Of course, if the system is in a superposition state with respect to (wrt) one particular observable, it must be a so-called pure state with respect to each incompatible, or conjugate, observable. And this is just the basis of the uncertainty principle via the theorems of Fourier Analysis. Two question arise here – one for the moment appears to be merely secondary; the other more fundamental, although we might find (after that this situation is actually the reverse of this.) What does the quantum state of a given observer’s brain then represent? The most that that observer can know about the quantum state and

evolution of this state, which his brain is presently in. For some reason, the entanglement of a given system’s wavefunction with those forming the system’s “sum of histories” does not trigger decoherence of Psi. One’s state of consciousness is thought by some to represent the continuous “self-measurement” by the observer of his own quantum state (that of his brain, at least – based on the theory that it is processes within one’s brain that constitute all that is relevant to consciousness). Somehow this continuous self-measurement does not cause any reduction of the brain’s Psi. This would suggest that the brain is in an eigenstate of the observable which is to continual subject of (self) measurement. Man must believe in something what letter thing to put one’s belief in than God. Another function of consciousness is the reinvigoration of and reinstatement (in new form or “acceptation”) of (recycling, if you will) of “weakened” viral meme fragments that should otherwise be lost or interfere with the function of “healthy” memes. The interference between consciousness and the unconsciousness acts as a kind of universal filter. The workaday, ordinary world of what Heidegger termed everydayness, is actually a repository of currently active metaphors. What is the meaning of metaphors for that which is presently (or altogether) beyond our ability to articulate, e.g., heaven, hell, purgatory, etc.? Thought is the abstracting of the general from the particular. Action, intentional action, that is, on the other hand, is just the converse of this –

the concretizing of the particular from the general. But action itself, by its nature is an inextricable mixture of abstraction, application (of abstract notions), and trial-and-error experimentation in which there operates a continual feedback in the form of mutual influencing (interference) of thought upon application and application upon thought in which nature is being actively explored by the observer-theoristexperimenter just as is the latter being explored by nature. Nature is forever attempting to develop and refine her own theory of (the separate nature of) the individual. Dialectic is the interplay of the mutually incommensurate, i.e., dialectic is the means by which the rational enlarges itself. How to reconcile the alleged open-endedness (“unfinishedness”) of reality with the systematic coincidence of history or the unfolding revelation of heretofore unbeknownst historical detail with the emergence of novelty within experience, i.e., with what we might conveniently term, borrowing somewhat from Derrida, as the alwaysalreadiness of historical novelty? There is not direct communication between minds in the sense of the transmission of anything. There is the cooperative requesting by each for objectively analogous elements of subjectivity, either as recollection or logical constructs. The naïve individual is the one who uncritically adopts the first notion that springs to the fore of his thoughts as the basis for action or conclusive interpretation – who, in a word, thinks and acts “without look back.” The depth of the world is in its breadth; the breadth of the self, in its depths. No matter how far the individual develops within his own being he will never be able to look out in the world and not find all of himself already there –thoroughly implicated! This would suggest that the brain is in an eigenstate of the observable which is to continual subject of (self) measurement.

A Perfect Vacuum, The New Cosmogony, points up the blurred distinction between theory (description) versus blueprint (program of application). There were those who seemed critical of his attempts at correspondence. The general style, the diction and turns of phrase, of which he made much and frequent use, appeared borrowed at turns either from the discourse of the existential 19th century novel or from those more serious science fiction writers of the middle years of the 20 th who, though now arguably the greatest and most profound authors within that much misunderstood genre, had been in their day either too intellectual or too seminal in their conceptions to have appealed to a contemporary marketworthy audience, their works only being rediscovered after being assimilated to the fringes of mainstream novelistic fiction, e.g., Olaf Stapleton, Stanislav Lem, Philip K. Dick, etc. Of course, the realization that one’s state of consciousness at any given stage constitutes merely a “snapshot” of one’s identity, poses some puzzling difficulties for anyone contemplating the Christian notion of resurrection within and afterlife: am I brought back as a naïve, impulsive, and hopeful youth, a stolid and single-minded middle aged adult, or a calm and serene, if slightly befuddled elderly version of myself? A more precise way of stating the fact of the relativity of time or the “rate of its passage” (a rather problematic notion, by the way) is to do this in terms of relative probability rates where the notion of quantum probability can only be rendered logically consistent by bringing in the notion of probability density. Density of what, of some kind of substance of events? And the answer here is both – the probability density of that which constitutes the substance of events as such. More specifically, the relevant quantity is the density of events within spacetime, rather than simply within space alone. This is because, although it is prima facie possible (on a deeper level within the context of general relativity, this can be questioned) for motion to occur along

one spatial axis without the necessity of motion, however small, along perpendicular spatial axes, this is not true where “motion along the time axis is concerned. This is in part because relative motion in space (and its associated momentum) is dependent upon a borrowing during some earlier phase of kinetic energy associated with the erstwhile purely timelike motion of the starting masses. Is metaphysical presence a kind of fundamental bourgeois presumption? Unbelief is commonly a symptom of the reflexive, instinctive and largely unconscious continual averting of the eyes from the convicting, fearful might and grotesque beauty of the divine. Spirit blindness is of such epidemic proportions among otherwise highly intelligent and sensitive souls (possessing far greater powers of consciousness than would have been required for survival, perhaps) that there can only be one explanation open to us for making sense of this phenomenon: this blindness exhibited by each person within bourgeois existence secretly results from a principled choice to, in a Husserlian sense, “bracket out” the spiritual dimension of existence. But this is at the great peril of each because the human psyche has been adapted to the endurance of chronic, relatively low levels of grief, dread and anguish to which one is necessarily subject while open to the dimension of the spiritual. But one can rarely recover sufficiently from a crisis of sudden spiritual awareness triggered (usually by some inevitable tragedy) later in life but in large part due to one’s having consistently failed to prepare oneself for such an eventuality by having pursued a course through life in perpetual “bad faith.” The karmic principle, if we are permitted to personalize somewhat, possesses a strong attraction for ironic situations, in fact, this constitutes a kind of quirk-like weakness from the human perspective, at least, in the moral judgement of the Universe. It is perhaps possible to exploit this weakness and succeed in manipulating the cosmic karmic tendency, provided that one’s ultimate aim is the selfless service of one’s fellows, human or “creaturely.” In short, one can tempt Karma by creating an

ironic situation in which oneself merely loses face, while the other is made (via Karmic intervention within the artificial irony) to reap some personal or material benefit. Of course, people who are conscious of the watchful eye of the Karmic principle do this all of the time when they give up some material advantage to another in exchange for a crediting to their name of some positive Karma. By quickly returning or perhaps even better (and more effective), passing on to some other , any material benefit one receives due to the karmic service of one’s fellow man in the form of one’s own karmic service - in this manner does one not lose “one’s reward in heaven” or in the next life in exchange for some fleeting, temporal gain. “We cannot tell that we are constantly splitting into duplicate selves (italics mine) because our (italics mine) consciousness “rides” (quotes mine) “smoothly” (quotes mine) along only one path in the endlessly forking chains. The many worlds interpretation (MWI) of the quantum measurement (QM) problem is perhaps only an artifice for providing a more succinct way of understanding the dynamics of QM implemented by a conscious observer, @$similar, say, to the solving of AC circuit problems through the use of complex variables. Viral meme tagging as a technique for tracing out information circuits for purposes, say, of determining the presence and extent of communication between seemingly disjoint social circles. @$

If consciousness is able to truly “split,” then degenerate continuity of consciousness is implied with this degeneracy only being removed ( and the continuity of the real self) grounded through the introduction of a notion of some kind of “superconsciousness.” The philosophical investigator attempts to articulate that which had heretofore long been ineffable within his own intuition while at the same time awakening the sense of the ineffable and its reality in his or her reader or listener. Mixed with this is the opposite tendency, that of passing a persistent autosuggestion off to the reader or listener and this

suggestion either succeeding (dissemination) or conspicuously failing (a concomitant secret wish, no doubt, of the author). A clear statement of objective that isolates the author’s ideational process from confusion also insulates the more creative faculties of his or her mind from the long maturing inchoate. We like to think of ideas, sometimes, as simply tools that we can use to get to other ideas, the general nature of which we might already have glimpsed. But perhaps a better way to understand the use and utilization of ideas is in terms of the viral meme concept – viral memes migrate, soon after having “caused infection,” into the motivational, in addition to the logic circuitry, which is more obvious and suggest to us all sorts of ways (exploiting the available cybernetic control machinery of the neocortex) that we can use them to get what we’re after. It might appear that these memes are inventing in use notions of how to use them ( in order to spread them) which cater to our deepest desires and fears. But what makes for a successful meme? Isn’t it that humans like a particular meme, elaborating on its theme, combining it with other and then passing them onto someone else either with the specific intent of doing so or as a by product of using them as a means to some other end not specifically addressed in the meme’s content? Isn’t it we ourselves that determine the nature of the selective forces applying to memes? Is it possible to look at this discussion in terms of the original quantities, i.e., genes themselves? Feelings of alienation were originally indicators that one was in disfavor within the clan or tribe, say for transgressing one of its taboos, or a still more crucial situation of one being stranded in strange territory, that one’s social camouflage may be rendered ineffective, or that one has become a captive of a foreign or warring tribe. Modern alternative music seems to be seeking to strengthen our sense of identification (perhaps with other displaced, alternative lifestyle

individuals) while assuaging our rankling feelings of alienation. For every concrete, actual memory or associative circuit concretely realized within one’s gray matter, there are quite literally zillions of virtual such circuits being completed per second just beyond the background of consciousness. All matter undergoes a kind of respiration of the locally available vacuum energy. “Irrational order” is a contradiction (in terms) while “A is an apple and A is not an apple” is also a contradiction, but here the contradiction is not merely implied (“implied” in the sense of logical implication or, perhaps, in some other sense?). An open-ended system, if it possesses a high order of unity or cohesiveness, does not do so in any formal sense, but in the sense of substantial continuity. But there can be no universal simultaneity “within” an open system.

Consciousness is not indifferent to the passage of experience through it. Consciousness is not merely a passive projection medium for the display of experience. We speak of sensations or perceptions “registering” or not. Use Altavista Systran to translate a word list and then use AS to do a rough translation, using the wordlist to clean up this rough translation. Use this technique for docex translation missions. The diffusion of consciousness forward and backward in time is essential to the process of temporal integration of consciousness experience.

The paradox of suggestion is that the more suggestible a person is the stronger are the suggestions that manipulative people make to this person – one would think the opposite relation the more reasonable. Let’s try to understand the intentionality of concepts in terms of flexibility of implementation in service to an implicit goal or purpose. Multifaceted and inchoate proto-metphors with context reactivity and contaminability. IN formation as nexi of adaptivness/adaptability. While not experiencing the suggestion of some particular social context, humans spend most of their time in a state of autosuggestion. Dignity is pride and humility blended in the person pursuing what they know to be there own path. Chain of Being, Chain of Thought, but not necessary for these to be predetermined to say they have reality, the conditions have been provided for these to be realized in any number of ways. The lower, creaturely part of the self is envious and covetous toward the higher self and its gifts, the value of which, or course, the creature self does not understand, only lusting after these gifts as hoped for instruments for facilitating the acting out of its narcissistic power impulses. Also, the creature is covetous of the esteem and worship of the transcendent self. Rebellion of Lucifer Banishment of Lucifer and his angels Chosen People Giving of the Law Dispensation of Grace, etc. Each transcendent/creature self acts out this metaphysical drama, represented and played out in the narratives of the Bible. Transactional Analytical of the history of God and Man’s relationship.

If they can’t sell you, they sell you out. . . Myth of the good and evil twin, favored son, etc. The higher self desires to experience itself as its own and while the lower self wants to subvert consciousness into a means to its shortsighted aims. The phenotype projector again and the requirement of thrown away information (entropy) in the coherence and cohesiveness of living structures. Genericness/genericity (Generativity) and the old school year book phenomenon. There is an uncanny sense of each day being totally new, full of the promise of revelation, adventure, and transformation. The immortalist perspective on the pursuit of life’s enjoyments: there will always be time later to have fun and adventure. Urges and impulses that seem to appear suddenly, “out of nowhere,” may represent early manifestations of developmentally triggered shift in cybernetic control of behavior by the person’s DNA. Is Logic empirical? C.f., au=Robert Nozick’s Philosophical Explanations. Asymptotic nature of our projections in relation to the question of presence. A further application of the viral meme fragment idea is the composing of a database of “secondary supporting observations/remarks” in the absence of a definite primary thesis, though this thesis is already glimpsed in a wordless way by the author. This might be an example of the intentionality of creative thought. On genericness and the postmodern condition.

On being caught

between immersion within the modern and in a detached, postmodern critical standpoint. The tension between recognition of these notes and riffs as being arbitrary combined with the recognition of these sounds, possessing concavities, directed toward projected thematic centers. Each successive note, though following the one before in time, is by no means caused by it. Having done a great deal of good and service to God and one’s fellow man will not lessen the pain and suffering unto death, just its wretchedness. I think of good things happening to bad people and bad things happening to good people as the phenomena of the moral universe. Zero-point fluctuations in the moral vacuum. Thought must contain a component of action and action of thought. The same observation applies to theoretical versus empirical. Raises the question of the objectivity of the moral as a category. Concrete versus abstract is another example of yin/yang duality. Truth is a stronger notion than provability: that there is a plurality of consciousness. And does this make the concept of number problematic? It is easy to judge others who are “acting badly” in a situation that oneself has never before experienced, still less the history leading up to as well as the immediate context embedding that person’s decisions to act/impulses to react. The question springs to mind here. “What if all of the conditions in which the other person’s consciousness is ensconced were the very same set out of which I was to think, decide and act? Is this person then not my own self? The answer here is “yes and no.” When one applies ceteris paribus principle, one is dealing only with measurable quantities. But is personal identity merely a condition upon

consciousness, or is it an absolute? Someday we will find out that everything we’ve ever supposed is true about reality is wrong and this supposition, too, will be wrong. Why are humans so confused? It’s because human intelligence, that is, the (alleged) forefront of evolving intelligence on the surface of this planet, has only just now advanced to a level lofty enough in its I.Q. as a species so that it is located approximately dead center on the continuum of intelligence between the lowly amoeba and the “God knows what else is out there.” Once we have the insight that there is no natural division (i.e., one established “by the Gods”) separating the subjective from the objective, we then are ready for the realization that there’s really no “out there” out there – just as there’s really no “in here” in here, so that we see the external world occupying us just as we see our selves reflected in and pervading the so-called external world. Persistent intimations of what might turn out to be a more rewarding pattern of living, all along acknowledged but studiously ignored – a perverse stubbornness of free will in the face of the superior judgement of the alter ego, the unrealized would-be self? A necrophile is an iconoclast of the first order. The attempts on the part of critics of Christianity to invalidate this doctrine by pointing out that the person of Jesus Christ probably never actually existed are about as unsubtle as Deconstructionists’ critique of metaphysics that consists essentially in noting that this discipline derives its name simply from the historical accident of Aristotle having placed his exposition of ontology after his Physics. Does the string of symbols, though it occur as a result of an accidental confluence of characters, have any less meaning for not having been intended? For once the meaning is in hand, however it might arise, is nonetheless intended when it is passed on by its discoverer who has recognized its meaningful interpretation as an important message. The chance that a similar

message will be conceived by the recipient by chance of the earlier message has been given a significant boost, but not only this, but the chance that a synthesis of a family of such messages will be received (conceived) by the person (in the form of an insight or epiphany). The Napster phenomenon, simulacra, Douglas Adams, and Derrida. Infinite perspectival vortex and the restaurant at the end of the universe. Concerning the question of God’s Being, we must observe that the unknown, even the radical unknown possesses a structure. But is this structure simply grounded in the open, evolutionary potential of our concepts to deepen and broaden. What is the distinction between the ground for a given development having already been prepared versus the lack of a “prepared” ground? Distilling from a long list of one’s favorite songs a number of elements common to several large groups of songs extracted from the list would permit the person to readily identify a number of important issues and motivations for his concerns and behavior, and would constitute a kind of psychic radiograph of the person. Topology of Experience, Energy, Minima, Fitness Landscapes. . . Form, Content, Substance. . Metaphysical significance of what is represented by Christ, that of the relation of the incarnate, embodied spatiotemporal to the higher, transcendent self, along with obedience to the mission of this higher self. There is a need to repair a breech in the metaphysical continuum due to a misstep on the part of the self that occurred almost immediately upon its initial descent into spatiotemporal (immanence). The wisdom of the excrescent insight – the insight which asserts itself to the exclusion of all others. Can the experience of all human beings be combined in a God’s eye view, without the need for being processed? The rich suggestiveness of language seems to extend its reach further than ought to be possible.

“rational zero-point’ -- Heidegger From Deconstruction, http://jamesfaulconer.byu.edu/deconstr.htm, “However, God’s Justice surpasses ours, so much so that it is inadequate to use the same name for it.” What name should we use for it, then? The nature of the growth and broadening and deepening of concepts as being more than a shifting and shuffling of boundaries in the redrawing of conceptual maps within some closed, if admittedly quite large, system of meanings and distinctions, seems to be implicit in the above quoted passage. A notion of the evolution of thought as containing a necessary revelatory (biblical sense) element is what seems to inform the statement quoted above. The degree of consciousness is directly related to the subtlety of integral structures that may form and be sustained within it. There seems no natural limit to the evolution or degree of development exhibited by consciousness. Are certain thought forms within consciousness more intrinsically stable than others? The evolution of consciousness is influenced by the forms engendered within it. This is the notion that consciousness cannot engender the awareness of particular forms while being indifferent to the creation of such forms within itself. Empiricism – consciousness is an empty container/blank substance. Rationalism – consciousness is a closed system – no outside world. Cool names must be simultaneously arbitrary and distinctive. From web= www.hearteat2000.com/aum.html , p. 12 o 28, “A metronome heart to strangle life out by not allowing energy/information in and out.” A generalization of this idea might be that of a finite (though, perhaps, “near infinite” ) collection of interlocked metronomes of a wide spectrum of frequencies which, via Fourier’s principle of analysis, is seen to be a deterministic function of the parameterized (as opposed to that of quantum observable) time domain. Power born of grace has no need for an object or subject for it to

dominate. Form and substance, experience and the medium of experience (the “ground” mediating experience) are not disjoint categories (“orthogonal”). When one’s motivation for acting out deviance is based in common, ordinary impulses, then one may be “perverse” but not actually “crazy.” (Phenomenology of the Mysterious) The notion of return, closure, having traveled in a circle, reunion, reenactment, interruption, disruption, irruption, contamination, dissemination, fusion, absorption, envelopment, enmeshment, rematch, irony, nemesis, self-similarity, recursion, resonance, dissonance, cacophony, incongruity, incommensurability, reconciliation, confession, catharsis, denouement, resolution, anticlimax, self-consciousness, (of the present performance), nostalgia, reminiscence, mirroring, reflection, imitation, disillusionment, disorientation, dissociation, vertigo, dizziness, acrophobia, agoraphobia, claustrophobia, divination, vagueness, haziness, ambiguity, intermittence, rarity, reciprocalness, reactivity, brightness, reflectiveness, opaqueness, camouflaged, faintness, etc. The wonder provoked by keen philosophical insights is owing to the philosopher’s secret appeal to already-presentness. All invention is innovation. Mystery loses its appeal as such without its invoking (if only secretly) the notion of revelation. Glimpsing the alterity within the Self and experiencing compassion for it – this is quite different (but intimately related to) the sympathy one feels for aspects of one’s self glimpsed within the other. Such is the distinction between a universal and a merely provincial system of ethics. People who have never experienced a moment of inspiration simply cannot sit for a person who is speaking while this person is in an inspired moment’s grip and the common reaction is one of mock

bemused, “hey, get a load of this,” or one of impatience, irritation and perhaps an abrupt stopping of the conversation by the listener. (Necrophilia) According to Henri Margenau, “a question is intelligible from a scientific point of view only if it satisfies two conditions: (1) the meaning of the terms must be fixed; (2) it must be in accord with the conventions of the science to which the question is put.” So Margenau is saying that scientific intelligibility demands fixedness of meanings according to scientific convention. Here “intelligibility” is relative, embedded in the context of normal science (in the Kuhnian sense). How are we to differentiate the merely relatively unintelligible from the absolutely unintelligible, i.e., that which is “between scientific paradigms,” or, between any paradigms (for that matter), in the broader senses of discourse and genre, from that which is not in or “between” anything? But by introducing the distinction of absolutely versus relatively unintelligible, one is also implying acceptance of a complementary distinction presupposing the validity of the notion of absolute intelligibility, i.e., intelligibility that is unmediated and unconditioned. The symmetries exhibited by linguistic structures, semantic, syntactic, morphological, etc. suggest the existence (in the sense of a mathematical existence proof) of categories for which there are currently no assigned instantiations. The question here is whether there is some substantive, underlying systematicity to linguistic structures (as well as to the pattern of their evolution) For example, what interpretations spontaneously suggest themselves to the reader who encounters the word “sefl” not understood to be a typographical error, but a new coinage intended to introduce some new concept of the self or of personal identity? So there is a role which language plays in fostering the concerted working out of human suggestibility and creativity. It is easy to see how one could quickly, as

it were, paint oneself into a corner by coining too many new words in one’s discourse, if it were not for the fact of concepts not being merely passive descriptors, but to some extent possessing a life of their own, both individually and collectively. So that there is some degree of selfdetermination of concepts in their evolution as well as responsiveness to the introduction of new concepts and evolution of other concepts to which they have some kinship. The question has actually been seriously asked in numerous places in peer reviewed scientific literature whether a, say, chimpanzee, rather than a human being, appropriately manipulating the proper laboratory instrumentation could succeed in performing an observation of the classic two-slit apparatus that would succeed in producing “collapse of the wavefunction” so that the interference pattern on the phosphorescent backstop is disrupted, to be replaced with a buckshot pattern of electron (or photon) hits. This question may turn out not to be so silly if it is ever conclusively established that both the human observer’s brain function and the quantum superposition state of the two slit apparatus exist in some kind of two-way interaction with the quantum vacuum. The hypertrophy of one kind of consciousness at the expense of another kind lies behind the phenomenon of original sin. Evil in the world, i.e., phenomenal evil versus that originating from or with the self. But to say that all of our concepts are abstractions is to assert a strictly empiricist epistemology. To say that all of our concepts are in reality only metaphors is to have implied that abstraction is merely the superposing (after the fashion of a photographic double exposure or palimpsest) of either an earlier upon a latter or a later upon an earlier context. There may well be a significant difference between these two types of metaphor. The recursiveness of consciousness is thought to be one of its (or the) defining characteristic(s) (of consciousness), c.f., The Egyptian Book of the Dead, the Ourobouros as a symbol of consciousness, but perhaps it is

this much touted recursiveness of (the individual) consciousness which prevents the transcendental unity of the plurality of transcendent (small “T”) selves and is ultimately responsible for each ego being held in the thrall of its eigentlichkeit of substantial form. Suffering teaches compassion. Goodness gains self-knowledge through sacrifice and the letting go of attachments. The unity of the self is more of the plurality of selves. The transcendent self possesses absolute self context or @$only has a context when self-limited. We do not really understand the gifts with which we have been blessed. Does it make sense to imagine a time and place where we have become the master of our gifts? That four-legged variety of spider known as the anthropod. Is there any real “need” for more than provisional or heuristic concepts, given the ubiquitous availability of feedback? But can metaconcepts nevertheless be determinate? Certainly Christianity did not originate as a conception within the mind of a believer so we must not necessarily allow the character of those who flock to belief in and adherence to this doctrine to bias our judgement concerning the doctrine’s relevance and validity. Roles and “scripts” mediate the self-consciousness of the person in ordinary life. To glimpse the objective self which is orchestrating and implementing these roles one must apply the psychologically trained observer’s eye to what is continuous versus what is discontinuous about the person’s behavior and style of behavior within each and all of these social contexts in which the various roles and scripts are “played out.” The sharper one’s state of consciousness, the more one finds oneself daily confronted by contradiction, incongruity, absurdity, and all that is hollow and false – not unlike the growing paradoxicalness of the dream when the self is in the act of attempting to rouse itself by dropping ever more hints for itself of the falseness, unreality, and arbitrariness of the

dreamscape. So it is not that the appearance of incongruity and contradiction galvanizes the self into awakening so much as the advent of contradiction signals the already upward movement of consciousness. Is “cognitive slippage” characterized by a crystallizing coherence of the heretofore incongruous? ess=

Investigate the implications of belief systems, particularly Christianity, being the product of “mimetic evolution.” Urban legends, which grow in the retelling, seemingly in accordance with a Darwinian evolution model of adaptive radiation, do not really do so because of the random nature of the “forces” producing this variation. October 2011 The Internet offers us a virtually (no pun intended) ideal laboratory for the study of the dynamics of memetic forces because of the time compression involved: the time scale on which the mutation, metastasis and viral replication of memes takes place there is highly compressed, and several centuries of “doctrinal innovation” such as what transpired during the first three hundred years after the advent of Christianity can be played out within mere weeks or months (in some instances, days) – a time compression ration of between 1000:1 and 100,000:1! When people experience epiphanies or insights the mind is usually in a particularly receptive and even suggestive state, one in which the insight is more likely to be accepted or acted upon. What is called automatic writing is a typical example of this and remember that the first five books (Pentateuch) of the Bible were originally written down at a time when the Middle East was still heavily steeped in a long standing religious oral tradition in which the appearance of writing was still new and likely regarded as suspect, as well as mystical and magical. The mental facilities, which mature literate cultures notaly lack, i.e., that of spontaneously devising and innovating orally transmitted tales and of easily committing long skeins of these to active memory, more or less overnight had to be combined with a process of the editorial production of myths and folktales in textual form. This enabled a greater ideational fluency and mastery of these oral traditions though now in the presence of the relative social vacuum provided by the specialized context of a

literate priesthood. But the strength of the back reaction of the self upon itself while in the act of retelling a mythic narrative or folktale may have been greater for a priest or scribe who was instead solitary while in the act of setting this tale down in writing for the first time. It is not altogether certain whether those literate few of that distant time fully understood that the subvocalizations echoing in their minds upon rereading the sacred scriptures originated merely with the self, c.f., The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind (Jaynes). I have often noted that I experience strange or notable coinidences during periods and with much more frequency when I am at once experiencing a greater flow and variety of ideas. And my having instituted the habit of always keeping a pencil and pad of paper within ready reach, including at my bedside coincided with a steadily greater influx of insights and intuitions, which at the time at least appeared worthy of being written down. There is no arguing the much noted suggestibility of the human mind when in the glowing presence of the written word. One cannot help but see in this the suggestion that the human mind is not after all unitary in its conscious functioning, but there is a natural partitioning in the subconscious origin of ideas with some ideas bearing the distinctive earmarks of having originated within the right hemisphere, others within the left. Young children are introduced to doctrinal ideas and systems of ideas at a tender age when their critical faculties have barely begun to form, allowing a goodly number of years for pregnant messages to be absorbed and internalized. Young children readily accept theological notions at the same time as they are being introduced to the characters of Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny and the Tooth Fairy. The theological notions in which these young children are inculcated were originally conceived by broze age tribal peoples living within a pre-industrial patriarchical society. There appears to be two distinct types of narrative structure, edited and unedited. The greater concision, logical clarity and coherence possessed by a narrative, which has been “reprocessed” by editing, often in a collective or collaborative context comes at a cost of “authenticity” (trueness to the original germinal insight embodied in the narrative). But what this authenticity points to is the simultaneously creative and disruptive ideational

functioning of the brain’s right hemisphere. By thinking and perceiving with “the whole brain”, creativity is properly seen as originating within the unified self. On the other hand, when an “unsophisticated” self stays locked up within a single hemisphere of the brain (bicameral mind), any notions or ideas, which pass to it from the opposite hemisphere shall inevitably be misinterpreted as originating from an agent outside the self, i.e., from some supernatural being. February 2013 A narrative structure of consciousness requires the continual integration of subjectively perceived time through a memory updating mechanism, which necessarily invokes at least a two dimensional temporality. Narrative, i.e., “coherent and rational” temporality, however can only support a single dimension of time. So if multidimensional time is required for the integration of the subjective time stream or “stream of consciousness” and so for the construction of a projective, egoic self as narrative center of gravity, then the notion of parallel universes must be an apt metaphor of the suppressed ground of subconsciousness as evinced by the unity of the autobiographical memory of the explicitly conscious self. Consciousness cannot be “incorrigible” while being merely metaphorical, i.e, devoid of a veritable conceptual basis. Metaphor versus concept consciousness as medium or substance of experience as a projection of the self as an intentional object and “structure of consciousness”. It is likely that there is a profound mismatch in the rates of maturation of the left and right hemispheres, which has an evolutionary origin, namely, while children are under the guidance and control of their more powerful parents, the all important function of the critical faculties is expertly assumed on their behalf. Similar to the way in which the “genetic dust bin” theory of aging makes sense of the radically changed natural selective forces operating in old age, one should expect radically different natural selective pressures acting on the functioning of the genetic regulatory networks of children. A revealing application of the GDB theory of aging is illustrated in some outstanding problems observed in nuclear transplantation (cloning) experiments, for example, c.f., C. David Allis (2007), “. . . If the key "Oct-4 like" genes are not

activated, clones die immediately after implantation. If those genes are activated, the clone may survive to birth and beyond. These considerations argue that cloned animals, even if appearing "normal" at superficial inspection, may not be so but may harbor subtle abnormalities that become phenotypically manifest only at later ages (Jaenisch 2004). . .” December 2013

“Page and his team speculate that the loss of genes on the chimpanzee Y may be due to the chimp's mating habits. Both male and female chimps engage with multiple partners when they mate. This gives a strong selective pressure on those genes that produce sperm. Conversely, it puts less pressure on evolution to preserve those genes on the Y whose functions have nothing to do with reproduction. Because humans historically have been largely monogamous, our Y chromosomes have been spared such selective-pressure imbalance”, c.f., Human Y Chromosome Stays Intact While Chimp Y Loses Genes (Whitehead Institute publication) and online link: http://www.newswise.com/articles/human-y-chromosome-stays-intactwhile-chimp-y-loses-genes And of course, there is nothing special or unique about a virus that it does not share with any appropriately structured “set of instructions,” though which cannot be attributed to the virus so much as to the fundamental properties of the informational medium in which the virus “lives”. Although it is interesting to note that a virus functions somewhat in the role of a contextualizer or perhaps, rather a “recontextualizer” of context. The virus changes “the rules of the game” as it were. Epigentic and genetic regulatory networks, which provide the interpretive context for any genetic base pair sequence, and which functioned optimally during one phase of the life of the organism, don’t disappear once the organism enters successive phases of its life cycle – these networks are still in place and are not so much “switched off” as they come to require less obvious sequences of “instructions” for their activation. The logic here is similar to that of how the self-

organizing forces (SOF) of chemical evolution (CE) don’t have to stop upon the advent of a “unit of heredity” at which the forces of Darwinian natural selection (DWS) commence to operate. Because DWS occurs always within the context of SOF, mutations to the DNA molecule are anything but random. The GRN does not so much as, e.g., guide embryological development as it taps into and puts to work the dynamic, self-organizing properties of atoms and molecules, which are in turn informed in their transformations by the dynamics of the quantum vacuum electromagnetic fields. This makes DNA effectively an electromagnetic “waveguide” for the transduction (as opposed to the “transmission”) of quantum information. December 2012 Yeah, textbook, alright. But I had about 10 months to read it! : ) Kind of shows that mutations aren't really random because a mutation only can contribute to advancing evolution if it is first registered by the already existing gene regulatory network. Epigenetics acts in the role of the higher level programming language facilitating this. I'm not an expert so I'm speculating somewhat here. What in the hell ever got you interested in Epigenetics? The field did not even exist 20 years ago by the way. Evolutionary biology has not yet absorbed this new subfield. Darwinian theory says that information can only flow out of the genome, never into it. This doesn't make sense because all information networks involve feedback, which is necessariliy two-way. The two pillars of Darwinian evolution are "natural selection" of "random mutations". Epigenetics also shows that mutations aren't random because they are selected by the gene regulatory network (as cybernetic control system) and that this selection isn't at all "natural". Epigenetic changes do not change any base pair sequences, just the manner in which these sequences are expressed. So any given sequence does not have a predetermined meaning, but always depends upon the gene regulatory and epigenetic contexts. So "blind" cause-and-effect is not at all what is involved here, but the operation of a language *and* an ongoing "interpreter" of this language. (Again, no preset genetic meanings). February 2013 Epigenetics provides a mechanism by which the evolving breeding population can back react upon the environment and in turn upon the forces of natural selection themselves.

Because of the syntactic and semantic properties of the genomeribosome system, nucleotide base pair sequences function in the role of meaningful (or potentially meaningful) character strings. I am still trying to understand au=Jacques Monod’s statement that the meaning of the codon is arbitrary. I seem to recall Monod saying that the arbitrariness of the meaning of gene sequences had something to do with the nonlocal nature of the mechanism of codon decoding by the ribosome. October 2011 One of the outstanding attributes of the syntactic/semantic system represented by that of the DNA codon is the seeming built-in resistance of DNA to the would be effects of the “Chinese whispers” phenomenon. Part of the robustness of DNA may be attributable to the meaning degeneracy of energetically continguous or closely neighboring base pair sequences. This same principle of robustness could also show up in other degeneracies, e.g., protein conformational states. Such examples of “operational energy degeneracy” point up the coherence and cohesiveness of the mechanisms of DNA ( @$DNA sequences are the expression of what?) and protein expression, which transcend the combinational/ permutational paradigm of random discrete change. (“Discreteness” forms the very component of this robustness, which we are talking around.) Vast “in between” regions within the “rugged fitness landscape” (“fitness” here is understood in terms of chemical stability instead of the usual acceptation of “Darwinian fitness”) of the DNA combinational-permutational “computational state space” must function as buffer or null zones, barriers of chemical potential differences between neighboring though non-contiguous 3d conformational states. The evolution of living systems without the emergence of consciousness corresponds to the evolution of Christianity without a real, divine Savior. But the evolution of life with the ultimate emergence of consciousness points to the existence of objective truth preconditions, e.g., here that of Christ having objective if not factual-historical significance. In other words, the way a message is received has relevance to the question of whether there is purpose and intention behind its symbolic realization.

This is part of the intimate relation between will (intention) and consciousness. Robustness of the message points to an element beyond selection within a field of randomly given possibilities. Christ is a metaphysical reality, even though He has, perhaps, only been imperfectly manifested within historical time. Deconstruction seems a most creative variety of criticism, paradoxically enough. Does deconstruction presume to have metaphysical presence on its side? Without objective probabilities, we only have deterministic intersection of causal chains that had never before interacted. The contradiction of “deterministic chance” as closed system behavior of an open system. Only Primum Mobile’s can interact in the absence of a unified continuum (Plural Reality). Conservation laws applied to systems with time-varying substances Non-conventional, mutually agreed upon message forms, e.g., woman who suddenly breaks into saying “fuck” frequently in her casual conversation. Volunteering reference to sexually charged subject matter in conversation with strangers. Nature versus Nurture – Work determines consciousness – Marx. . . Consciousness equally determines work (means of production that the individual selects as his mode of making a living). If the means of production and worker consciousness do not stem from the same ground, then their mutual interaction must define dialectic, which is to say a dynamic. Dialectic is an evolutionary process that is not reducible to an unfolding or manifestation of hidden, preexistent order (immanent or transcendent) – this because of the requirement of a plurality of contingently related though essentially separated grounds.

Dialectic naturally cuts across the duality of immanent versus transcendent because this duality is specific to a particular ground. Dialectic catches the transcendent order up into temporal process by exposing its plurality, resulting in the performance of metaphysical work. The Internet should facilitate a paradigm shift in the nature of social organization, evolution of thought, and of communication, due to its having expanded the domain of these sociocultural phenomena, c.f., Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Kuhn, concerning the defining conditions for shift of paradigms. Paradigm shifts and Gödel’s Incompleteness Theorem. The Intelligible versus The Rational . . . these two are usually equated, but such an equation (or inequality for that matter) between these two points up the tautologous nature of transcendent intellect (even without a Platonic set of intelligible forms). October 2011

Deconstructive analysis seeks to effect a paradigm shift in the analyzed work, which was "always already". Level, c.f.., A Brief History of Epigenetics, Gary Felsenfeld, “. . . With this knowledge has come the understanding that epigenetic mechanisms may in fact be responsible for a considerable part of the phenotype of complex organisms. As is often the case, an observation that at first seemed interesting but perhaps marginal to the main issues turns out to be central, although it may take a long time to come to that realization. December 2012 From the syllabus of an introductory graduate level course in epigenetics: “Finally, we will discuss one of the most controversial topics in current biology: the hypothesis that environmentally-induced epigenetic modifications can be heritable, contributing to disease susceptibility of multiple generations” [italics, mind], c.f., PSYC G4498 - Behavioral Epigenetics, Dr. Marija Kundakovic, Fall 2012 So far only the secretly characteristic manifestations of open systems have been seized upon as being relevant to the phenomenon/mechanism

of consciousness. No defining abstract property or mechanism for consciousness. viral/disseminative basis for consciousness as such.

No

If the sequence of productions of the phenotype projector are nondeterministic, then how is it that the production of any given projection is itself thought to be “governed” by a logical rule (“law”)? Truth which is transcendent in the sense that we cannot make it objective because we are too involved with it versus transcendent in the sense of utterly remote, indifferent, platonic truth, i.e., one way flow of information. Dialogical versus univocal truth, etc. One indeterminate ground connects to another through elaboration/ development of an abstract symbolic system which, when sufficiently “fleshed out,” back-reacts upon the ground through the fine details originally suppressed in order to form the foundational abstract categories of the formal, symbolic system. Forms derived from indeterminate ground destabilize it. Poetic expressions bypass the discursive, analytical mind, which suppresses the peripheral details, recapturing what was filtered out via an evolution of the complexity and tight cohesion of the filter structures. The permutational-combinational model of the possibility space fails when one is forced to take perspective born of depth, i.e, and inferred and/or perhaps implied additional dimension that possesses content not determinately present within the n-1 dimensional field. The Boltzmann brain hypothesis raises the possibly neurotic concern that one’s consciousness is only transient and momentary and that the memories one senses within any given moment of conscious experience is always an illusion in the normal sense of reference to the usual intersubjective world, but not an illusion in the sense that there must be other Boltzmann brains that indeed contain the conscious experiences referred to by the supposedly illusory memories recollected within one’s own Boltzmann brain. A quantum entangled infinite network of Boltzmann brains collaboratively

projecting spacetime in which each is an avatar inhabitant. The Boltzmann brain hypothesis appears logically inconsistent because the astrophysical evidence for the cosmological theory that supports the BB hypothesis is revealed as illusory. @$Although if the BB hypothesis were true, wouldn’t one expect the system of appearances projected by the BB to be consistent with a true BB hypothesis? On the other hand, if we are to preserve the current findings of astrophysics and cosmology and the interpretations of these findings, i.e., cosmological theories, then won’t we will have to accept the notion of a vacuum “fluctuation” more likely producing a brain embedded in an intelligent species with an evolutionary heritage on a planet occupying the habitable zone of a class G yellow dwarf star constituted from a “universe” boasting of an astrophysics of fine-tuned physical constants where there is significant input of information from outside the system. For if we once again turn to the notion of the “mix-master” multiverse, random chance and the Anthropic Cosmological Principle to account for the otherwise unlikely order we see all around us, we are again saddled with the inconsistencies posed by the Boltzmann brain hypothesis. In other words, a @$ Boltzmann brain is not more probable (as a fluctuation) than is a whole universe possessing myriad real brains because of the input of information from outside the system. We have to ask ourselves: “What is the nature of this outside source of information input?” Given the “always alreadiness” of an intelligent ground of being, the probabilities of real universe versus Boltzmann brain is exactly reversed. 2010

July 2012

Data is context-free information and information is contextualized data. There is another distinction to be made along an axis between noise and signal, which I believe cuts across the axis of datainformation. New contexts can come into being, which can create new information from the same data. The interpretation of data is not predetermined and so information may not really be conserved quantity (in general). (November 2013 So perhaps there is something like protoinformation, apart from mere data, that is conserved.) However, *quantum information* may indeed *be* a conserved quantity, which addresses your point about us not being able to be "deleted". On a

computer hard drive for example, "deletion" of data only means removing the "directory tree" that allows the CPU to access the data on the hard drive, which remains in place. Since the brain is probably just a filter and "interface device" acting between multiple topological sectors of the quantum vacuum (between multiple "Boltzmann brains", if you will), the brain is itself just a directory tree of the quantum vacuum's accessing data from itself. The question is whether the class of Boltzmann brains represented by the identity, "Ziad Fahd" is the most general property of Boltzmann brains or not? August 2012 What dynamic medium is it that resonantly tunes to a succession of Boltzmann brains. Can Boltzmann brains be constituted into classes based on the category of consciousness, ID structures of consciousness that posits a category subsuming a subset of Boltzmann brains? It is clear that the highest evolved functions of biological structures are those that are capable of accessing the subtlest levels of quantum dynamics (thus far reached). So is only application what is newly produced by evolution, i.e., structures of boundary conditions upon the underlying dynamical ground, or does evolution actually back-react upon this dynamical ground so as to alter its dynamics. If so, then this would affect the function of structures that were perhaps long ago already evolved into their present forms. This would be a genuine case of a higher level of description informing a lower one, which is to say a sort of “reverse emergence” or, more strangely, a kind of backengineering of the dynamics by the boundary conditions. Without this possibility of “reverse emergence” it would appear that all evolution succeeds in doing is taking latent, unexpressed order and transforming it into actual, expressed order. Evolution on this view would not be responsible for any net increase in the amount of information in the universe. We might term the actual creation of new order through physical temporal change involution. It is only when the ground of being comes into contact with its other that this type of genuine evolution (involution) may actually occur. It appears that genuine novelty is only possible though the interaction of the ground of being with transcendence. An example of transcendence might be the

simultaneous co-presence of all conscious mental states. But if transcendence is necessarily category-busting, then the phrase, “simultaneous co-presence of all conscious mental states” could not succeed in picking out a particular set of entities out of the field of “reality” if a search of the universe of discourse (intersubjectivity ~ objectivity) must necessarily turn up empty. There are two views of the distinction of the denotative vs. connotative: 1) what a 2 nd or 3rd person party says must be enclosed in quotations, e.g., “I exist” while what a 1 st person party says may be correctly inscribed without quotes, e.g., I exist. 2) any proposition uttered, regardless of by whom must always be enclosed within quotation marks. But the force of using “…” cannot be derived independently of the notion of “naked utterances”. How do we distinguish evidence for something being the case from evidence for something’s mere possibility? Or is all evidence of possibility to be counted as evidence of fact? What about probability based upon logical analysis of heretofore unquestioned metaphysical assumptions lying behind current physical/ cosmological theory? Is computing speed set to make a quantum leap? http://gu.com/p/3fqeh http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_hole_information_paradox The parallel quantum universes must be anchored within the neural microtubule network of a single brain. The Planck mass-energy quantum decoherence limit specifies the boundary between appearance and reality. Chemical determinism and self-organization in relation to the sugarphosphate glycoside bond to which the nucleotide base pairs are connected Science or scientific evidence will never be able to prove the existence of the Christian God but it may lend support to the existence of

Spinoza's God. From Todd my young friend... 'Just read that article on the doctor studying 'dead time'. He mentions the possibility of memory being nonneural. Are you familiar with how computer programmers avoid memory issues when writing programs? They use pointers, a small entity that simply refers to a location of a complex entity which may store typically larger data. Would be interesting to explore if the brain really worked like that. The observation that ambient photons within the laboratory should not be able to trigger the collapse of a superposition state certainly applies to the case of the two slit experiment performed using buckyballs. Nevertheless an observer can use photon radiation of precisely the same momentum energy and polarization in order to observe which slit the buckyball went through which does succeed in collapsing the interference pattern. This is true even though the very same types of photons existed amongst the ambient radiation with in the laboratory when the observer was not looking at the slits to see which slit each buckyball went through and this ambient photon radiation in the laboratory does not succeed in causing the interference pattern to collapse apparently the observer makes the difference not the physical interaction of photons with the buckyballs say through ollisions. In other words if the observer is not watching which slit the buckyball goes through and just looks at the phosphorescence screen for the presence or absence of an interference pattern then he cannot rely on the presence of ambient proton radiation of identical character to that which would have been required to observe which slit the buckyballs goes through in order to produce collapse of the interference pattern with the exhibition of particle-like behavior on the part of the buckyballs. So it does not appear that a physical interaction is responsible for collapse of the interference pattern but rather the presence of the observer looking at the slits.

Earth's civilization must then be secretly extremely old not only in the galaxy for but perhaps within the universe at large such that the average distance of peer extraterrestrial civilizations namely those of comparable or greater technological development may well be too great to be detected We should now investigate what might well be called the f Ferrmi metaparadox within the discipline of the philosophy of mind and the problem of other minds. The dissolution of a paradox by way of the advent of a new paradigm usually signals the appearance of a metaparadox. The process of biological evolution is not a hundred percent onward and upward just consider the case first considered by Darwin himself of placing newer or modified species in competition with their earlier for bears in the current environment of the modified species and how the newer or modified species would merge victorious rendering the extinction of the order forms from which they are derived and now having said this consider someone to reverse case where the newer or modified forms of the older species are placed in the folder species contemporary environment and allowed to compete with him there here the advantage would not be so clear of the newer forms over the older ancestral forms because of the consideration of coevolution and ecology. September 2013

That an individual consciousness' apparent peers are intelligent is more a testament to the ultra-high fine tuning of that individual mind's consciousness than it is to the fine tuning of the brains of those peers. Note here that we are relating the fine tuning of consciousness with fine tuning of brains. The paradox is how an atheist who considers himself moral and ethical might answer this dilemma vs. how a Christian theist who also considers himself moral and ethical might answer this same dilemma.

The belief in a supreme intelligence or at the very least in a 'cosmic programmer' of the universe somewhat akin to George Lucas' 'The Force' may continue among the relatively uneducated classes for many generations. Strangely, there will be a rise in the belief in both epistemological solipsism as well as poly-metaphysical solipsism, i. e., the belief that the universe is a collaboration and sociolinguistic construct of myriad individual consciousnesses. The deepening realization that there is no evidence for ET's will begin to reinforce the idea that we are members of an at least billion year old civilization living within an 'ancestor simulation'. Philosophers and cosmologists as well as some physicists as well as a goodly number of philosophy-educated people of the not so distant future will take it for granted that the probability of universe-simulacra, for example, Boltzmann brains, et al., greatly outstrip the probability of so-called 'real' universes. Which realization is natural in light of the compelling logic of the anthropic principle? It seems all causal relationships within four dimensional space time can be encoded as quantum entanglement on a two-dimensional surface. I think this is pretty solid proof of the holographic universe theory. Interaction of distinct spectra of nonlocally connected energy fluctuations to produce locally connected structures of superpositions. All of the complex systems found in nature exist because of the occurrence of a cataclysmic breaking of the symmetry of the ancient quantum vacuum. And it is these binding forces that sustain the structure of the vacuum’s fermionic boundary conditions. Does the evolution of thought demonstrate that concepts (if coherent and intelligible) always point beyond their initial scope (of comprehensiveness and comprehensibility). Mathew 11:25. The Truth of the Word of God can only be understood

through the guidance of the Spirit. Man cannot discern the Truth of the Word of God by his own understanding. If Man is simply a “higher primate,” then there is no reason for Man to see any special truth or significance in God’s Word, moreover, humankind should have never had any reason for conceiving of the very notion of God in the first instance. Had all humans been born with dark-lensed, designer sunglasses permanently affixed to their faces, would romantic poets have lamented, “would that my love was possessed of limpid pools for eyes so that I might glimpse the depths of her impassioned soul? Would this concept be the same – would it be different in a referenceable way? The imagination can encompass difference from actuality but only as a perturbation of the actual. What is the nature of the ground that makes intelligible the far-fetched seeming hypothetical? Nonsensical hypotheticals can be used in stepping stones in valid trains of speculation. There is not consciousness as such and yet there is suchness itself. What is the paradox here? Perturbation theory/ Perturbation paradigm. Is it possible to “perturb” a paradigm as one does a theory, i.e., perturbation theory, where one makes a few simplifying assumptions, reducing the complexity of a theoretical description of a physical system to, say, the first or second order? According to the nature of paradigm as making the outer reaches or boundary of scientific speculative consciousness, there seems no place for the notion of metaparadigm, metaparadigmatic, and so on. Narration is the substance of myth and the ego is the central and unifying element of all narration. Myth must stem from processes underlying the constitution of the ego. Pounding disco beat combined with long, sustained, airy chords invokes

both the primal and the transcendent elements of human sensibilities. The analogy of the road that builds itself just a few steps ahead of the traffic running along its surface serves here. Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason is another example of what we term the “Ourobouros principle” of foundation criticism, e.g., Popper, Skinner, Darwin, Sartre, Gödel, etc. The Ourobouros was for good reason the Egyptian Book of the Dead’s symbol for the transcendental nature of consciousness. The self-similarity of each consciousness, though perfect in its essence outside of time may pervasively manifest itself within time but does this of necessity only imperfectly. Our concrete actions are bound together into coherent patterns by language possessing a greater generality than can be contained within the mind of the individual. How is it that critical theories and/or methodologies, i.e., behaviorism, deconstruction, radical skepticism, falsifiability theory, strong AI thesis, Darwinian evolution theory, etc. are capable of escaping their own sweeping critiques by, e.g., in essence, successfully asserting that assertions are impossible (in the case of deconstruction), or, there is no logical thought as such but merely stimulus and response of the organism’s nervous system (as in the case of Behaviorism). To prove the unintelligibility of something is not to disprove this thing’s existence. The relevant question here is: is a requirement of Being its rationality, or stronger still, its intelligibility? What are we to make of the distinctly American common practice of leaving one or more television sets continuously running from early morning until late at night? In this manner American households have made the prime objective of advertising and marketing firms, that of

cultivating temporal tunnel vision – the kind that has the potential to anaesthetize a would-be consumer’s ability to question mediapropagandized assumptions concerning what makes for contentment in life. For tens of thousands of generations, the age of 40 represented the near extreme of human life span. Rather than directly competing with younger members of the hunter-gatherer band for mates or, indirectly, through physical prowess displayed on the hunt or in combat with members of enemy tribes, the older individual proved valuable as a kind of consultant or mentor, perhaps also as a spiritual leader such as shaman or witch doctor. Divisions of labor within the clan would also be selected for and eventually incorporated into recurring genetic combinations within the clan’s offspring with relative frequencies consistent with the required relative percentage representation of the innate talents for each labor specialty promoting the clan’s survival. @$ What are selected for within evolution are not so much the genes themselves as their expression or non-expression at relevant times. Genes triggering or controlling the implementation of behavioral programs beneficial to a tribal sage, for example, may have proved positively deleterious to a 16-year-old member of the clan. November 2012

Equal rights under the law, differential privileges within the market. How can it be simultaneously true that 1) the self is a social (sociolinguistic) construction and 2) every other person with which one becomes well acquainted is just a projection of some aspect of the self (for all practical-social purposes and intents, that is, in an exclusively epistemological rather than a metaphysical sense)? The self is a social construction society-self; society is composed of individuals who are manifestations and projections of the self-society. This is one way of breaking down the self-referential structure of society, which is akin to the echo chamber/hall of mirror self-referentiality of the economy, e.g., economic indicators feed into the dynamics that is generating what these indicators quantify. Perhaps if representations are understood in light of the ruling metaphor of an economy, as “currency”, i.e., which is

continually exchanged, invested, charged or paid as interest, etc.? Is “natural law” the opposite side of the coin of a social Darwinism that has been reprocessed in terms of Darwinism’s heretofore verboten notion of “group selection”? January 2013 Lamarck’s giraffe. goo= Chance mutations vs. GRN, epigenetics and self-organization of chemical evolution without unit of heredity carrying information prior to the advent of the RNA/DNA epoch; natural selection vs. preexisting enabling/buffering combinational-permutational as well as DNA/RNA, linguistic infrastructure; Radio, TV, Internet, weblink, protocol, registry, dll, cloud computing, etc. These are all new metaphors for emergence within the context of providence (matter and mind). Many of the seemingly disturbed patterns of behavior readily noted in modern, industrialized society are perhaps only erstwhile useful genetic behavioral programs expressed outside of their natural hunter-gatherer social context or accidentally triggered by social and psychological conditions inadvertently emulating ancient behavioral cues. “Those swarming particle pairs form a screen that partially cancels the electron field,” c.f., cit=p. 66, paragraph 6, Discover Magazine, July 2000 issue. @$“And we know that all bound structures break up when their energy density exceeds their binding energy,” c.f., p.69, Paragraph 1, DM, July 2000. Somehow free will and a conscious state of awareness are intimately connected as both being manifestations of a radically open system, i.e., one transcending space and time.g Both the nature of the ego, c.f., Freud’s reality principle, as well as the rational, causal seeming nature of the so-called real world are social constructs, not in the normal but in the metaphysical sense. @$Although the theoretical assertions of science rarely survive paradigm shifts unscathed, the empirically-based propositions of science, which possess

only phenomenological content, while relatively free of metaphysicalladenness, tend to survive such fundamental shifts relatively intact. (ADHD alternative treatment: cut sugar while adding chromium and vanadium to the child’s diet) @$

It is only where language extends the speaker’s reach beyond his grasp that the role of symbols as modes of arbitrary expression is transcended and the collective consciousness actively participated in. (The symbol here acts as the locus of a palimpsest of successive determinations of its multiple acceptations) Some unorthodox religious thinkers consider God’s sacrifice of “his only begotten Son,” Jesus or, alternatively, God’s voluntary subjection of himself to the limitedness of Space and Time (Sin) as a more or less open admission on Divinity’s part of its material complicity in the enacting of Original Sin. What is the parallel, if any, between the Sefirot of Kabbalah and the “Names of God” in Sufi mysticism? In a world without Time, the Fecundity Principle inevitably spells contradiction. Evil necessarily exists within the created order because Goodness, although unified within the Divine nature beyond Time, loses this perfect unity within Time. There is an impulse for Goodness to regather itself into a new unity within creation that, of course, can never really become a finished project. Human beings could not have been created with knowledge of Good and Evil, but only with the potential or capacity for acquiring this knowledge, outside of the presence of the Creator. This knowledge of Evil, therefore can only be instilled through experience, that is, through the experience of suffering (physical and psychological). June 2011 Evil is necessary in the unbounded process of soul formation. Evil in this context of so-called soul formation may be considered the metaphysical

equivalent to experience as essential to the building of character in a more worldly context. In this sense, evil, if it could be shown to be a principle independent of and transcending that of mere privation (absence of good), would be compelling testimony to the givenness of good as more than the mere absence of material evil. @$Because the presense of self-consciousness and free volition disrupts the disjoint nature of good vs. evil in the sense of making impossible an exhaustively case-covering juxtaposition of dual categories, good and evil as distinctly active, dynamic principles each in their own right become genuinely possible. This is the connection of original sin to the concept of a will distinct from the Divine Will. Goodness possesses no quality as such in the absence of Evil, i.e., Goodness in its absolute nature is simply the transcendent, divine essence. Goodness, mediated through temporality, that is, plurality, results in a tension between the myriad acts of self-limiting on the part of this goodness in its attempt to know itself. 1 This self-knowing can only be engendered in relation to the other. There are two basic forms to ignorance, that by the transcendent of its other selves, and that of the limitation of the Transcendent, i.e., the self, of its transcendent origin. Goodness is it simultaneous forming and giving up of attachments. But attachments must be formed in order to be given up in order for Goodness to realize its true nature. Beyond time and limitation, the divine attributes remain in an undifferentiated state. Christ represents the perfect differentiation of the Divine Attributes within limitation and represents the template by which all transcendent beings are to accomplish the same goal. There is God before the advent of Christ and then there is God after this advent. Christ’s spirit, or higher self, is the Holy Spirit. God the Father is good, but only realizes this good through His Son, Jesus Christ. 1 through relating itself to in its grappling with the other. God could not create Evil any more than Man can create Good. Why am I me, within this place, at this point in history? Does the fact that this question is equally valid for everyone who might ask it, render this question any more meaningless? What ontological status is implicitly

accorded this world if we deem valueless, possibilities, which therefore take on a certain ontological status above that represented by “null and void.” Can God create a stone so heavy that God could not lift it? existence of each of us is testimony to an affirmative answer. (2) virtue of their never having been realized within Reality (Being or Existence here – or both?)

The solely by

This is so only if Being is

rational, i.e., complete as a formal system of relations, without residue or remainder, which is to say without kernel.

Folk metaphysics maintains that “everything occurs in threes.” This seemingly uncanny phenomenon of everyday life may be partly explained in terms of some basic principles of cognitive and attention psychology, and perhaps reflects the manner in which human beings attend to and categorize new experiences more than it does the nature of reality informing the world of appearance. Consciousness, in other words, as the basis in which forms manifest must itself fall outside of the scope of all possible formal manifestations. It occupies the “radical outside,” if you will. Consciousness does not originate within spacetime and then somehow magically transcend this constitutive matrix at some later time, say, as a result of having acquired within itself collection of forms as one of its preexistent structures, nor as a result of its having been driven or induced to newly assume some one of its already given possible modes. But consciousness, if it is transcendent, must be so by its very nature. All consciousness, if it is transcendent, must be so by its very nature. All consciousness is transcendent consciousness. The notion of transcendence is incompatible with that of necessary or sufficient conditions for some entity possessing or exhibiting transcendence. If there are conditions for consciousness’ being (Being), these conditions are not of a temporal nature. We may be quite puzzled at the notion of conditionals that do not invoke the element of time and question the meaning and validity of such a category of conditional. The concept of modularity must be much more broadly understood if the concept of “timeless conditionals” is to be given a rational explication. Is the temporal nature of the will,

when acting “freely,” merely an epiphenomenal effect of this will’s interference with elements embedded within the spacetime continuum? Who is the entity constituted by the seeming unity of the authorial voice, this subtly benevolent and unassuming, teaching companion? Those sophisticate human beings believe that greed and selfishness they have put behind them, but narcissism and egotism are the more civilized words for these traits still very much present. It took just a couple of seconds as a dynamic an chaotic flux of thought was converted, through the sudden pumping up of tiny electric and magnetic fields of just as myriad and tiny stray capacitance’s and inductance’s of billions of gray cells, all acting in mysterious concert now, if what each had been doing just instants before was to have been one’s only guide. The exerting of a free will was a bootstrapping of action just as much was its dual consciousness in its first concerning the intention that will now implemented. Is there always some systematic coinage of compound terms formed from simple relation terms that succeeds in “covering,” in both a “complete” and “consistent” manner, but without generating superfluous, “empty” categories (uninstantiable, useless compound terms), which would necessitate an expanded (though not properly motivated) redefinition of primitive terms, already given within the system, e.g., “grandbrother,” “grandcousin,” etc., in the description of incest-genealogies? Is organic unity a conserved quantity in the evolution of life or is this unity supposed to be on the increase with time? What is the lifetime for correlations between local quantum states for vacuum boundary conditions, e.g., brain states, and nonlocal quantum states for “the” dynamical vacuum state “itself.”

The most compelling work of scholarship must convince prospective critics that its thesis was all but already articulated, short of the actions of the particular scholar in bringing to light or establishing key remaining links in the literature of his subject, which thereby demonstrate the secret inherence of the thesis in the body of work researched. Feynman’s facetious unified theory equation, U = 0, the total unworldliness in the Universe is 0, has some interesting underlying implication, one of which is that, the details of the structure (interpreted broadly here to include function) of the universe, which are important, are incorporated into abstract features coordinated via closed form, analytic expressions, and those details, at the present stage of theoretical development, are to be found (and eventually shall be found) just on the other side of what we might conveniently term, the “wall of abstractness.” Simultaneous with this is the assumption that none of the details on either side of this “barrier” have been placed there by “us”. Although abstraction is the defining operation of the important faculty of the mind (and therefore of the mind itself, known as intellect, and therefore should be supposed to possess a key subjective element (this may turn out to be only with respect to the actual impulse to formulate an abstraction or abstract category, say, through coordinated impulses of will and perception), what is left behind “on the other side” of “the barrier”) is nonetheless supposed to be 100% objectively real. Is there some divine equivalent to the FCC which assures that each persons quantum vacuum interface device (brain) operates within a narrowly enough defined spectrum of vacuum electromagnetic field modes so that for all practical purposes (from an evolutionary standpoint, say) “cross talk” between “licensed” frequencies seldom occurs?

Impulses of the survival mode, e.g., competition for scarce, lifesustaining resources, had to be placed somewhere for safe-keeping until such time as they might again be needed. If all of these suppressed competitive urges and impulses are “stored” within the very same compartment of the “conscious,” i.e., social-oriented sub-basement of the mind, then left to themselves for long periods may form among themselves some integrated, self-sustaining nexus with its own instinct for self-preservation, not able to differentiate substantive from merely abstract or symbolic, representational “threats” divorced as these impulses have been from the more rational, social-oriented self, an ongoing participant in the mutuality of relatively peaceful huntergatherer existence. Left with the residue of abstract categories and relations of the rational self but cut off from the active guidance of this self, the creature concretizes the symbolic – rather the opposite function to that of the intellect, that of abstracting from the concrete flux of the senses. One of the principles of karmic influence is that of the exhibiting of large, and even grand scales of space and time, within the microcosm, e.g., orderliness, order, timing, planning, subtlety, etc. Interesting here is the notion of this karmic principle applied to another principle or rather its operation, that of sublimation, which is intimately related to the cultural complexity of bot the individual and higher levels of social organization. If the “Ghost in the Machine” model of the human self is approximately valid, and there seems good reason to suppose that it is, then what basis have we for the assumption that one’s individual self is to be identified absolutely with the ghost and only relatively (or contingently) with the creative organism and not the other way around? In other words, what basis have we for identifying our true identities with the eternal spirit and not the temporal primate organism, itself destined to ultimate ruin, death, and decay? It seems that body and spirit are really a temporary symbiosis, each

utilizing the faculties of the other to implement its own selfish aims: the creaturely organism gives the spirit access to impulse, sensation, and experience, while the spirit gives the creature access to consciousness and rationality. It is an equitable exchange between spirit and creature of a higher order means of survival for the means by which Spirit may perform its metaphysical work ( of co-creation) within the realm of the limited. Is salvation then just the proper identification of the symbiant with the aims of the indwelling Spirit. Is there any bleeding over into the creature’s world of that which registers within the realm of the Spirit as it actively engages itself with projects within other realms of the limited? Although coupled together at the level of the mutually grappling intentions of each, there is naturally no mutual recognition by each of the alterity of the other. Perhaps the basis for compassion and humility is to be found in this mutual recognition at the level of consciousness rather than of opposed or merely accidentally consonant wills. Symmetry breaking of the unified consciousness field and Lurianic Kabbalah. The phenomenon of language as the restoration of local symmetry to the consciousness field. The breaking of a symmetry involves the loss of conversation of some substance and is the breaking into the system of the indeterminate with respect to the quantum the conservation of which has now been lost. In this way the system comes into interaction with respect to variables previously fixed. How is the myth of the “remaining crucial element” of some newlyrestored system of ancient occult knowledge relevant to the paradigm of modern scientific research, e.g., the standard model of particle physics, the human genome project, quantum computing, etc.? One should choose an open-ended name, one amenable or adaptable to an evolving interpretation. Justification for one’s life style does not consist merely in a pat-sounding account in the form of a “plea for excuses” in combination with the

enlisted support of a network of like-minded individuals – this would be a mere rhetorical-political justification basis for one’s way of life. The truth from which all real justification/ apologetics flows must transcend politics, which constitutes a kind of “expedience on a grand scale.” Had culture and social organization been evolutionary epiphenomena, i.e., had they had no effect upon either natural or sexual selection, then the interpretation of modern man as a species of primitive, huntergatherers, forced to adopt to life in advanced, industrialized society, would undoubtedly come across as ridiculous and far-fetched. We cannot arrive at a clear notion of what makes for consciousness, that is, its substance, simply by making a sufficiently comprehensive cataloguing and study of its forms and content. We must already know (secretly, at least) what consciousness essentially is if we are to identify novel manifestation (form) of it, even though such a discovery would mean seeing, under some altogether new unsuspected aspect, the way in which all of its forms, with which we have enjoyed long familiarity, have exhibited consciousness consistent with the new understanding of consciousness’ broader essence. She exhibited an air of prepossessedness that the locals here succinctly described as “her having a corncob up her butt.”

If information cannot be transmitted, then how is it that a person is an open informational system? Mental and physical are formed as are will and consciousness – Will provides the cohesion for consciousness which, in turn, provides will with its objects/representations. Things come into and go out of existence. Is this true of Being? Is God the same “thing” as Being? Or is God what makes for the possibility of Being?

Consciousness is integration within an open-ended context with which one has real time interaction. Integration which takes place along lines not recognizable by the collective. Coherence is no proof of truth as is attested by the phenomenon of insanity. An inflexible template applied to the open-ended context. The one explicates here actions in terms of history and the other in terms of the present context. Karma is the signature imprint of the individual’s consciousness upon the dynamism of the interaction of his will with the information by the collective upon this same dynamic. Does a finite time span of consciousness imply that all its structures are formed of standing waves? Investigate the relationship of the concept of radical arbitrariness to the polyemanation doctrine. Textile fashions, automobile body styles, line dances, etc. quickly enough fall into obsolescence. How does the phenomenon of hype, e.g., media hype, fit into the deconstruction of metaphysical presence? If the single helix were truly like a symbol string (ideographic or phonetic) then would the genetic sequence for a specific protein truly be, as Monod says, arbitrary? But what if the proteins coded for are themselves subject to interpretation? This suggests a structural system of interrelated signs. Can this particular system be deconstructed? Mutual gene therapy as the literal fulfillment of “becoming one flesh.” The means by which the literal implementation of the erstwhile merely metaphysical is to be accomplished itself has important symbolic significance. The transformation of the metaphorical into a form of its literal acting out and fulfillment seems to hold special and, in some cases, almost spiritual significance for many human beings.

There is no experience so profound that its significance cannot be broadened and deepened within the inspired imagination of humankind. The fundamental error in the attempt to clarify and simplify holy scriptures is that of attempting the bypassing of the necessary guidance of the Spirit. If successful, this would be a kind of “short circuiting” of the understanding of the truth of Scripture. The act of expression creates the conditions for the expression of that which is not already in the understanding. This is much like the dialectic of painting in which the finished work bears little resemblance to the beginning stages of the work. Melody is a superposition of resonances occupying distinct times. The dignity of an inhabitant of gemeutlichkeit. greeter at Wal Mart.

The Zen of being a

(Notes from conversation with Jennie Tucker McClesky, evening of July 26, 2000) Hexagram Histograms. One throws the I Ching using either sticks or coins until one has thrown all 64 Hexagrams, however many throws this might take. One records each of the wishes under its respective Hexagram. A bar graph of number of wishes versus hexagrams reveals the relative frequency of hexagrams thrown during the length of the session extending from the first throw until the throw upon which the last hexagram appears. The interpretation of the above histogram is difficult and uncertain in the case where the wishes are changed with each throw – much easier if the wish is kept constant. Sheldrakean explanation of the evolution of the method of interpreting the hexagrams. The interpretation of the hexagrams evolves as a result of centuries of empirical observation of the effects of their use.

The hexagrams could be “thrown” utilizing a small quantity of radioactive material of known, relatively short half-life. This quantity of radioactive material would be placed in appropriate proximity of a geiger-mueller tube connected a digital counting device. The registering of a decay within the period of a half-life could be interpreted as either a “0” or a “1”. Since the assignment of a “0” to, e.g., “tails” and “1” to “heads” is entirely arbitrary at least upon the initial occasion of performing this experiment, c.f., Rupert Sheldrake, The Presence of the Past, a number of observations are here in order. The hexagrams must exhibit a duality therefore upon the initial performance of the above experiment. Considering that the I Ching has been in use for many centuries, it is difficult to conceive of how the duality of the system of hexagrams of the I Ching, implied by the assumed equivalence of the throwing of sticks and the throwing of coins in the determination of each hexagram, could alter significantly over the course of a series of trials extending over the lifetime of a single person. This duality poses a problem for the assumption that the specific manner in which the hexagrams are thrown and the specific implements used with which to perform the throwing of the hexagrams, if the hexagrams are understood to convey messages containing some objective validity and/or content originating outside the mind of the person casting throws. The motivation for implementing the throwing of the I Ching via use of a device sensitive to radioactive decays are the many speculations concerning an connection between the quantum state of an isolated physical system and the quantum state of the human brain. It is not for nothing that each individual strives and suffers during his or her life on this Earth, wending his way between hope and fear, joy and sorrow, faith and disillusionment, etc., but something from his or her experience is deposited in some form into the ground of the existence of all, c.f., Sheldrake. Upon my first throwing of the I Ching, I encountered the 64 th hexagram.

Which hexagram is the dual complement to this hexagram and what is its interpretation? Etwas ist mir ganz jetzt eingefallen. Information cannot be transmitted through only local, causal processes. We can only trigger in one another private recollections or insights. Selecting for a selection process, the evolution of evolution. The linking of genes for phenotypes which enable a selection process through providing a more natural selection-friendly set of fitness indices. Metaphor reveals the hidden pervasiveness of abstract structures. Metaphor is an exemplar of abstract structure that cannot be predicted. Contingency is based in the evolution of possibility and necessity. Consciousness is “metaphor” as such. Evil follows from each pursuing its own good in ignorance of the good being pursued by the other. Pride must yield on the part of each so that these goods may harmoniously combine. Investigate the hidden dream structure of waking experience, “waking existence is the dream under the control of the object” – Santayana. No viable mechanism for the furthering of evolution is left unutilized, e.g., the encoding of individual experience into “reality.” Of course, too much unity is a bad thing. Elements and subsystems must possess a certain degree of autonomy if the system of which they are a part is not to function in too great isolation. On the other hand, the system must retain a certain necessary degree of integrity as a whole, if it is to profitably combine the separately originating contributions of its constituent elements and subsystems. Chronic narcissistic fantasization may be thought of as a kind of hemorrhaging of the sublimation mechanism normally presiding over the distribution of the id’s conserved psychic energy. Alternatively, this

mental masturbation may be understood as a short-circuiting of the tripartite structure of the psyche. Substance behind appearance is revealed through transformation and affinity. Communication between persons as mediated via communication of “higher” and “lower” selves amongst themselves. Individual consciousness has this special function over and above serving the interests of the individual’s survival. God chose out of his great love to share his divinity with other beings. The individual human soul was created not within time but as having always “existed,” i.e., had being as itself a transcendent, infinite being, possessing creativity, but only within the realm of limitation (spacetime). @$ Human experience is our gift to God and divinity is God’s gift to us. This exchange of human and divine gifts is best realized within the figure of Jesus Christ. Might the Karmic principle operate on both “external” and “internal” time scales? The Karmic principle may be a manifestation f the fact that reality is intersubjective rather than objective which means that reality (as such, or, “such as it is”) is overdetermined along myriad distinct though interrelated realities. The individual “personal” realities would not be recognizable by us as such because each of our personal worlds is actually our individual interpretation of a collective, social construct. Superposition is of ghostlike copies of classical worlds, differing from each other in only inessential details. The collectivity upon which the world of appearances is based is qualitatively different from the individual worlds comprised by it. The most general property of consciousness is identity-in-difference. What would provoke a human being to question that which is mot familiar about his daily existence? Words are always interpreted in

terms of other words. Deconstruction always adopts linguistic devices that attempt to resist its own deconstruction. These devices are themselves deconstruction’s of the larger text of which they are a part. “Physical objects” as icons of the human neural networks operating system. Objective oriented programming. One is handled and treated as “a self” for perhaps 18 to 24 months by family members prior to the birth of one’s own sense of self. If one’s life has been an inspiration to a few though still a warning to many, then it shall not have been lived in vain. It is the nature of Man’s arrogance to interpret the fact of his making in the image of God as his possessing the very substance of divinity. Sometimes the answer to a question is “yes and no.” Some either/or questions presuppose an invalid or incoherent dual distinction or falsely assume existence, e.g., “are some krundelbleetzes blue, yes or no?” So the theorems of logic and mathematics are not independent of semantics. We cannot fairly evaluate the value or meaning of experience at the personal or individual level by placing this context against the backdrop of the grand scale of the impersonal or collective (hive or societal perspective). Although it is usually difficult to recognize signs/indications through contrast with past patterns than it is by contrasting with latter developing patterns. One would love to go back and relive all those choice moments of one’s past as everything would seem so real because one would be acting the whole time. Reasons for our actions, always good enough, can always be added to.

The facility of communication of abstract, intersubjective content has disguised the uniqueness of the individual’s personal experience, even from his awareness. Individual-based venue for genetically, behavioristically determined experience taking place within a cultural/social construct, e.g., linguistic determinism. Deconstruction and postmodernism is proof of a neurotic philosophic consciousness. There must exist some most appropriate literal state of affairs that a beautiful poetic metaphor perfectly describes. The Platonic forms may not be abstract concepts or categories, but may be metaphors, which require experience for their definition as well as the context embedding this experience. Platonic order as maniacal overkilling substantiation of any truth claim. (Unnecessary for adequate support of truth claims) Absolute truth is nevertheless truth relative to some fixed and eternal system of relations. In the absence of such a timeless, more than large enough to support multiple, conflicting truth claims. Only on the assumption of a corresponding theory of truth does a truth claim necessitate an existential claim. Any truth claim can be surmounted by an adequately subtle and extended (over time) shifts in consciousness. All “logical” arguments are at some level based upon an equivocation of sense since consciousness can always invent and establish still subtler distinctions than can be suppported by the categories, and hence, class relationships presupposed in “rational” argument. All rational argument is then ultimately “discourse-ive.” There are private language constraints as well as intersubjective

openness in the fitting or adapting of subjective intuition to collective rationality. These subjective constraints upon insight can inform prior art as well as requiring a dialectical process of adaptation to and from this prior art. epi=The dialectic doesn't break reason, rather; reason is at the very heart of the dialectic. We are all or most of us what might be called “petit politicians,” forever campaigning. We parted after each having coming to the irretrievable conclusion that each was out of the other’s league. Fundamentally different types of people tend to view each other’s character strengths as crippling limitations. Another views one person’s philosophy as rationalization for failure while the philosophy of the first person is viewed by the other as an ad hoc justification for living an inauthentic life. Altered states of consciousness held a coherent social and cultural function within early primitive, tribal hunter-gatherer societies. The capability to attain nonordinary states of consciousness as well as the tendency to seek out substances in the natural environment for creating or enhancing such states of consciousness has been selected for during many thousands of generations. Most of the behavior disorders, including those traceable to brain chemical or neurotransmitter imbalances, may be traced to a normal reaction of an essentially psychically whole hunter-gatherer forced for too long to live within a cacophonous late 20 th century urban society. This situation is further combined with the notable absence of formerly long available pathways of psychic and social integration, e.g., tribal ritual, myth, religion, and collectively a pharmacologically mediated altered states of consciousness. Such altered states of consciousness permitted human beings to become one with (by perhaps gaining a sense of being immersed within) a transcendent being/ continuum, either

personal or impersonal, as well as to gain a sense of becoming one with all the members of their tribe/ clan. It was independently, and certainly accidentally, discovered that an echoing, pounding sound stirred oneself and others to synchronous movement, and also helped to produce a state of being more suggestible to both commands and communications. If young people are not provided with a sufficiently competitive, if you will, social structure (with accompanying selections of viable personae definitions), then the genetically determined default mode is brought out and adapted to the prevailing modes of expression and communication that most lend themselves to this. Relative differences in one’s own consciousness from one moment to the next or in the consciousness of one person and another may be made the proper subject of theory and speculation, however, not so for consciousness in its naked, absolute essence. Distinctions are always defined or noted, consciously or secretly, in view of either an a priori or already established category within which these distinctions are made. There are certain distinctions therefore which can only be made with respect to consciousness given the existence (or subsistence, if you will) of some a priori concept or category of consciousness as such. Without consciousness, there is not a grasping of latent or potential order from out of its camouflage of chaos. The appearance of one structure in no way suggests another. How are we to interpret the notion of the creation de novo of something as being suggested by something already present to hand? Metaphors frequently possess little of any actual descriptive value, but the metaphors a name is recommended by a fusion of pleasant if extremely vague and subjective associations. Consciousness necessarily involves action and agency in the

fundamental sense of origination and self-moving. It is the primum mobile of the conscious mind that forever possesses the potential to act in a manner that cannot be anticipated by any kind of universal causal medium or ground. Hence, the necessity of the action of consciousness in collapsing the quantum state vector. The will collapses the wavefunction because it acts from an origin positioned, if you will, altogether from outside the deterministic spacetime of the Schrodinger equation. This is what assures the transcendent nature of the will and why we should speak of it as being free. Of course, there can be no naturalistic explanation (in the traditional acceptation of this word) for the origin of either the consciousness of the individual or that of consciousness as such. Potential is not fixed, once for all, in advance, nor do potentials come into being, evolve and so on, in accordance with the dictates of potential potentials as this kind of thinking leads to an infinite regress. Both “potential” and “actual” are abstractions, the distinction between them being merely relative. The degree and quality of the interface between the transcendent, higher self and “its brain” account for differences in the intellectual abilities between persons. The determination of certain types of truth and fact necessarily involves feedback, participation, give-and-take between investigator and the subject of study which to some extent necessitates a certain selffulfilling of prophecy. To deeply probe nature is to at once probe into the penumbra of the brain’s dynamic and reactive embedding substrate. At some deeper level of probing into the affairs of natural processes, nature drops her guise of passivity and takes up an active, cooperative role in more fully determining herself. We say that nature reacts passively and deterministically to the application of an impulse or stimulus to one of her external inputs and actively and creatively when this stimulus is applied to one of her internal inputs.

Like the human psyche, nature is comprised by both active and passive components, i.e., dynamics as well as kinetics. Knowledge that is representational is transferable through discursive symbolic communication, i.e., communication in which there is no direct coupling of the dynamics of one mind to that of another. On the other hand, knowledge that is participatory is not transferable symbolically. Consciousness is relevant to the question of what exactly drives the collapse of the wavefunction in its role in binding and integrating processes that must be described as being nonlocally connected. Will or intention is relevant to this same problem in the sense that will, when expressed in bodily action or even as mere thought, introduces a disturbance to the continuum of the quantum vacuum wholly or essentially unanticipated by it. Novelty is generated as a result of the intervention of human action (will) in the affairs of the quantum vacuum. The quantum vacuum must at once quickly improvise a response to this human meddling/interference in its “private” affairs. This response is a fusing of elements of the human psyche with some of the quantum vacuum state’s own elements in which both sets of elements are initially somewhat incommensurable. The activity of this quantum vacuum is constituted by the combined collective interaction of all possible transcendent beings. The only way to in a single stroke reconcile Plato with the fact of real novelty and creativity at the metaphysical level and not just at the level of “physical” (manifestation) is to promote these Platonic forms to the status of creative and free, transcendent minds. The behavior of ideas is after the fashion of viruses and genes, i.e., mimetics, appears consistent with such an interpretation of the Platonic forms. We may think of the human brain (and its associated local dynamics) as being a kind of degenerate eigenvalue associated with an unlimited number of “states,” i.e., transcendent beings. The attempt to encompass the larger, background domain of vacuum dynamics (in which the brain’s deterministic dynamics of physical states has representation) so

as to uniquely specify the person associated with the brain in question, @$ shall only succeed in uncovering a historical event, namely, that of the transcendent being selecting that particular vacuum dynamic (with the brain effectively acting as its “kernel”) as the vehicle or conduit of its own self-limitation. No future development in physics or brain science shall discover a determinism within the scope of its refined description of brain processes (and their interplay with those of the vacuum of, e.g., post quantum physics) which demands that this or that brain (or brain state) be “the cause of” this or that particular conscious mental state (of this or that particular person). Fig. 1, Common term /

\

Context \

context Common Environment

/

Failure to understand metaphor because no experience with common abstract structure of context-literal mindedness. July 2011 Instead of the older, simpler diagram showing, c.f., Fig. 2, Common term /

\

Person A’s idea \

Person B’s idea

Common Environment

/

Insofar as our theory of conceptual referring/denoting is an actual description of what happens “inside the head of each person” in a conversation, then we should expect our diagram illustrating the model of the theory to possess self-referentiality, i.e., imagine replacing

“Person A’s idea” and “Person B’s idea” in Fig. 2 with two different versions of the the diagram in Fig. 1 and then perhaps essentially doing this once more by replacing “Context” and “context” within the two versions of the diagram in Fig. 1 with the diagram in Fig. 2. Inductively this constitutes a representation of an infinite regress. Noncommensurability of two distinct dynamical grounds pertains to the lack of momentum-energy exchange between them in which the distinct grounds indeed are undergoing a mutual exchange, however one that is completely out of resonance. The resonance of two or more grounds should be internal to both and external to neither. In a portable document file (PDF) if on takes the little hand icon and clicks the mouse, causing the hand icon to grab the page and then pull the page down across the screen rapidly, one begins to perceive a flickering of the text on the screen. The flicker frequency becomes slower the faster one pulls the page of PDF text downward across the computer desktop screen. Any connection via analogy with quantum tunneling frequency? Without a medium can there be representation? Can there be Platonic forms without “ontological commitments?”, c.f., cit=Guidebook to Derrida on Deconstruction. How can transcendentally exclusive entities connect within a common continuum? How can they initiate descent into the realm of limitation? Is some pivotal hyper transcendent entity required to trigger, enable, and orchestrate the necessary conditions for polyemanation and mutual contact within space? The tripartite organization of the soul: intellect, emotion, and will. Investigate the concept of spin as angular momentum about the time axis. To the Earthly, creaturely self, intellect can only be a tool, a means to the fulfillment of instinctual desires. Can all areas of human endeavor be

shown to be sublimation of instinctual drives? Choosing between different infrastructures of life. The same themes and conflicts are worked out in myriad distinct contexts. The nexus world of intersubjective overdetermination – a world rich enough to provide synchronistic validation of each individual’s ultimate narcissistic fantasy – to be God. Freedom means equivalent (rather than equal) access of each individual to their own “unification center” of reality. We must each and all agree to play roles that exhibit the logic of timeless themes, but also develop altogether new existential themes, and these roles must be temporary (in some sense) but this is complicated by the fact that by transcending mere manifestation within experience, new ground is brought into being, i.e., “Being, itself is enlarged, and the ground of one’s own transcendent being is metaphysically worked upon (metaphysical “work” is performed). All creativity invokes metaphysical work. What are we to think of the fundamental fact that the quantum vacuum supports the existence of any evolved structure, organic or inorganic, even though such structures are genuinely novel in not being prefigured as definite potential latent structures of this vacuum? So when a new organic structure comes in to being, for example, do the processes within the vacuum that sustain the existence of these new structures themselves also come into being? Consciousness of the particular individual remains unaltered in the face of all transformations of its state that it is capable of being subject to. This degeneracy of consciousness with respect to all possible observables points up its virtually infinite symmetry. Originating and propagating causes are the timelike and spacelike

components of causality. cit=

And Yet the Center Holds Age of Deconstruction.

The Platonist/Existentialist debate in the

These two types of causes characterize the causal medium in its active and passive modes, respectively. For two individuals to communicate a specialized language must grow up between them which encodes the history of a process of tentative and searching mutual grappling in the pursuit of a common project. Invention serves the needs of discovery. Consciousness’ collapse of y with nonlocally connected superpositions proves it separate, i.e., not originating in, the nonlocal quantum vacuum. Recognizing one’s self in the other and recognizing otherness in one’s self are two expressions of the same insight. Are substantives constituted by relations? If a process is overdetermined, then the particular causal sequence that historically led to the effect in question must itself be underdetermined. Paradoxically, the average sensitive human being is wrenched at times by a deep impulse to experience gemutlichkeit and transcendence.

The difference between thoughts and perceptions: with perception, the initiative or motive lies outside that person. By saying that a mind or consciousness is an open system, we are also saying that an individual consciousness possesses no outside.

The past is the history of boundary conditions and bound fluctuating fields. The fluctuations of the vacuum do not cease when a given moment becomes past. The “shifting of ground” phenomenon is owing to the cumulative effect of collective collapse of a vast number of more or less distinct wavefunctions. The occurrence to oneself of a very clear and distinct possibility combined with the recognition of its heretofore never having been realized, sometimes triggers a keen sense of having a premonition. If the characteristic density/time (in the probabilistic sense) is comparable to one’s lifetime given the probability rate – density and experience volume of the person, then the occurrence of this event is “overdue.” These are all factors, probability rate density, experience volume, etc., which the subconscious/higher self may indeed be able to calculate. The conscious mind is alerted to all reasonable probabilities. Because it is truly only our otherwise that is vulnerable to the insults of embodied, spatiotemporal existence, one feels that tragedy is only likely to befall others – a clear case of the equivocation by the ego between two quite distinct metaphorical acceptations of a concept – the origin of our unlearned intuitions, with a startlingly varied mixture of keenly ontarget insights and miserably mistaken presumption. Back-formation of transcendent context for temporal metaphor is a relevant notion at this juncture. Foreknowledge can be received from the future provide it has no determinate denotative content which is nevertheless usually recognized as such in hindsight. Outcomes of separate measurments of different components of a system

described by a single wavefunction though nonlocaly correlated, canot be utuilized for supeluminal observer-to-observer communication. Two nonlocally connected events are not external to each other. Pinnochio Effect is where you fake identification, knowledge, competency within a certain area until these become factual in the sense of courtroom description, and hence real. Life of its own free will cooperates with the will of God. The moral law is built into the structure of the universe just into the structure of the universe just as is the rationality of the human mind – why mathematics is so unreasonably effective in describing the physical world. The sense of the word child in the phrase, “children of God,” is that of familial relation. But there is, of course, the other obvious sense of this term the sense of immature human being. While we are on this Earth we are hopefully adults for most of our lives and children of God. After we have all accomplished our unbeknownst appointed missions here, we are then ready to become the “grown-ups of God.” What better medium in which the infinite regress of causation/explication, can have its being as already completed, than that which is at once both most singular and, pardoxically, most general (because the precondition of all thought) as well as the seat/ground of both will and representation, that being, consciousness. And ended reality (transcending any single unification) this medium is actually a plurality itself without bound, i.e., infinite multiplicity of coequal unities. We always assumed that our personal experience possess a validity more general than actual. Order is only encountered in its particular manifestations, but has it ultimate origin in something which itself has no particular order. This

something must then be itself boundless and is constituted by activity without temporality, i.e., activity in the absence of changing forms (transformation). All forms are “flux stabilities” of this activity and so transformation, i.e., temporality without fixed time scale, is change to these flux stabilities which is really just change in activity subject to externally imposed time scale. A “theory of everything” would be a single or a list of equations, i.e., “explications of the structure of the empty set.” But clearly there must be an infinite number of different possible self-consistent structurings of 0 or the empty set (speaking most generally). Infinity and 0 are simply distinct poles of the Void, i.e., empty set. A given 0 contains within itself all of the determinations of a given infinity. But just as there are many infinities there are many 0’s each corresponding to a counterpart of opposite pole. And the classes of opposite pole. And the classes of infinity do not form with one another any single hierarchy of transfinitude. It is only through birth and death that the temporal and the eternal may link back to one another. The potential for death is the constant link of life to its dynamic and creative ground. Life performs during its course creative, metaphysical work as it backreacts upon its ground through life’s engendering of novel elements in this same ground which themselves and their new dynamism grow incommensurate with the elements and their dynamics of the old foundational ground (partly initially internalized by the living, experiencing thing). This incommensurability of old and new ground and ground elements/dynamics necessarily grows with time so that the living creature grows less synchronized with the evolving ground of its developing being (as opposed to existence), resulting in the eventual “death” of this creature. It is on account of the growth of an asynchrony between the internal processes of an entity and the processes of its ground that this being necessarily faces ultimate dissolution. @$But note

that this degeneration unto death is necessary in order that the realm of being be enlarged by the processes of existence. This being more and more loses its ability to spontaneously adapt to the shifting of the ground of its original (and present) being, largely due to the myriad cumulative and collective effects of all other living things upon this same physical ground. The same pseudo Lamarkian processes which enforce a necessary limit on the lifetime of each individual living thing. Entropy degrades a living system because the system is giving up information to the environment faster than it can convert information into beneficial modifications of its own structure. Continuity is important because some information has no absolute design content, external to itself, in the sense of changes to the preexisting content rather than coding for a particular out-crystallization of dynamic structure from the present ground state. Messages passed, person-to-person, along a long chain, resulting in such garbling of message that it no longer bears any resemblance to the original Degradation of digital information through multistage amplifier circuit. No constraint upon how noise creeps into and entangles with the original signal, i.e., no syntactic or semantic filtering/processing accompanies degradation of the signal. So when transmitters are active, i.e., listener-speaker, signal information is replaced gradually with an altogether new signal without degrading into random signal, i.e., “noise.”

The omniscient narrator can interpret for the reader the present actions of the protagonist in terms of events that are to befall this character

much later in life, c.f., p. 29, paragraph 1 of The Rector’s Wife. www.hackersclub.com

web=

She had become a stern disciplinarian of her inner child. Since the quantum vacuum, or zero-point field, is ultimately responsible for that special and general relativistic effects, e.g., mass increase, length contraction, time dilation, etc., and also determines the precise character of quantum phenomena, e.g., Psi-collapse, tunneling, resonance, etc., we are hopefully justified in supposing that the vacuum plays a substantive role in determining the exact timing and synchrony/synchronization of all physical processes, including neurological processes. And since the exquisite timing of signals transmitted both within and between neurons are vital to the brain’s processing of information, the vacuum’s dynamics must be intimately involved in the higher level functioning of the brain. We cannot understand information in the way data are understood, that is, as determinate and closed or isolated entities. It only makes sense that the “phenomena forever unmanifest,” the virtual processes that underpin (at every point) causally deterministic processes of the manifest order, be themselves, nonlocally connected and essentially acausal. The greater degree of integrity and wholeness that the temporal ego brings to its experience, the more valuable information would be lost during the phase of uploading into the personal cosmic mind. And so the less likely that the ego’s underlying integral structure shall be disassembled so as to make other data and information readily available to this mind. Certainly the level of resistance of the ego to the perceived horrors of the fundamentally incomprehensible process of his “being uploaded,” shall only increase the magnitude of the stresses acting on and within its psyche. Each individual has a more or less distinct built-in or instinctual (but largely subconscious ) knowledge that “uploading” is his ultimate fate. All of these individual, subconscious presentiments of uploading and

reprocessing manifest themselves on the collective level as the notion of divine judgement, purgation, etc. Can experience be plugged into an altogether novel and perhaps alien context with the result that new meanings of more powerful significance (than is possible in, say, the context of one’s Earthly life) are brought forth? All arguments are “circular,” the question concerning an argument’s “validity” is simply that of whether or not this circle (of the argument’s circularity) can be encompassed within a human mind or not, that is, whether the argument only “fails” when considered from the standpoint of a superhuman mind or not. Because the Platonic subsistence of logic and rationality is itself ultimately a given, that is, an irrational datum, all arguments are either only conditionally valid or arbitrary/nonsensical. There can be no causal reason for an eternally existing universe. There can be no general procedure for forming abstract descriptions, (unless the generality of this procedure is necessarily inconceivable?). A high frequency, periodic flow of quantum coherence and decoherence underlies the “flow of conscious experience.” As Descartes has cogently pointed out, there is nothing more certain, less likely to turn out to have been mere illusion, than the fact of one’s own (conscious existence). No greater certainty concerning the fact of God’s existence may be derived from another fact than that of one’s own seemingly indubitable existence. The atheist secretly suffers from a profound sense of his or her own ontological insecurity. The ontologically secure individual is only faced with the lesser crisis of belief, namely, “am I myself secretly God, or is it someone greater than even my higher self?” The recursiveness of consciousness, the necessity of the mind being both

a unity and an open system, i.e., unlimited, its faculty for selfinteraction with potential for complete self-interpenetration (ability to “pass through” itself to perfect recursiveness), the nonsensical and contradictory nature of information being “transmitted” through a substantial medium – all of this points to consciousness transcending spatiotemporality, itself merely the arena for the manifestation of consciousness’ representations and willed actions. The uniqueness of consciousness means that its operation is not lawlike. Its role as the ground for the formation of abstract categories implies that it itself possesses no formal descriptions, such which applies only to its various representations (mental) and products of intention (embodied action, i.e., physical). In other words, a given consciousness cannot cease to be though it might be forced to withdraw itself from spacetime (existence). The important question for the individual, admittedly philosophically-minded human being to consider then is whether there is some essential and necessary connection in force between himself, i.e., his “worldly ego” and the transcendent being whose being is absolutely necessary to his temporal (and perhaps secretly eternal ) conscious egoic existence. It is clear that one’s necessary precondition for conscious existence that embeds and enables the phenomena of his ego, i.e., this transcendent consciousness/transcendental being would not enable the ego’s existence out of a mere trifling, escapist and thrill-seeking impulse, but this Being desires to achieve (somehow) genuine growth through the experience of projecting itself (through appropriate) acts of self-limitation. Since this is to be a serious mission) project for this being, real and lasting consequences must be a genuine possibility (and express goal) of said being. Consequently, this Being’s act of selflimitation is of necessity an irreversible one. If he is to return to his transcendent selfhood, this must be accomplished by a path that does not preexist as present possibility. Return can only be accomplished through the working out of altogether new possibilities of transformation than existed prior to this being’s descent. Metaphysical work must be performed by this being, in other words, if the realm of the transcendent is ever to be reconquered. So here we see that emanation of Being into

Existence cannot be manifestation, pure and simple, but at once necessitates novel and unprecedented acts of creation. Consciousness may indeed be a category, but it is not an abstract category. Perhaps what we term consciousness is a metaphor of one kind when applied to other persons and of still another kind when applied to one’s own case – here a metaphor for something intimately connected to the ego but utterly transcending it. The question of immortality is reducible to a question concerning the relationship of the transcendent self to the temporal ego. Does the personal absolute, if you will, require the preservation of its client-ego in order to best preserve the unique quality of the knowledge gained through this instrument, which, as already alluded to, cannot be a purely passive instrument of the personal absolute, which itself must risk real involvement/enmeshment with a spatiotemporal realm. One is uncertain about what relationship one should maintain with regard to the narcissistic id. Freud was mistaken in some sense about the limitations of the id with regard to the operation of the reality principle. If an individual’s brain is networked to a large preexisting network of other brains, and this is done too quickly (nonadiabatically), then the thread of continuity of the identity of the person patched into the network is lost. What basis is there for identity other than structure and continuity? Adiabatic changes to the quantum mechanical system are those which are so subtle and slow that the underlying ground state quantum vacuum does not realize that anything is being done to the system. C.f., the ship of Theseus, the golden thread in the Labyrinth. Certainly there is nothing wrong with taking a breather on a plateau along one’s climb and cultivating a little complacency, enjoying the sense of stability of a local energy minimum. But, of course, this system of local energy minima can itself always shift. Can the dynamics of such a shift be adequately described by deterministic, Hamiltonian dynamics?

Unless the phenomena of mind were inputs to brain/consciousness, there would be no coherent/rational reason for their appearance within the presentational continuum. The phenomena of mind, whether thought or perception, etc., must be informative to appear. Can we say the distinction of data versus information is parallel to boundary conditions versus dynamisms – to space versus time – to momentum versus energy? Entropy – closed vs. open systems. When we prove to be right in our suspicions, we rarely are aware of how right we truly are. Manifestation is never merely a projection into a passive medium, but its ground/point of origination is at once participating with the expression/transmission medium. Transmission transmission.

involves

expression

just

as

expression

involves

Recursiveness as a necessary feature of entanglement of transmission and manifestation/expression. Overdetermination of meaning in the sense of multiple, simultaneous determinations all of which (perhaps, no two of which) can be held in the mind, i.e., comprehended at once. Adaptability of history to future, broader determinations that shall include prior determinations. So an additional time axis accommodates changes between (rationally) mutually exclusive determinations (degeneracy of causality). Degeneracy as the realm of the higher temporal dimensional temporal evolution. Data concerns descriptions of change along a single time axis; information describes changes of time axes/time variables. Is this the reason time cannot be an observable in quantum mechanics where collapse of the wavefunction involves switching between different temporal evolutions, i.e., switching from one Schrodinger equation to

another with respect to some incompatible observable. The successive splitting of degeneracies pertaining to a single moment in the sense of staggered over time, multiple historical interpretations is exclusively a function of the mind of individual historians. Dialogue with the author upon reading a text is possible at least in the sense that the author’s development of his subject or thesis insightfully anticipates the questions, impressions, misunderstandings and epiphanies likely to occur in the mind of the reader in response to this development. Cernerse: hover; threaten – this is a case of two acceptations being separate words in English and being fused in another language (here, Spanish). How are vampirism and necrophilia related? Sucking the life out, leaving a lifeless husk behind versus proving that the inner life principle of the other is an illusion and that the other is, in fact, not genuine other at all. Will to solipsism and necrophilia – what’s the connection? The mind routinely utilizes a kind of dialectic in the fusing together of ideas that, heretofore separate, were mutually incongruous. This irreversibility of ideas in interaction suggests that ideas, when they first occur to us, are pristine and uncontaminated, free of cross contamination with other ideas with which they otherwise “run together.” Knowledge of common versus distinctive kinds of a thing/situation. Much creativity is expended in syncretistic endeavor – the exploitation of obscure covey holes within a genre – paradigm. Each genre may be interpreted as a more or less independent axis of variation of forms of a certain sort. Analysis: the peculiar and confused, self-referential logic of narcissistic

representin’.

Noncommunicable sensory/perceptual contents – linking together (networking) of minds does not change the polyvalent character of subjective experience within this composited medium. What kind of degeneracy is this? It is a case of degeneracy with respect to all possible formal/physical parameters – another basis for saying that no formal description of mind is possible (because there can be no formal or physical basis for distinguishing “distinct” minds). The chaotic attractor notion of thought may suggest for them a “formal content.” This form nature is determined by the degeneracy structure. The degeneracy structure determines the resonance spectrum. C.D. Broad would have us believe that each of us is secretly capable of perceiving everything happening elsewhere in the universe (from the perspective of the particular individual in question?). These “particular individuals” are free to develop their consciousness in any direction at all without this development interfering with the developments of some other individuals’ consciousnesses. This is the idea of each individual mind possessing its own unique resonance spectrum. Uniqueness does not imply determinacy in the case of consciousness. Although graced by evolution with a body fashioned through countless generations of millions of beings struggling against all odds to survive, most human beings would prefer to live life expending the bare minimum of effort. [If my consciousness and that of each intelligent person possess its own unity, then can there be room for a still more perfect unity, that of consciousness as such? But the notion of a unity of features of the individual’s own consciousness which transcends the unity of his individual consciousness seems nonsensical, if not contradictory.]

Unity is always an “attribute” that is unique to the thing “possessing” it. This unity, being unique, cannot be described discursively. There can be no complete formal theory of what constitutes unity. The notion of unity can only be understood in metaphorical terms. Any attempt at characterizing unity generally must involve elements not necessary to its essence. This is because unity always subsists against a background of a fundamentally nonunified reality. That which has never originally been “produced” can certainly ever be reproduced. Only the formal manifestations of the absolute possess a historicity. The Absolute possesses no history for it has never interacted with another, other than itself. The realization of form always simplifies in some ways and complicates in others. The simplifying abstraction of features of the whole always invites into the mix new elements at variance with new forms thus engendered. The medium of experience is always in small part the creation of which whose experience is expressed through it. So there is no pure separation of experience from its medium. So experience can never be captured in a purely formal manner. Moreover, the medium of experience can never be truly passive. It is the activities of which we never grow tired the pursuit of which our vigor is ever renewed that are prompted from within our innermost being. The implications of this observation are harmless and pedestrian enough in the case of the known or acknowledged habits of mind and body, but potentially quite disturbing where newly revealed or introspected, longstanding patterns are concerned. It is not so much the adopting of new interests that signals a change in the self as does the turning away from an activity heretofore regularly and frequently engaged in, the more so the greater this former activity’s frequency and regularity.

We do not fail to reproduce novel and unique phenomena merely because the causes that evoked them in the first place cannot be reproduced, nor because this set of causes has changed or shifted so that we are now faced with a search for the proverbial haystack needle to identify them through later incarnations. But rather we have lost the thread by which change to this set of causes was introduced (containing both manifest and "hidden" causes) through having allowed our vigilance of and intimate involvement with such changing sustaining conditions to lapse. Unique phenomena are only reproduced through the maintaining of a thread. This thread acts to maintain the robustness of newly engendered forms by heading off the irrelevant deterministic effects of the instrumental side of the dynamism, the blindly given off epiphenomena, manifesting at lower integral levels of process. This necessary integration of dynamical process involves the continual redefinition of what might be termed causal equivalence classes. The stability of percepts and the fixedness and purposefulness of thought depend upon this proactive integration of dynamic abstract forms. An instinctual, that is, a robustly overarching theory of, the causal relatedness, as well as the historicity of, the three basic interacting levels of abstraction, causation, and information must already be in hand for this process of the continual distillation of mind from material process to continue going through. Information and abstraction are seen here as basically inverse functions of one another. Information fundamentally alters the possibilities for the abstracting of forms from the dynamical causal medium. Abstraction is the manifesting of the medium through filters as well as the adjusting of these filters insofar as the filtering mechanism is part of a causal process. First level filtering is then seen as base level adjusting of filters so that there is a still lower level of filtering relating to the mere presence of boundary conditions to the medium’s causal self interaction. Information involves an alteration in the character of the medium itself. And there is a special type of informing/information which never involves the introduction of any novelty whatever. This informing is simply that of the maintenance of the thread of continuity,

no more, no less. There is a kind of novelty introduced in maintaining constancy against the backdrop of continual flux when the thing thus maintained is itself an abstraction, at least in part, from out of this flux. We are here referring, of course, to the Self, which may be aptly characterized here as the equivalence class of all voc=equivalence classes of a certain type/sortal. Not changing by taking into account all inessential changes is the tenacity of the self. Not all limitation presupposes the most general limitation of spatiotemporality. All the while that we have spoken of temporality we have secretly been referring to spatiotemporality. Temporality itself, shorn of the intuition of space, is to us indistinguishable from the timeless. The sense of audition has often been spoken of as being a faculty of pure temporal perception. But there is a trace of spatiality where nonmeaningful or noisy auditory streams are concerned. It is only the meaning conveyed by voice, simultaneous with its very utterance and issuing from within the mind’s ear, if you will, which possesses this timelessness. Each must find some creative endeavors, which engage these dynamisms that underlie the daily-reenacted banal, unproductive patterns of self-talk, instinctual psychological/egoic reaction. Formerly these impulses were engaged within a tribal clan setting and by continuously being acted out, sufficient mental pressure was avoidable to prevent the bubbling forth of these impulses into consciousness. Many fragmentary impulses that regularly body forth in the psyche are in search of their former tribal hunter-gatherer social context. Reality unified? Along only particular lines? But manifestation is what defines the avenues of unification while at the same time necessitating a departure therefrom. Manifestation is a departure from unity that remains in some measure connected to this origin. There is nothing to prevent a unity from being enlarged through maintaining this unity in the face of growth.

We only recognize causes in terms of the conditions through which they act and which limit them and moreover do not distinguish different ones as such. Distinct causes or the existence of a plurality of causes, that is, the fact alone of the existence of distinct causes, such that their number is greater than unity, being revealed only when one set of conditions fail to be reduced to another necessary to it. And so the evolution of conditions is dialectical in nature by evolving the operation of new causes during its course. But whether new causes are evoked, due to changing conditions, from the very same source it is not meaningful to speculate upon unless one is presuming the possibility of essentially similar acts on the part of distinct persons. Only natural superiority has a right to be respected. The realm of the possible is the medium, which supports the “transmission” of actual events as well as their transpiring in place. This medium of possibility is not indifferent to the passage of actual, historical occurrence through its bulk, but reacts anharmonically (aperiodically) to all but the simplest and most regular occurrences. As we know from studying Fourier analysis, an aperiodic function can only be approximated through a sum of sinusoidal functions, and then, over only a finite interval, c.f., Gibb’s phenomena, and even an infinite number of sinusoids must fail to properly represent the function over an infinite interval. But the notion of an aperiodic function over an infinite argument interval invokes the notion of an infinity by other than construction, that is, an infinity not founded upon a projection requiring endless repetition of a finite rule. Such a rule translated to a law would be describable neither in terms of induction nor deduction, but points up an altogether different kind of ratio. This type of infinity itself represents what might be termed an infinite rule, e.g., a new kind of ratio without use of counting numbers. The possibilities of the decision tree reconstitute themselves in reaction to the action of decision’s taking place. So perhaps there is not such thing as intention alone as purely contemplated action, but intention itself is action. What is the meaning of the coherence of myriad unintended consequences? @$The gravity of human action is Karma.

I am amazed at the capacity the arbitrary has for institutionalizing itself and shocked that this is its most urgent ambition. That which is truly unique is usually just imitation in search of an object. The irrational does not possess the potential for automaticity. May we characterize evil as being inherently paradoxical, the harmony of cacophony – as being a thorough going rational irrationality? The manifestation of the absolute within the realm of limitation is likened unto goodness itself corrupted unto perversion. But this is not identical to what is evil. We must start from the premise that evil was born here as a product of this world. Ignorance is a necessary ingredient but so is this wantonness of a proactive survival instinct. But there are also the qualities of arbitrariness and perverseness (as opposed to “perversity”). When one makes a new distinction, does one point out what everyone should have already known, but were unable to articulate to him or herself? Energy is routed, channeled, filtered, etc. like a flowing conserved fluid possessing only a passive momentum, i.e., not reacting back upon that which conditions its kinematics. Information possesses an active momentum and cannot be manipulated mechanically as a passive substance. Information possesses a dynamism through its action of informing all with which it comes into contact, including other information (“streams”). In a sense, hypotheticals are not really possible because nothing can really take place within the world, history or within the most ordinary situation as a truly isolated event. The hypothetical and the real are not completely distinguishable. Metaphysical presence and canonical, classical, standard, etc. An abreaction of the reaction formation of “hopeless humanness.”

Attributing one’s human nature to one’s individuality. This is a narcissistic halo not unlike that worn by the love object; every nuance of inflection, mannerism, and habit is uniquely individual to the magical person. After the denouement of the love affair, all these are seen as either affectation or common. What possible evidence could be ascertained for events that, if perceived, automatically cover their tracks, erasing their memory traces within the brain? When recollecting an old friend after many years time, must one take a positivistic perspective? But mustn’t there be an objective order already existing within which the reality-by-agreement is to be worked out, inevitably through some historical-temporal process. No genuine dialectical process ever worked itself out without at once working through itself. Dialectic requires that its “background” continuum be caught up in the dialectic as well. Freedom is as much connection to and interaction with nonlocally connected information as it is independence from these. Nonlocality and the contingency of a substantial medium or ether in the “transmission” of information, would nonlocally “mediated” “inter”actions be reversible? Can a nonlocal “medium” be consistently assigned an entropy? The purely arbitrary just by being placed in the mix of historically mutually involved entities must necessarily take upon itself a nonarbitrary historical significance. This is part of what makes science fiction time travel stories so interesting. July 2011 Stewie to Brian: “That’s such a douche time traveler thing to say” I imagine an SF story in which the protagonist encounters a time traveler from the distant future who, upon solemnly confiding to our main character that he’s “from the 30 th

Century”, receives an abrupt response from our man (designed to make us “ignorant peasants’ just a little proud): “What great significance is your solemn revelation set against the immensity of the Universe?” There is indeed a trend I’ve recently noticed in time travel science fiction to downplay the presumptuous narcissism of futuristic time travelers – a trend the seeds of which were perhaps first planted by H. G. Wells in his seminal SF work, The Time Machine, whose protagonist 19th Century Philosopher-Scientist taught us that progress is but an appearance borne of fluctuation and too puny a scale of historical vision to appreciate this fact. Now recognize that a fluctuation is merely the most natural manifestation of a system conceivable! Everything which the system shall manifest as robust new development in the future is first prefigured in the idle, roiling and bubbling bed of fluctuations of the system. This is much in the same fashion as the young toddler who, babbling, vocalizes every possible phoneme which he shall ever utter during adult life. Meaning and significance are the glue which make experiences stand out in our memory even after most else has been forgotten for the last time. This realization might help to make biological evolution somewhat more palatable to reason. After all, can the very ground of being really lift itself by its own bootstraps so as to transcend itself…still less could it engender a daughter which would outstrip the creativity of her father! I am at this point struck by the disturbingly nihilistic revelation that we indeed have a notion of consciousness without actually possessing consciousness as such or in its suchness. The empiricists transported from the age of reason to our alleged postmodernity might settle upon the notion that thought is just a reprocessing of the data of the senses, which abstracts it from its original timeline. In other words, thought is just recollection in a form which is disguised by an inadequate understanding of the functioning of the mind. That the data of the senses are originally experienced in a temporal order does not close off their participation in higher dimensional contexts than the unidirectional one constituted by the thread of temporality. When experiencing hypnogogic states (usually experienced just before the onset of sleep or upon awakening) one notices that myriad and highly distinct though stylized scenes (similar to types of animation) flash

before one’s mind’s eye at a rate of about 0.80-0.90 Hz. The scenes do not however exhibit the continuity of content and context of actual dream scene sequences. It is as though the mind is performing a computed tomography of its experiential store of sense data and is spontaneously recontextualizing them. Oh, is that all it means to you? No, that’s just the representational part. Like attempting to move the limbs of some transcendental faculty, one occasionally feels a prompting or impulse to act in a manner for which one is not in fact equipped. @$The question arises, whence come such inherently fruitless stirrings? Somehow fancy and illusion, when interwoven with action are regarded as of greater worth and significance than illusion and fancy alone. As we have earlier noted, evil arises from the finite person attempting to act out of his own absolute being. An imbalance between the faculties of mercy and justice brought about in the process of having made the self artificially ignorant of its true nature. Just as the notion of the true self points to something transcendental relative to finite existence, the notion of community is equally transcendental relative to the unlimited state of being of the personal absolute. The imperfect knowledge possessed by the finite self concerning its transcendent counterpart combined with the imperfect knowledge possessed by the transcendental self of otherness and the Other contribute to the emergence of evil in the realm of finite being. The knowledge of the one is partially given up in order to gain knowledge of the other in an attempt to realize a greatest good. Mankind has always experienced many inner promptings to exert faculties in a measure of which he is not actually capable, much like the attempt of an amputee to stir into action a phantom limb. Philosophical endeavor, particularly metaphysics, represents this attempt to grapple with questions too deep and broad for a mere humanly limited understanding. Sometimes individuals faced with certain death or destruction in the face of obviously superior force will suddenly develop

an extremely sharp conviction of their natural invincibility – such as one might experience in the face of a grave threat encountered in dreams in which one suddenly realizes one’s true identity as a waking self merely asleep in a superior reality. The wrath borne of frustration and vexation of one’s shadow transcendent self forced to deal with countervailing wills and obstacles unknown to it in its unlimited state of being may manifest as what might be seen as evil behavior. One forgets that the limitations with which one meets with daily are but inevitable symptoms of one’s chosen limited form shaped by the complex realm of limitation. The types of uncertainty and/or factors contributing to it: vagueness, interference effects due to exchanges of energy, interference effects due to exchanges of information, uncertainty due to sheer complexity, that due to active deception/disinformation, “experimenter effect,” i.e., the effect of experimenter subconscious biases, expectations, and projections, uncertainty introduced through transmutation through changing media, translation losses/gains (linguistic), viral contamination by foreign memes, breaking through of combined subthreshhold effects, incompleteness, ambiguity, blindness/denial of observer/experimenter, channeling, focusing, filtering effects, sociology of knowledge, paradigm dominance, etc. One’s theories, models, and paradigms that inform the interpretation of data must be under investigation along side the phenomena being investigated by way of these. By bonding with people of the type that in the past hurtfully rejected us, we might find, finally, the key to those rejecting hearts. The confused (and usually repressed, as well) desire is to symbolically (or perhaps, in reality) return to the rejecting person armed with the newly acquired secret weapon for knocking down (penetrating) the battlements of their erstwhile icy hearts. Her is to the key to the polyemanationist doctrine: there is unity in diversity but which relative to intersubjective agreement (EST) Selfishness and pride are barriers to the opening up and enrichment of the self by experience. Experience is never interpreted in search of meanings larger than those concerning the self and its immediate needs/wants. When asked to imagine any situation or entertain any new idea, if one finds that once set upon such a path of fancy or speculation that powers of intuition and insight commence to spring into action, seemingly of their own accord, then clearly unconscious contents are in process of being liberated, latent connection of parts of the self are finding a new actualization, resulting in a perceptibly if not slightly heady and vertiginous larger integration of the self’s resources, now already underway. Then we say that the ideas and images offered to us for consideration have a transformative power – they seem to lead us vertically “upwards” or “downwards,” as the case might be, but at any rate, take us away from the sterile surface of the banal in which our identity is normally fixed, compete with all of the requisite attendant boredom, frustration, and restlessness that is the lot of mundane men and women. Fortunately or unfortunately, few of these ever reach a stage in life of being able to articulate the true source of dissatisfaction with life’s perceived possibilities. January 2013 From a recent Facebook message: “That is both a short and a long conversation, Sam! New disorder discovered: PLSD: "Post Langweilig Stress Disorder". *"Langweilig" means "boring" in German. I'd like to offer myself up as a kind of "patient zero" in a ground breaking study of the disorder! : )” The pluralist world of Plato’s ideas is not timeless but these ideas are living beings. But how to reconcile notions of absolute, infinity, unlimited, etc. with temporality? Dissociation may just be the retreating from our normal personas and taking up refuge in the self that transcends and employs them much as a puppet master might. But dissociation is a necessity of social existence

in which the individual is expected to completely perform in role, according to the cognitive styles/modes most appropriate to social spheres of which his life is comprised. But dissociation is a two-way implication: that of the persona decoupling, e.g., fugue state, religious conversion, etc., from the true self, and that of the true self decoupling from the persona. Due to the operation of culture in standardizing and institutionalizing patterns of social interaction and behavior, it is not necessary that behavior be genetically determined in all individuals within a given breeding population, e.g., clan or tribe. It is only necessary that a large enough percentage of this population be composed of socially dominant/influential individuals (possessing the ability to substantively influence the cultural and social evolution of the population) for the survival value to the population of the new set of behaviors to be fully exploited. The more influence such dominant individuals wield within the relatively closed society of the breeding population, and the more effectively the culture purveys the spread of new, evolutionaryadvantageous behaviors, the smaller the fraction of individuals within this population need actually possess the genetic markers for the evolutionary-advantageous social behavior. So we should expect that some small percentage of a breeding population exhibit patterns of behavior as an expression of their (genetically-based) being while the majority of this population exhibit these patterns through mimesis informed by cultural influences. Here we arrive at the notion that socially dominant individual’s act out of the inner promptings of their being while the 95% of a given social group are acting out a “second nature” determined by the cultural patterns of behavior dominant in their social group. We would like our generalizations to be viewed as informed by a broad and varied base of experience. We would like to give specific examples to be viewed as acts of imagination. Experience is constructed so as to accommodate future developments.

As the density of quantum vacuum states decreases with cosmic expansion, a blackhole must give up enough quantum states (per unit time), all of which are distributed along and across the hole’s event horizon. Because of the greater relative abstractness of terms original to older languages, e.g., Sanskrit, Greek, Latin, etc., it appears likely that language evolved out of a progressive expression of high level, internal information processing taking place within our automata-like forbears of the genus Homo, who did not possess an individual-style consciousness. At some point, the nonlocal quantum brain processes become mutually disconnected within the collective and reconnected to distinct, individual (transcendent) absolute minds. Dynamic: opening up, breaking out or into a heretofore-deterministic data structure. The Supreme Being is the transcendent Being possessed by all transcendental absolute identities (persons) in common. But this commonality of transcendent consciousness is only valid analogically speaking. You might think of this form of transcendence as transfinite transcendence. Is it necessarily the case that equivocation of sense (of the same term as it appears in both the minor and major premise) necessarily render a syllogism invalid, or are there certain special circumstances, that is, restrictions upon the precise manner of the equivocation, which permits the conclusion to go through? And if indeterminate or “polyphonous” meanings are admitted into the discourse of argumentation, does the law of excluded middle still hold? The truly sacred and holy cannot be desecrated, only our idea of it. It is the distinctions and system of differences that is created not that in which these inhere. What is called an open unity is a unity of common transcendent origin of manifestation. It is not a unity in an abstract or formal sense, that is, of

description. Therefore, this unity’s manifestations do not uniquely attest to it as being their author. Any candidate formal description of “the process” by which manifestation occurs would have to be both broader and deeper than that pertaining to the production of abstract descriptions, e.g., in terms of classes and categories. Does what is called intention transcend the duality of accident versus causal-deterministic? The analogous relatedness of the plurality of individual subjectivities, i.e., consciousnesses, implies a copresence to an impersonal transcendental consciousness. Consciousness is the ocean in which living ideas swim. Bobos in Paradise, David Brooks (Simon & Schuster) The Exurbanites, A.C. Spectorsky The knowledge of the nature of consciousness is not intersubjective, which is to say, discursive. The individual seems to possess this Cartesian certainty of his own state of individual consciousness and yet, there is nothing within his consciousness to which a possible verbal description might be attached which explains the nature of this most general feature of his momentary experience. With the individual’s own consciousness apart from any forms that might inhabit it, the general and the particular are one. That is, paradoxically, the individual’s state of consciousness is at once of greatest generality and greatest particularity. It is a general category that possesses unlimited potential for instantiation (over time), but at any given moment is utterly singular. If the possibilities for consciousness are not prefigured, then as consciousness evolves, it grows more singular and grows in its generality. The ground of the individual consciousness would in this case have to be partially constituted by what is occurring to other consciousnesses. The substance of consciousness is the infusion of its past states, which are

non-repeatable, as well as its possible future states, which are different by the time that they become actually exhibited within it. Indeterminacy leaves room for the operation of alterity, that is, that which is at the present stage in commensurable with respect to consciousness. One’s experience should be rich enough that one can wait for an apt cue to subtly segue into the topic of conversation of one’s choosing. When one acts out of a sense of one’s absolute being, one considers oneself the end subserved by others considered as means. We do not need to fetishize the customs, folkways, and social structures, or even the physical theories of the past. There are an unlimited number of equally valid ways of thinking, perceiving, and being. I have taken no small amount of solace in the thought that I am and will probably forever remain, the single greatest blunder of judgement that you commit during your short sojourn on this planet. After the age of 40, you’re not likely, say, to discover some neat, new way of cracking your knuckles. The same rule goes for. . . Pragmatism and Pluralism are distinguished from Idealist/Monist philosophy most easily in terms of how these doctrines treat the notion of progress. Pragmatism: not better just different; Idealism: not just different, but better Correspondence versus the coherence theory of truth is aligned with the distinction between idealism versus pragmatism. Upside down vision-inducing goggles experiments of the 1950’s. What my hand feels like – is this “intrinsic” sense-meaning or institutionalized

arbitrary sensations linked through feedback. How does participation (feedback) shape and crystallize representations? Nothing is real in a solipsistic universe. maximal realism meaning.

Polyemanationist reality has

“And Justice for Some” Center as well as periphery, figure as well as ground, rational as well as irrational, pragmatic and theoretical, and so on, form a dual set of categories. Coherence and self-consistency that belong to a category of the dual pair also belong to the other. There is no reason why one dual distinction cannot cut across another while retaining its coherence as a dual set of categories, as well as the other duality retaining its coherence. Regardless, of one’s perception of the magnitude of one’s progress, one must not imagine having drawn any nearer to a full understanding of existence. There is a subtle rollover effect that occurs during conversation in a second language with a native to the culture of this language. One begins by intending to say one thing but must actually articulate something somewhat different occasionally what one actually musters to articulate is only loosely related to what one believes one originally intended to say. This phenomenon is imperceptibly replaced by a perhaps unreferenceable change (in the mind of the speaker here, that is) in the kinds of things that the 2 nd language speaker intends to say. It is during this transition that one ceases to have to constantly translate what a native speaker says into one’s mother tongue before composing a response. I note here that I never have needed to translate what I wanted to say from some initial composition begun in English into the target 2 nd language. Apparently the faculties of language composition and

comprehension are distinct in their operation, c.f., contrast between “deep structure” and “generative grammar.” Fractal vowel sounds of the French language versus pure vowel sounds of Latin, Greek, Hebrew, Sanskrit, etc., i.e., tongues descended from the Protoindoeuropean. This observation also applies to the tonal languages, i.e., languages in which distinct meanings are conveyed through very subtle variations in vowel sound tonality, e.g. the oriental languages. Another relevant difference between oriental and occidental languages is the one in terms of the first possessing an ideographic written language, the other, a phonetic. Does the monotonality versus the polytonality of Indo-European versus oriental languages have any relevance to the distinctly different notions that the corresponding cultures/societies hold concerning transcendence? Can only drive the system at one or more of its natural frequencies. Natural lifetime of historical moments “driven” at newly formed resonance frequencies - the loss of enthusiasm as the decay of a moment of determinate potential determinations. Reprocessing experience in terms of new concept maps/networks. The canonical form creates a deterministic and stable space of possibilities about itself, which is filled fractally. A hypothetically super-canonical space may be densely filled by intersecting and interpenetrating, fractally-filled canonical spaces. If there is no God, then to whom am I to be grateful for my good fortune? A repetitive sensory stimulus only appears to induce resonance if the mind deems the stimulus to possess a potentially meaningful pattern. Otherwise, the perception of those stimulus sinks from consciousness. Those with excellent short-term memory, senses of direction, social

skills do not need to rely on reason and imagination. The whole picture is revealed stepwise so the meaning of each step is in terms of a context not yet revealed. We can have metaphors for abstract metaphors that have “fallen into” being literally interpreted. How is personal gratitude a coherent notion, when so many are suffering in this world. Is gratitude to God then just gratitude for deserved (or undeserved) favoritism directed toward oneself and not others? How do strange chaotic attractors function in neural network memory and learning? Dictaweb TM portable web search digital Dictaphone with nerual net based voice recognition. Informerge TM. Concerning the question of unity, we shouldn’t ask if things are related to one another, but how can they be related so as to serve objectives. One element can always contaminate another, if only y allusion within narrative there is not intersubjective infinite. Metaphor and specifically analogy, free the mind from confinement to any particular deductive system. Sleep Warehouse on Siegen Lane. White Elephant in Hammond, LA. Men invented the concept of femininity. Estrogen treatments of prostate cancer. Injection of testosterone into cows, causing them to attempt mounting of multiple other cows. The thesis of core bisexuality being modulated by “extraneous” factors presupposes the “pre-postmodern” notion of core identity, that is, “self-

identity.” Proactive sociality of homeless people, e.g., always waving hello to people wearing tinted sunglasses. More thought and perception appears in a prepared “grist form.” Truly “deep cover” operatives don’t know they work for the agency! If you suspect you’re one of us, just call 555-5555. Grace receiving consciousness on credit – human experience is actually free floating, ungrounded experience. It is paradoxical but there is such a thing as “eigenalterlichkeit.” Since one’s identity is not yet fully formed, one cannot be identical with oneself and the distinction between self and other is not well founded. Does the negation of something (as existent) secretly affirm it as essence? Highly differentiated people are people who’ve had great success in adapting to a particular environment. But the more entrenched an organism is in its “perfect adaptation” to an environment, physical or social, the more precarious is the organism’s position. Essential to the concept of freedom is the concept of arbitrary choice and action. Certainly, for the revisionist critic, there is never an arbitrary action. Can the reasoning of a philospher of sound mind and body be subsumed with that of a paranoid schizophrenic under a single, biophysical logic? The tendency of newly-formed compound words to be understood as atomic, gestalt wholes. Presence is accentuated through art. Thermodynamics of ordered structures. Dynamic entities or processes generate new essences (Platonic forms) and so may be thought to

perform metaphysical work (labor). Is creation and novelty possible within the realm of the transcendent, or is limitation unto immance, e.g., space, time and causality a necessary precondition? Only in relation to and interaction with other transcendent alterities (contrast with: “entities”) which can only be mediated through the realm of the immanent, i.e., within time. Anthropologic Inn. Additional three milliseconds between words. Everlasting to everlasting. Anthropod/Arthropod is an understandable confusion. Reverend Tyndall’s “fire and brimstone” sermon on the sinfulness of Man. A stay of a fortnight is required (purgatory?). Communicating rooms and a door can be opened from one room into any other (defies normal 3-dimensionality) Reservations: timing is everything. The Watering Hole principle – the propinquity principle of mating/coupling, c.f., Dobie Gillis episode from 1950’s. It is only continual reminders, landmarks of memory that we believe to be the familiar earmarks of an objective everyday reality that prevent by their continual re-presenting themselves to our consciousness, this consciousness from “de-rezzing,” not into nothingness, but into chaos, in parallel with the vacuum being not emptiness, but a hotbed of fluctuating momentum-energy. Investigate the thermodynamics of Hawking radiation within the context of cosmic expansion in terms of the thermal coupling of the 3-and 4vacua. It is no coincidence that the mass of a black hole is directly proportional to the ratio of the quantum vacuum and bound energy densities. The exoskeleton that defines the blind spot of the person’s consciousness called personality. Reality is only closed with respect to the mind that refuses or chooses not to perceive one or more of its possibilities.

Evil is breaching the agreement, made in mutual good faith, to not act from out of one’s absolute being. Of course, the attempt to actually do this is doomed to failure, with rare exceptions, and it is the acting as though one is acting out of one’s absolute, transcendent being, that is the root of evil in the spacetime realm. The action of transcendence within the immanent is what generates Karma anew, and which therefore can, more specifically, rescind Karmic bonds, e.g., physical law is violated if conservation of energy is not maintained – this is action from out of time. The elements combined and permuted are not constants but change throughout their combinatoric interaction. Their ground is not mere suppressed figure. Creativity and expression occur hand in hand. There are no pure instrumentalities – the tool always reacts within the grasp of its user. The present to hand and the ready to hand cannot be prized apart unless in abstracto. A formulation borne of mere poetic sentiment must always be able to be reified when applied in all its ramifications the overdetermined world. Nature enlists our aid in her determination of herself in that our paradigms, theories as well as the methods of probing and questioning nature informed by these, give her ideas of which she avails herself. Many laws or rules explain the selfsame data set and so no one of them may be thought to actually govern the behavior of nature. People who “have pasts” typically exhibit behavior informed by emotional reactions that totally mystify those more naïve individuals witnessing the display. Derrida is like Dionysius, holding up a lantern in search of an honest representative of metaphysical presence. We falsify presence all of the time, e.g., self-plagiarism. We are continually soliciting the projection of superadded presence unto our own incomplete beinghood. Alternately, we engage in a practice of reflecting back our own

projections of our selfhood, however accurate these interpretations of the other’s self may be in those terms, so as to enhance the mutual feeling of community. The proof of a concept is the usefulness of our agreement concerning its meaning, its application to domains apart from that of its advent, the concept’s implications for ethics, culture, politics, society, etc., and what other such “practical” concepts whose engendering it enables. Determinate concepts or categories are like scaffolding for a building or training wheels on a bicycle. Concepts that are in essence simple while at once being difficult to arrive at by virtue of transgressing the categories of our inherited conceptual maps – such peculiarly simple concepts must have profound potential for reconstituting these maps. The wise counsel of a friend does two things: alter the rugged fitness landscapes of the conscious mind and nudge the focus of impending will and intention from one local energy minimum to a lower, neighboring one. Certain types of discussions do not lead anywhere (productive), diverging on the whole faster than the rates of convergence of discussion within any of its subtopics. Natural language strings are fundamentally different from transaction codes in that any sequence is potentially meaningful and its transaction generative. Because the interaction of science and “nature” is a dynamic one, neither the self, nor nature, i.e., the physical realm, is self-identical. John Dean made up stories to please the Watergate independent council.

If the substance of reality is, as Heraclitus says, ceaseless change, then there is no such thing as “pure potentia.” Pure change would be completely ungrounded change, that is, change in the absence of substance. Substance doesn’t appear to have any function other than to satisfy the human fetish for mechanism, that is, continuity which comes at no cost and which requires not action inputted to sustain it, to wit, continuity for free. Seeing that naked bundle of irrational, grasping motives of a close friend suddenly revealed is most assuredly ugly as it is frightening to glimpse it within oneself. Although I have experienced a number of revelations, epiphanies even, since making your acquaintance, they are revelations for which I’ve been in quite long preparation. If I get my ass shot off and I don’t see you again, it’s been nice knowing you. He suddenly jerked as he leaned forward and reached out with both hands as though to catch the breath that carried those words in a symbolic gesture to return it to his lungs. And then waving his hands to try to dissipate this breath instead smiling blankly and shaking his head a little to convey the futilities of it all. The indeterminacy of single acts of determination. The acts are individually underdetermined and overdetermined collectively. Myriad preconditions that are mutually exclusive each of which giving rise to the same underdetermined act. Is this logically possible. Want to be reminded of your humanity? Think yourself a god. Moreover, the interaction of infinite entities cannot be mechanistically deterministic. Each must perceive the other act both freely and according to its nature. This animal was attempting to escape the grasp of my argument, a mere

abstraction, treated as a life and death threat. He did this using words as a wild animal might employ tooth and claw. Would we deny to Nature herself the very limited creativity that we possess and to whom we ultimately owe this wondrous faculty? Yes and No in different acceptations of the duality of affirmative versus negative. Yes. Human creativity is an emergent phenomenon quite “unanticipated” by the natural order as it existed prior to the evolution of human beings, which issued forth from simpler life in a dialectical process in which order appeared in newly unified plural reality rather than the mere illumination of what already had its complete being but heretofore latent within some metaphysical darkness. @$Here we have not existence as a manifestation of essence, but the existential converse to a platonic order, in which all essence are historical developments. Is the historicity of mathematics itself implicated in this dialectic of essence? Studying philosophy on one’s own in one’s private leisure hours is akin to the chess neophyte playing over a few well worn openings in the vain hope that some heretofore undiscovered line of play might fatefully suggest itself to him. The very few valid chess openings that have been discovered during the last 100 years or so first insinuated themselves in the minds of professional players with at least an international master’s grasp of the game’s subtleties. @$A new philosophical principle is perhaps stumbled upon but always with a well-informed aim in view. @$@$

The “concentration” of many determinations [Marx] cannot be effected by a unified and single act of determination. In other words, the steps in the process of evolution, whether of technology, or of biological systems, are not secretly superfluous. Single acts of determination are what we might call unimodal while the steps in an evolutionary series involve the mutual or successive action of incommensurable, multiple modes or modalities. @$Only ex post facto does consciousness view the evolutionary process as unified or, unimodal.

August

2011

Marx’s “concentration of many determinations” is also characteristically exhibited by the evolution of culture. kwo= “But we know that at some point reversibility is lost and this must take place when the structure can no longer be produced from out of the vacuum “in a single go,” but must be “cobbled together” from a number of such vacuum-engendered particles which are to exist in some kind of bound structure maintained through exchanges of momentum between all of those particles (which emerged from the vacuum in a single step). This might well be due to there being no definable “anti-entity” with which the “entity” can annihilate so as to return the pair to the quantum vacuum from which they had originated.” The above considerations suggest that “trial and error” as well as “tinkering” possess not only the usual empiricist interpretation, but a rationalist interpretation as well with equal or perhaps greater claim to be substantively involved with the process of technology’s and culture’s evolution. The existence of God, as opposed to God’s Being, would mean the possibility of a complete and absolute determination of Ground through the unity of a single act. August 2011 Such an act would not represent a creative act par excellence, which seems to require that what is created leave open the development of new possibilities and unanticipated directions of development. (Here the notion of “direction” is an undetermined generalization of this term from its normal use, e.g., “direction” in the sense of say, “boot-strapping chaos”) This would mean an act of determination wholly independent of any other determinations or acts of determination. @$There is no room for anything more than an illusory temporality within a world that remains within God’s actual existence. What makes experience within finitude possible is the individual’s potentia for experience and furthermore, may be derived from the

limitation of the individual’s own esse, but the possible experience itself is not derivable through mere limitation of esse. If you research and study too long within the same disciplinary field, your brain reaches a state of near saturation in which very little that is “new” makes a lasting impression. Hypertextual organization of information minimizes this kind of saturation. Diversity threatens those who cannot feel secure without feeling that they are part of a monolith. Why write a book about narcissism, you ask. Guys who drive pickup trucks always leave the tailgate open. Is deconstructing a film as easy as picking out the genre influences at work in different scenes of a George Lucas movie? This tattoo shop would periodically send customers home saying, we haven’t gotten any fresh needles in - we’re out. “But we decide which is right and which is an illusion.” Moody Blues Because of the necessary dialectical material connection of will and representation, there are no pure motives and intentions. Objection to “canned”, “processed,” or otherwise “inorganic” narration, i.e., that which does not grow and flow spontaneously, authentically out of the person’s own thought and experience of the moment. @$

Retroactive backfilling of consciousness by the subconsciousness mind to maintain illusion of constant and continual “presence.” This is also done in social interactions and conversation by the passing of processed material off as the real, spontaneous productions of the moment. But the subtleties of the communications context, original and self-plagiarized superimposed, clash dissonantly in the mind of the listener, suggesting inauthenticity of the author/ speaker. Writing seems to involve this kind of inauthenticity more than does speech. Yet

inauthentically spontaneous communication from one person may enable authentic experience/realization in another. Potentials for change of various orders, e.g., duality, trivalency, etc. December 2011 It is interesting to note how the “Like” button works on Facebook and how “Like” can be quantified in terms of a “stroke” as in “stroke to one’s ego” and submitted to a description in terms of a “calculus of strokes” in which almost no individual Facebook members realize that this calculus is pervasively in operation. We can then apply the insights from this understanding of the “Like” button and how it functions to broader life contexts. Note that the distribution of instances of the “Like” button being clicked on various people’s Facebook pages could be performed in bulk and more or less indiscriminately or perhaps just in accordance with the very simplest of algorithms (say people press the "Like" button on other FB members' pages more or less just in the expectation that these "friends" will press the "Like" buttons on their FB page later at some point. And so to each person, who does not perceive the horizontal distribution of “Like’s” (i.e., along the “friend axis” of the person hitting their "Like" button - and not along *their* friend axis - so that they remain unaware of the bulk "Like" button clicking), it appears that he or she is receiving individualized “strokes” from “friends”. This observation is perhaps the more valid, the more friends one has on one’s Facebook page, who are not people with whom one is personally acquainted and who one does not have regular personal contact. @$But this distinction is perhaps ultimately illusory, since personal contacts and communications conform fairly closely to the Facebook friend-network communications template, alluded to above. The debate concerning the reality of miracles is particular network of assumptions concerning the concepts as causality, objectivity, physical law, etc. miracle is, in short, founded paradoxically upon naturalistic hypothesis concerning physical reality.

framed within a meaning of such The definition of a uniformitarian,

Nature’s creative “intentions” are informed by the creative labor of humankind. Philosophy, Science, Technology, Technique, Art, Culture,

@$ Philosophy, Consciousness of Self. One’s consciousness of self is May 2011 one’s consciousness itself. There is no remainder or residuum of “undifferentiated consciousness”. Consciousness as such is a backformation of the ego seeking to imagine itself grounded in ultimate reality.

Eternal essence as a backward projection of historically determined essences. Existence versus essence as merely a relativistic duality. Historicity back-reacts upon its (partially) indeterminate ground. “Pure ground” must exist/have existed for time to have had a beginning. No metaphor is “perfect” because of the incomplete inter-translatability of distinct languages. And so contents “expressed” within language cannot be fully deconstructed down to mere diferance. To the startle response of fight or flight has been added that of dissociation. @$Clearly, it is the constraints of civilized society, which account for this new possible response. Perhaps natural selection only represses the frequency of the manifesting of a presently deleterious trait, but doesn’t altogether wipe it out, holding it in reserve against the day that it might again be needed. Permutation as particular variety or mode of expression versus distinct messages. Character: how our dignity triumphs over what we can’t live down. One’s “intellectuality” as a comfortable illusion one entertains about oneself. But, of course, this is relative to matters of definition which is always open to dispute. Definition is the indissoluble blend of the arbitrary and the necessary. Also, this and other such labels are functions of one’s peer group and of the social groups in which one @$ participates. The “impulse spectrum” theory of personality May 2011 differences. I am no different than a criminal or a psychotic, only the spectrum of the weighting of the “basis eigenfunctions” of the various possible human impulses is different. I realized that I would be a different person again before this were lived down.

One has to research and study so hard, experiment for so long, that when one is finally able to “conjure” new behavior from nature with the help of the newly developed mathematical “incantations,” one no longer views this as a mastery of magic. @$Since all science is “hard” there is no such thing as “magic.” May 2011 The repeated experimentation has a two-fold function, revealing to the experimenter the patterns within nature and telegraphing to nature the character of the greater detail in which she manifests new structure. @$

Man’s mind is an open system and if his thoughts project ultimately into nothingness, it is one possessing a fullness beyond possibility. The notion of possibility presupposes limits, which within a truly open system cannot really exist, but must be imagination. But the imagination of what Being, that of mankind or God. Is meaning determined by how many and what kinds of connections can be established/discovered to exist between a new concept and already “well established” concepts? If some perceived context is a construct of the intellect, which is a distinct mode of consciousness relative to, say, the emotive faculties of the mind, then certainly feeling based, e.g., social phenomena, may not fit rationally into this context and, in fact, appear to draw energy from some mysterious realm. We regard much new phenomena through the lens of as yet unarticulated definitions. @$

One starts observing and reacting to differences between one’s present and former selves. Perceptions and opinions grow out of these kinds of comparisons, creating a complexity of personality unfathomable to a youth who has not appreciably changed since “discovering his identity” as a teenager. Such youths are seemingly here on Earth “for the first

time,” unsuspecting of what us old souls are thinking. Facts as indeterminate in absolute terms and only made determinate through a series of tentative representations fed into an intellectual community. This is particularly evident where alleged facts regarding the motivation of individuals’ behavior as there is not a higher court to which we can appeal than the individuals themselves. And sometimes the individual himself does not understand what motivates his behavior due to the influence of unconscious/ subconscious contents of his psyche and their ill understood influences. A friend “disappears” and only a very select subset of his associates and more of his family or coworkers remember that he even existed. @$

A writer’s disgruntled former associates always fancy they know the well spring of his ideas. Energy not traceable to the interaction of potentials is localizable in spacetime. Speed entertained within the imagination is just a metaphor. A metaphor, perhaps, for a kind of transcendence. We might call transcendence a case of invention of a metaphor for which there is no experiential context – intimations of a world beyond the appearances through convergence of transposed (or inverse) metaphors. This is an important mechanism to be noted when one is involved in the deconstruction of the metaphysics of presence. Nonlocal, supraliminal connections permeating the universe and the historicity of nature’s further determination of its lawlike behavior during the course of the dialectic of Man’s rationality and Nature’s mutual grappling. The explanation of the appearances cannot, fundamentally, be grounded or explained in terms of still another set of appearances, i.e., “world” manifesting an altogether different set of anomalous-mysterious-strange appearances. The alternative system of appearances is invoked only to

replace one mystery by another of equal, if not greater (because not derived from an as “familiar” space of appearances). This is the banal inconsistency underlying the appeal to “other dimensions” to explain anomalies cropping up within this system of appearance/ manifestation, c.f., the problem of aetiology. Because of nonlocal correlations and physical superluminality and their likely role in the underpinning of the order of the consciousness of the individual, there is no way to crucially decide between a unified and objective, deterministic universe from a radically overdetermined cosmos whose determinate structure resolves itself over the course of a historical evolution of progressive “crystallization” in reaction to the always deeper and more invasive probings of the scientific rationality. And since this “historicity” of physical law in which Man is so deeply involved must impact upon the dynamics of the “physical” medium of his own mental process, this historicity is of necessity dialectical in nature. The nature of theory determines the kinds of detection and measurement devices constructed with which to perceive new physical phenomena. Theory determines the manner in which Science interrogates nature and so partially, at least, determines the manner in which nature manifests itself to the experimenter. Anomalies and ambiguities and novel phenomena, not prefigured in theoretical prediction, are given off initially with the performance of first experiments of the new paradigm. Much thought is expended in resolving these equivocal experimental results until a consistency is achieved. The scientific community is unwittingly colluding with a radically, perhaps infinitely, overdetermined “natural order.” And a kind of historical ratchet effect in the progressive determination of nature, based in the dialectical mutual grapplings of Man’s mind with incompletely crystallized nature. This is similar to the manner in which the solipsistic delusional person imagines the details are constructed in a conversation that he overhears: the more mental effort he exerts in attempting to divine the details of what is being discussed between “the two other persons”, the more richly

detailed becomes the overheard conversation. The two theories of the phenomenon of the witnessed conversation, the first that of sense perception of publicly observable phenomena, the second that of creative imagination powered by internally generated psychic energy, may turn out to be equally good “explanations” for what the solipsist, deluded or not, observes appearing to occur in his surrounding environment. July 2011 What can we say about the tentatively proffered principle that objectively, both interpretations are equally valid and good and that it is only in a political sense that one or the other is the superior metaphysics? The physicist and philosopher David Deutsch has pointed out that there is no valid distinction between the theory that the subconscious of the solipsist is responsible for the observed phenomena of the external world and the realist theory of an objective external world populated by myriad other minds, governed by general physical laws and independent of the function of the psychic processes of the individual’s mind. September 2012 If the ground of the quantum observer’s mind is understood as the multidimensional temporal integrative processes of the whole, and this whole is also understood to be necessarily open-ended, which is the non-spatiality condition (on temporality), then metaphysical solipsism is effectively disproved. Perhaps the cosmos is a collaborative effort and the salient features of this cosmos are just those features owing principally to our puny efforts in the collaboration, where our is taken to refer to mankind. Higher level collaborative artisans are only contacted and recognized by those of a lower level after a sufficient progression of science and the working out of its social implications. However, the quantum mechanical phenomena of nonlocality, superposition, decoherence, complementarity, Heisenberg uncertainty, tunneling, virtual particle/ field reactions, creation/annihilation processes, as well as the infinite energy density of the quantum vacuum all seem each in their own way to compromise this boundary, heretofore secure and clearly delineated within classical physics between the subjective and the objective (intersubjective). It is perhaps because the “cash value” of the objective is the intersubjective and on account of this

alleged boundary between the mental and the physical within the mind/brain of each individual being indeterminate that the equivalence alluded to by Deutsch may fail. The lesson of the quantum vacuum is that Parmenides was right when he asserted that, “nothing does not exist”. Might the notion of “oblivion” similarly prove to be an illusory abstraction? Consciousness may be conceived as a connecting thread or string, which, though it cannot break, it can become impossibly tangled. The dynamics of what the string connects to as well as how, where and when it connects to determines the nature of the psychic structures produced and/or represented by the string. The string must be supposed to possess its own eternally preexistent dynamics, that is, its own nature qua substance. If there continues for many decades to exist an educated and affluent technologically savvy class within the advanced industrialized world, a new cultural development I anticipate within the next 50 years is what will be styled “the new atheism”. By this I mean metaphysical solipsism. The philosophy, ethics and etiquette that develops around the eventual wider and growing acceptance of the solipsistic subculture shall help it to one day become mainstream. In this way, Western culture will catch up to where the Hindu’s have been @$ psychologically for many centuries. The deconstruction of metaphysics, if successful would result in its destruction, which would lead to the collapse of the distinction between metaphysical, epistemological and methodological solipsism, c.f., cit=The Undivided Universe, “We recall from chapter 2 that in a positivist philosophy, epistemology and ontology are thus equated. But as we also stressed before, there is no real necessity to do this. Indeed in our ontological interpretation of the quantum theory, we must say that although the particles are indistinguishable, they are still different, and that each one exists continuously and therefore has its own identity.” Leading up to this will be a growing proliferation of notions such as lucid dreaming, anthropic cosmological principle, technological singularity, Boltzmann brains, ancestor simulations, quantum consciousness, inflationary theory. What appears common to all of the above seemingly fanciful conceptions is what Derrida terms always alreadiness.

November 2011

If I were going to be a good solipsist, I would make sure to bespeckle the world with a fair number of acutely self-conscious philosphers of mind exhibiting every sign of being unduly preoccupied with the mystery of consciousness and the problematic nature of the existence of other minds. The field of the sociology of knowledge may turn out to be just as important for the so-called hard sciences as for the social sciences and humanities. Each cosmic individuality tries to create, but there is no basis for distinguishing imagination from reality at this stage. There is no possibility of the creation being or becoming independent of its creator. July 2011 Only the gentle or violent clash of myriad distinct wills and their grappling, meshing imaginations can reduce the degeneracy of reality versus imagination. “Projections” that interact with each other must exhibit unanticipated behavoir, i.e., must back-react upon “the projector.” Choosing particular metaphors to state veiled literal messages (if the listener subconsciously interprets the metaphor elements in terms of their original literal context). Repetition, reverberation, 3 or higher dimensional sounds, rotation, vibration/oscillation, electrical discharge, rippling waves, mist, shadow, darkness, vagueness, shimmering, ambiguity, vertigo, buzzing, crescendo-decrescendo, increasing or decreasing frequencies, fading infading out, great heights. These figure in the phenomenology of the mysterious. In dreams there is no distinction between the literal and the metaphorical because everything taking place in dreams is literal. It is only against the backdrop of one’s waking existence, grounded in memory/history, that one is in a position to analyze a dream into distinct metaphorical and

literal components. Superpositions of information, meaning, alternative statements of underlying intended messages, etc. Complementary to the process of thought, i.e., abstraction is the process of concretion of detail in systems, which are the physical realizations of @$ some abstract design. An example of this is the emergence phenomenon of the appearance of “bugs” in large, complex computer programs. This phenomenon I will term supermodularity. The concept of autocorruption is important in this connection and may indeed be related to Penrose’s concept of decoherence as autodecoherence. September 2012 The spontaneous decoherence experienced by an advanced quantum computer in the act of calculating a chess move n moves ahead (where n is some suffiently large, i.e., “critical” number) perhaps illustrates how the Planck mass or Penrose’s “one graviton limit” represents not only an upper energy threshold for quantum superposed states, but also an absolute limit of information density and computational complexity vis a vis the underlying and supporting quantum vacuum qua information reservoir (after the fasion of the infinite heat bath from discussions of the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics) and in which the quantum computer embedded. Investigate the concept of nonlocal quantum entanglement of a quantum computer’s ground state with the global of cosmic quantum vacuum state, i.e., universal ground state. The autodecoherence threshold represented by the Planck limit may signify that there is no universal quantum ground state, i.e., global or cosmic quantum vacuum field, but that the so-called quantum vacuum can only be properly understood as a quantum entangled albeit essentially modular quantum field. Parallel quantum universes may then reduce to nothing more than the false projections of myriad quantum vacuum field modules, each separated by an integral multiple of one Planck energy. Atoms, molecules, macromolecules, etc., cannot be manifest by the vacuum as one of its possible fundamental energy fluctuations. And yet such structures can form from their constituents, each of which is a

fundamental fluctuation. @$So the vacuum serves as a peculiar kind of ground for matter structures in that this vacuum appears to be able to sustain that which it cannot create. This situation defies Leibniz’ hallowed principle, to wit, that what is sufficient to create a thing is necessary at every succeeding instant to sustain the thing. But the converse is here implied: what sustains a given created order nonetheless lacks the power to alone create this order. Two observations are perhaps relevant in this connection. July 2011 Also what is not sufficient to create a thing may indeed be necessary to sustain it. Irreducible complexity is when the sufficient reason for a thing transcends the sum of the necessary conditions for that thing’s sustainment in existence. October 2011 The root understanding of irreducible complexity as a general phenomenon is to be sought at the boundary between the unity and compositeness of the ground of existence, i.e., at the Planck energy level where particles cease to be able to be produced “in one go” as single fluctuations of the quantum vacuum due to the spontaneous formation of virtual black holes (and thermalization of would be structure via Hawking radiation) (in this connection also see various remarks about a “chronology protection mechanism”) July 2011 If fundamental reality is in the form of information rather than independently existing fundamental particles, then there is no real paradox involved in sufficient reasons transcending any finite sum of necessary reasons. Individual consciousness vis a vis brain evolution and development is perhaps a prime example of this amended principle. Sufficient conditions await contingent conditions, no finite sum of which can ever replace the fertile dynamical, holistic context of preexistent fields of information that inevitably enable the causal efficacy of those contingent conditions in engendering a conscious mind. If we are to continue to hold to the Leibnizian principle, we must state that the matter, by transcending in complexity that of the structures which can appear out of the vacuum as one of its fundamental fluctuations, must be itself participating with ground in the act of its own sustainment. This “sustainment” of matter by ground, or whatever in combination with fundamental ground, acts as such, constitutes the

temporality of this matter structure. So a portion of the temporality of matter is consumed with sustainment of this matter’s complexity over and beyond that which can be directly sustained by the action of fundamental ground which constitutes cosmic, nonlocal time. Therefore matter must not only be updated by vacuum as it continually reforms out of this vacuum energy, but the vacuum itself must be updated by the matter that it sustains. So any matter of greater complexity than the most complex vacuum fluctuations, must back react upon vacuum. So the vacuum cannot compute its next state without first “consulting” the complex structures embedded in it. Although the vacuum does not need to consult the structures that it is capable of spontaneously engendering in order to computer their succeeding states. Matter thus acts as a boundary condition upon the vacuum, causing it to allocate some of its computational time, or clock cycles (Planck times) toward the calculation of measures of complexity beyond what it can directly compute. The vacuum requires information from matter structures to aid it in its recomputation of these structures over succeeding clock “pulses.” This is why we may say that the vacuum cannot create information, but can create the conditions on which information can come into being. So the vacuum contains no information but is itself infinitely informable, or the potential information content of the vacuum is near infinite. So information consists in the interaction of matter and vacuum at their interfaces. This may help to account for why the entropy of a black hole is directly proportional to the black hole’s surface area. The surface area of the black hole, i.e., its event horizon, precisely defines the interface between matter and vacuum. Within the hole’s interior there is literally no vacuum energy available to be exchanged between matter and vacuum in this region. All interaction of the matter within a black hole with the quantum vacuum must take place precisely at that surface defined by the hole’s even horizon. Are ambiguity and uncertainty subjective experiences of quantum superposition?

Programmers who collaborate to produce large, complex programs usually built unintended, extra logical consistency into the code. Software bugs are frequently not due to logical “errors” in the program but to what might be termed the “superconsistency” of the program. “Well foundedness” of the law, theory, perception, etc. Laws do not govern but are just descriptions. Analogies do not prove theses. Metaphors do not explain why. How is structure/function and “why” is purpose/intention. July 2011 Emergence is from the other side of the event horizon. The identity relation serves as a causal filter from which the historical is distilled from the merely eventual. @$Why differs from how in that it is how to whom? Lets look at the sociology of knowledge where biblical scholarship and philosophy of religion are involved. Representations acquire meaning through our interaction with them and through our abstraction from and application of them to other settings. Karma is a manifestation of the tendencies in the soul responsible for acts and consequences at one scale of time and space organizing reality or, more properly, manifesting on larger such scales. What if we find fault with and rebel against the principles embodied in the images lying within the collective unconscious? The reflection of the information-transformation game of sperm and ovum at the level of intellectual, social and political interaction of the differently gendered. We must live out that which we cannot work out through thought. At this stage you are still a projection, a marxist-feminist whose wisdom threatens to throw my sins and inadequacies into ironic perspective.

Being in the presence of God means gaining fullest recognition and awareness of one’s Sin nature. Justified wrath versus merciful love. Are we only able to glimpse the forms/images in our subconscious that we have put there since the time of our birth? And when all of the personal/idiosyncratic and cultural forms/images are stripped away, does each human being glimpse the same blank nothingness? The “details” ignored or suppressed in order to define an abstract concept or category are themselves abstractions. A hidden assumption appears to lie behind Deconstruction’s critique of such notions as giftedness, genius, talent, etc. That assumption is that there might be some moral or other justification for the subordination of the inferior to the superior and so the concept of superiority must be deconstructed. Or there is an implicit acceptance of the categories underlying valuedual comparisons but insistent denial that such comparisons could ever practically result in an inferior-superior duality with respect to some parameter commonly held by both feminists and sexists to be “valuable.” Nature and nurture are both held by their respective proponents in the alluded to controversy to be determinisms of human behavior, personality development, etc. The more important such controversy is that of deterministic versus freely chosen development, behavior, etc. Certainly there exists a direct correlation of a body’s information content and its inertial mass. When a vacuum-networked neural-network quantum computer “learns” it is not possible for the original configuration to be backed up for purposes of resetting the state of the machine. March 2013 This is related to

the fact of spacetime-like correlations belonging to a large set of quantum fluctuations than spacelike fluctuations in which a timelike component is absent. @$

Natural selection determines the frequency of genes, but not the genes themselves. Does the exclusively divergent nature of evolution (divergence of physical processes usually results in entropy increase) mean that only microevolution within a particular species that can never be reunified occurs and not macroevolution? Using metaphors to make the simple and ordinary, extraordinary and mysterious. This activity seems to defeat the usual intended purpose for invoking a metaphor: to clarify difficult new ideas in terms of more familiar (rather than less) to the listener/reader. Nature is indeed overdetermined, but exhibits a tendency to collude with the human theorists’ desire to reify his concept of unification in the form of some unique, finite set of entities whose relationships are determined by a single, self-consistent mathematical representations. She does this by hiding from the view of organized science glimpses of any of the infinite number of other mathematically self-consistent descriptions. If mathematical laws actually “governed” physical phenomena, there would be no “necessity” for an infinite number of equally valid mathematical theories of physics. I like to think of myself as the clever native of the tribe whose pastime is the serious study of anthropologists. I like to provide valuable instruction to my teachers. I am quite the admirer of the underdog. The generation of new ideas always involves the transformation of old knowledge and established concepts as they are gradually or suddenly illuminated anew. So one does not add a new bit of information to the database without triggering a shift in the dynamic equilibrium in the integration of this body of knowledge.

So the new bit of information doesn’t fit and the database reintegrates to accommodate something intimately connected to, but not identical with the original “irritant bit.” So the original input is never incorporated into either the old or the new knowledge base. So what did one think one glimpsed that triggered this transformation of thought/knowledge? So never information itself, but something “pointing to” (in the sense, perhaps of a web browser) is actually “stored” within our gray matter. There needs to be some kind of “sideband” of communication in which the exchange between total strangers of socially unacceptable messages is paradoxically, generally sanctioned by society. An anonymous email account functioning as a private bulletin board between two persons might serve such a purpose. It seems that Derrida’s motive in advancing the theory of deconstruction is to demonstrate that “there is no there there.” The syntax by which the semantics is “implemented” has some modulating effect upon this semantics. Of course, there is the reverse effect, especially in the form of semantics resolving a semantic ambiguity/indeterminacy, e.g., “don’t you remember that English teacher we had at University?” The dynamics of the nth order. The kinetics is at the 1st order. Nuance and variation, fluctuation and ambiguity are ontologically of the 1st order while the “canonical forms” the suport and server are phenomenologically of the 1st order. The higher the order perturbation of the theory, the more closely does this theory approximate the reality of its domain. This principle may be termed the downward ontology-upward phenomenology principle. @$The DO-UP Principle.

Re: the connection between Sin and consciousness. Are there certain types/trends of ideation which simply would not occur to one in the absence of an individual consciousness – certain psychological disorders that just “don’t make sense” without the subject of experience. Does individual consciousness secretly underly many of the important phenomena of human psychology and culture – those not shared with other “intelligent” mammalian species? Consciousness is characterized by an ability to participate in the 2 nd and higher abstract orders of behavior. Certainly, many forms of psychological and behavioral/motivational deviance are insupportable in the absence of a “ghost in the machine.” Narcissistic and necrophilic disorders seem to particularly support our hypothesis of the necessity of consciousness in certain forms of psychological disorder. The alternative hypothesis is that of primordial instincts turned loose in the socially constructed reality. The appearance of computer software bugs frequently points up, not an error in the construction of a program, but the program’s unanticipated thorough-going consistency – the program’s manifesting features of greater generality than anything held in the mind of the original software programmers, which intended design parameters being only highly special cases of the actual functionality of the program as implemented. The nuances of meaning are generally not defined and individuals do not receive these subtler meanings through instruction, but from them on their own, more or less. Three axes: conscious-unconscious, individual-collective, subjective-“objective” together form a 3-dimensional solid table possessing eight distinct triads describing mental states. Not separable by some intermediary continuum does not imply

continuity. What distinguishes static from kinematic variables? only independent variables dynamic?

Are

The substance of substance is form. The substance of form is function. Neuronal circuit includes itself in it own construction of itself. A given neural circuit can be expanded in terms of a sum of other circuits. Each stored path, i.e., one that has been reinforced through prior use, is also a component of myriad other established neural circuits. The question arises as to how important the 3rd order image of this circuit is relative to its other 3rd order components. The circuit cannot appear among the 2 nd order components of its description. Metaphor like concept is descriptive, but not merely descriptive. Metaphor informs and directs the processes of which it is also a description. It may turn out that physical laws are not purely or merely descriptive. When we borrow concepts from one domain (of endeavor, say) to metaphorically understand another concept, we are suspending questioning, or bracketing out the questioning of, those concepts while they are functioning in their role of metaphorically structuring some other concept. And it is not necessarily the case that we understand the concepts we are invoking as metaphors any better than we do the concept subject to structuring/explication in terms of these metaphors. There seems to be an assumption here that concepts somehow establish themselves, achieve closure in certain important ways and then go on to serve duty as structuring or descriptive metaphors. Are Truth and Dissemination a dichotomy? Not if truth is “deepended” through dissemination, i.e., the aggrandizement of a concept by performing work in contexts foreign to that in which it was concerned. Concrete-stable versus diffuse-unstable forms a duality. Conscious thought takes the former for its representations, but the latter for its manner of working out the relationships and transformations of these

representations in terms of the concrete-stable. What would communication with God be like? I could not lessen his uncertainty about anything though He could easily lessen mine. So there is apparently no two-way process of information exchange here (data exchanged which invoke respective information). Unless God experiences limitation through human beings. Can the system of the brain be driven at frequencies other than those of its spectrum of natural (resonance) frequencies? Meditate on this sentence: “We are not claiming that all cultural values coherent with a metaphorical system actually exist, only that those that do exist and are deeply entrenched are consistent with the metaphorical system.” The Platonist believes that it is the “represented-as” which is relativistic/existential in nature. But that representations themselves as ends in the chain of interpretation are not conditioned, but only the manner of their being invoked being subject to limitation and contingency. A particle moving through 3-space at the speed of light in vacuo, doesn’t “have time” to “inform” any of the processes taking place along its null, i.e., timelike and spacelike trajectory. What constitutes a particular inertial frame is no mere abstraction, but is physically mediated. The Elsewhere region is actually a four dimensional fabric of timelike, spacelike, and null connected interior spaces. Topology is built into special relativity at its very foundation. Does a real electron become virtual while quantum tunneling? electron is “off mass shell” during the process of tunneling.

The

The Elsewhere region cannot be understood as a projective space with trivial topology. The boundary between spacelike and timelike is an average of a dynamic process. 2nd, 3rd order, etc. emotional reactions based upon more or less tenuous associations. The substrate, or 1 st order would be genetically determined through natural selection acting upon chance variations within a population, but the connection between certain stimuli and emotional reactions within the individual is physically and chemically determined. There is no law connecting elements of a unique causal process, but if one can duplicate the individual in the absence of a complete description of the original. . . Averaging effects in the fluctuating potentials within a large collection of individuals  buffering against effect of local vacuum fluctuations. This averaging effect may enhance deterministic behavior of individuals. Space voyage. . . Only one woman left. For purpose of the survival of the human race, she agrees to sleep with all of the ship’s crew in strict rotation. The story builds up to a brilliant deconstructive essay by the woman about man’s venturing into space just in an attempt to impress the cosmic mommy so she will sleep with Man – space exploration as misguided attempt at transcendence. Attempts at unification of science as attempt to create/prove existence of God. Or the repository of all unrequited desires. Degeneracy of sense data with respect to discrete state space or overdetermination of sense data by brain states. This is closely connected with coherence of sense data. Since each person is unique, if conscious, that is, all one should be concerned with are the superficial compatibility, logistics, and life infrastructure questions. Our neurotic concern about picking the right person in terms of a particularly appropriate self essence, is a misguided

unenlightened project. No essence in being not numerically identical. But the concept of number is not straight forward where infinite qualities are involved. A who is not a kind of “what.” Unique entities are not instantiations of a category or class. Is the individual not identical with himself for the trivial reason that he has no identity, or, because his being transcends identity, i.e., a form, however complex. Creation ex nihilo and the created object being a finished work, independent of is already, indifferent to the passage of time. It is not necessary to “completely” understand the asserting made in one’s academic papers, or that these theses therein be altogether clear and coherent because of the way the collective supplements the incompletely formed system of concepts and metaphors in the work. The work does not have to be particularly coherent or brilliant and original in its assertions if the work carries myriad, perhaps subtle, earmarks that enhance that work’s disseminability. A work is more valuable the more it is cited by other authors. The number and collection of works cited by the work are also relevant to its valuation by the establishment. There is a considerable distinction between the unconscious and the nonconscious. Similar observations apply to uninteresting/non-interesting, unemotional/non-emotional, etc. “Un” apparently denotes “non” but with the potential/capacity for “non-non-x” rather than non-“x”. Because the evolutionary basis of consciousness may have been one of projective identification for purposes of defensive anticipation and social integration, it is to be expected that many psychological and sociological phenomena require the projective functionality of consciousness. Since design, whether “intelligent” or evolutionary, only utilizes certain features of their medium in the progress of the development of its forms,

emergence is inevitable as “unintended” or non-manifest aspects of mistaken perception of sense data, as the media are brought into mutual combination. Relation of momentum current/flux density vector. Vector rotation angle is determined by ratio of fluctuation to expectation value term. Parallel mirrors accelerated experience a force. The implied mass is thought to originate from the inertia of vacuum energy. But it is the inertia of bound vacuum energy, that is, vacuum energy subject to boson @$ field boundary conditions. This implied assumption is seen in Einstein’s derivation of the inertia of photon energy, i.e., photon bouncing back and forth in a mirrored box. Ratio is imposed upon the incommensurable There is a problem with the interpretation of thought and perception in terms of the filtering of information (because information itself requires filtering?). The progressive definition of the Self is seemingly so like the career of a single strand of DNA floating in a soup of amino acis. The timing sequence in which complementary base pairs are encountered and attach to the template single helix is determined by chance, but the endproduct, the completed double helix, is a forgone result. This analogy is almost “exact” if we allow great overdetermination regarding what constitutes a compatible “base pair” along the “helix” represented by a person’s biological timeline. Just because I buy books about and download articles on narcissism doesn’t mean I’m a narcissist. If not dissemination, then truth. Can chance “disseminate?” One would expect that chance has no creative power and so can disseminate because it has no the power to inform as it has no coherence, or essence, i.e., no “image”, c.f., “Image of God.” Is information subject, does the informing, or object is informed by

something else, or, perhaps both. The Halo effect is sometimes an annoyance to people with specialized degrees. Being afraid to withhold or use labels such as an academic correcting herself when referring to a nonacademic friend as being a “nonacademic.” Knowledge vampire seeking free University lectures or the selfabsorbed person seeking free therapy sessions. “I’m not going to always claim heterosexual privilege whenever I speak about my partner. The bottomlessness of the no design-basis Universe. The label “pseudoscience” presupposes there is such a thing as “science” and such a thing as an important distinction between them. By what we term science is perhaps secretly only meant normal science in au=Thomas Kuhn’s sense. The mind filters within consciousness. What filters between and amongst distinct consciousnesses? Is the eternal individuality of each consciousness a projection beyond its vanishing point, i.e., origin in some unified, transcendental consciousness. But if individual consciousnesses are filterable, then weren’t they all secretly separate all along? I’m not going to give you a list of my fave books, music CD’s, movies, websites, etc., just so you can work all of this out of context stuff into some bogus, straw version of my personality! Doesn’t know how to really respect a woman without being phony or masochistic. The definition of flakiness is not knowing your own mind, which is

inevitably manifested in one’s inconsistency over relatively short spaces of time. A geek believes he has the power of implanting the ideas he finds so exciting in the minds of those not members of his social group. The geek does not understand the relevance of changing social context. Comfortable familiarity and incongruity. Incongruity of that which is comfortably familiar to one’s peers constitutes the dissociative state, according to the latest Diagnostic and Statistical Manual. The “raw feels” start out as completely arbitrary sensation. But does completely undifferentiated sensation, not informed by some underlying physiological structures/functions feel like anything at all? Resolving power conflicts stemming from social situations through choice of a liberating, interpretive metaphor. Metaphors can give closure to one’s interpretation of experience. Most seek lives or delusions, literally false without any redeeming metaphysical, poetic truth (for the individual alone, perhaps). Can truth, then, if only in a poetic sense, be that set of beliefs which gives the individual the greatest inner peace and harmony in his/her life. Closure through discharge of potential difference, resonance, least energy, thermodynamic equilibrium, etc. Forgery, forging a “signature.” Forging a relationship, connection,etc. Truth and facts are not uncovered and do not preexist, but through a dialectical process of knowledge sociology of myriad individuals testing the reactions of the world to their attempts to impose their hypotheses upon “nature.” Representations are supplemented through the dialectical process of “resistance” of the world to their application.

Apprehending “consciousness criminals” operating consciousness above permitted levels. The development of quantum computing will reveal the vacuum’s nature as an information creating medium. Information merely borne from one place to another is about some “objective” aspect of reality. References within speeches reflecting or effecting nonlocal connections. Reverberations expanding the chaotic attractors to encompass a new abstract persona projection. But there is evidence that multiple chaotic attractors of the same archetypal symbol can mutually interfere, but only destructively, it appears. This points up antiparallel phase locking. It appears that there is no direct mutual interference, but both attractors draw power from the same source. A parody is impossible without the original already given. So certain works are not possible due to constraints on meaning. Even if the work is physically realized it is not recognized. The denotation of a groundless metaphor. No set of inputs that can produce a totally unmotivated notion? Projecting oneself into one’s characters placed within settings in which they can represent the working out of the unresolved conflicts and issues of the author. There is what is termed “skillful niceness.” This is when some one acts engaging towards one about whom they form at every turn the most unflattering judgements. Before returning home once more my pride will suffer every manner of indignity. Emission and absorption of virtual photons can be understood in terms

of competing quantum vacuum processes of vector boson and scalar composite boson creation-annihilation. Here the scalar bosons are virtual electron-positron pairs, c.f., part D., Bremsstrahlung Suppression due to pair creation (http://xxx.lanl.gov). Sufficiently high energy photons can suppress pair productions, as well. “Quantum effects” become significant for /\E  ~E. Reality at the level of manifestation is determined by filtering and feedback of and between ground and the intersubjective collective. Recognize the existence possibility of superior consciousness, then by induction, what? Most intelligent, sensitive people have a number of these disorders but in benign or nonvirulent form. Most of what language does, it does for the individual, intra or infrasubjectivity, in terms of organizing and processing data. This faculty was adapted later for purposes of communication. How could the clan organize itself around incommensurable ideas (because language had not yet evolved as intersubjective communication)? Communication between members of the tribe is unconscious manifesting itself in the realm of dreams not distinguished completely from “reality.” These collective dreams became orally transmitted myths after the advent of language. If language can serve the social organizational needs of the tribe, then collective dreams would eventually atrophy, leaving behind a vestigial function which can be later enhanced through proper training and discipline by “effete individuals.” Arcane disciplines, pracitces, deviance as either manifestations of functioning outside sociobiological “design parameters” or of trying to function within them once again. How tightly knit social organization prevents manifestation (at the individual level) of narcissistic, necrophilic, borderline, etc. The continua contact and exchange between members of the tribe and its

hierarchy allowed for the release of social tension, psychological impulses so that no accumulation occurred and no resonant amplification (through observation without participation) if beta males could not successfully mount desirable alpha females, itt was not for lack of trying. And the potentially frustrated sexual impulses, developed while for a short while lusting after these desirable females, and quickly worked off during mostly unsuccessful battling with alpha males and other beta males. Homosexuality offered a simultaneous working off of sex and aggressive impulse for “dominant” beta males and provided sublimation of sexual impulse (through sex role inversion) for the subdominant beta/gamma males. Only locally occurring energy degenerate changes in system state wavefunction can be mediated through nonlocal interactions. Such nonlocal interactions do not take place within spacetime due to their typical supraliminal speeds of propagation. Nonlocal information exchanges flows should not be affected by local spacetime curvature, although local processes coupling to nonlocal exchanges on each and may, indeed, be so affected. Politics, representation, unconsciousness, etc.

copyright,

trademark,

rationality,

Ph.D’s tend to be highly differentiated in their opinions, beliefs, and attitudes. Relatives by virtue of common descendants – time-reversed family tree. My discussion on April 7 at lunch – Blade Runner, meaning, language, dreams, myths, collective unconscious, evolution of consciousness. . . The deconstructed, posthistorical world inhabited by al us hip metahumans who think they think, imagine they imagine, discuss their “illusions” freely amongst themselves. These individual don’t love, but admire the sentiment of love, don’t hate, but feel a strong antipathy toward hate in all its forms.

Though infatuation neurons might form superpositions, and mutually interfere or resonate, at turns, love is a strictly classical entity. Sex is not monogamous, but love certainly is so. “Field research,” is such a lame reason for “doing” an interesting stranger. Arrogance, as they say, is so unbecoming in others. No common origin: paralleling, analogically related. Common origin but divergent, separate origins but convergent, of common origin, but convergent, etc. Inconceivability is not an absolute for any individual consciousness. The forms are not sensory based but are systems of difference which parallel one another. The problem of reconciling time’s continuous flow with its integration. No integration of objective time? This is a topology problem. Truth and dissemination are just abstract parts of a concrete continuum of the infinite, plastic transformability that consciousness makes possible and necessitates. I have noted the corrosive effect that the attitude of carefree unbelievers (in a state of grace) has upon my highly intellectualized faith. Perhaps this is taking TA too far, but she appeals to the feminine side of my orthodontically-challenged, inner Lesbian. I always seem to get “the word” last. This arrangement has a kind of elegantly twisted symmetry opposite the alternative reality I originally desired/imagined.

Rap music records sales success and Rapper wannabe’s as virtual successful Rap artists. The economics system as prime example of integrated, real-virtual systems. Do recognition and imagination have a common origin? necessarily coextensive.

Are they

Transferring elements versus transferring contexts. Context is always partial because they are open systems. Representation of determination/determinacy = X of which, mathematics is a subbranch. The necrophile jealously guards his ontological status encroachment by other pretenders to metaphysical presence.

from

Coherence is dream structure and dream structure is coherence – there is nothing more. One must never have the feeling that there is some particular person/thing which one must have to be complete. For this would be to place ones center outside of the potentially authentic self, that is, within the “world.” At [illegible] one’s thoughts begin to flood away from the surface of the good, green Earth. The ability to understand the ideas of those smarter than oneself.

We avoid people who tend to disconfirm our theories about how life works. Institutions or structure which threaten our worldview are viewed as manifestations of the irrational and we carefully wend our way around and past them. In order to glimpse the rationality of that which originally strikes us as irrational or nonrational requires that we perform at least a partial deconstruction and the reconstruction upon the foundations of our own philosophies, beliefs and preferences. We act in such a manner that we only encounter the world which is consistent with the worldview we espouse. Because the world itself, or, the world as it is, is so radically rich and overdetermined, beyond any possible rationalistic unification, only relatively small subdomains of the world may be worked into more or less coherent unities. It is within such subdomains that the worldview of the proud, illusion-filled individual finds its peaceful coexistence. Instead of the usual dichotomy of performers versus spectators which describes the two basic categories of how persons go about their lives, I have settled upon a somewhat different dichotomy, that of perpetrators versus detectives. Whereas in terms of the former dichotomy I should have been forced to categorize myself as a mere spectator, in terms of this new complementary set of categories, I can proudly style myself as detective in the game of life. Perhaps not always so exciting a career as being one of the more active perpetrators, for those of (pay close attention here) the appropriate intellectual temperament, this career holds high moments to which nothing in the more “active” life career could ever be adequately comparable. The mechanism by which the effective speed of light is dramatically reduced in the laboratory through use of a supercooled gas of Rubidium atoms may be essentially similar to the manner in which the speed of light is reduced within a vacuum of reduced virtual Cooper pairs of

electron/positrons. It is interesting that the velocity of light is the product of k, wavenumber and f, frequency, which are intimately tied to the momentum and energy of the photons, respectively. It is frequently stated that spontaneous emission of excited atoms is triggered by vacuum fluctuations. The question arises as to whether these fluctuations are in the form of real, 3-momentum fluctuations or imaginary 4-momentum, i.e., energy fluctuations. We know that the density of real photons within the volume occupied by excited atoms is directly proportional to the rate of stimulated emission of real photons from the excited atoms. We could invoke the so-called Bose Inclusion Principle (BIP) to account for the increased probability of real photon production (through spontaneous emission, stimulated by virtual photons). Instead of always speaking in terms of decreased vacuum imaginary momentum fluctuations (energy fluctuations) and enhanced vacuum 3momentum fluctuations (real momentum fluctuations), we could, instead, think of the vacuum momentum-energy field as a ghost matter field. In this way, the presence of matter in a given region of space would decrease the density of the ghost matter field by the precise same amount by which it increased the density of the matter field. Since photons propagate through the ghost matter field and the matter field changes state through the mutual interaction of the matter and ghost matter fields, we should expect the velocity of light to be lower in regions of space possessing a reduced ghost matter field density. For example, although a Rubidium atom is excited when it absorbs a photon of appropriate frequency, this atom will only decay when “stimulated” to do so upon “absorption” of a virtual photon. A question here is whether virtual photons owe their existence, in turn, to the vacuum having made some kind of downward transition in its energy – which, perhaps, can be explained in terms of the action of virtual virtual particles! But k and f are in reality the expectation values of the wavenumber and frequency, and these values are dependent upon the Heisenberg

uncertainties and vacuum fluctuation intensities of these respective quantities. = sqrt[{~E**2 - /\E**2}/{~p**2 - /\p**2}] Metaphors don’t prove the conclusions of arguments but help to demonstrate that a pattern in a current situation is more pervasive and therefore probably not entirely coincidental – even though no causal connections, i.e., links in the chain of causal influences have yet to be unearthed. Here is the idea of a pattern operating by its own dynamism, independently of the dynamic of the medium of its present context. We say, then, that this pattern informs its medium and helps to determine a context for its context. This pattern is not merely expressed through the medium, but modifies this medium by operating “through” it. I reserved all my faith and trust in my Lord and Savior. Concerning all else, I am highly skeptical. Culture puts an illusory face upon the society of human animals. Real fermions are boundary conditions upon the corresponding boson fields. But fermions themselves exist as quantum fields. What serves as the boundary conditions for these fermion fields? What is unique cannot be reproduced and therefore cannot be recorded. Records as physically “inscribed” in some material system, are not themselves memories but evokers of memories. There are changes in these “memory records” that will not affect how a memory is evoked and some which will do this. There is, in other words, a two-way acting degeneracy in how the brain records experiences and how these records evoke recollection of their original experiences of which they are “recollections.” C.f., energy level diagram for and atom with n discrete energy levels. All possible energy (atomic) transitions are indicated by appropriate

arrows connecting upper and lower energy levels. The ground state is indicated as the lowest energy level in the diagram. Keeping in mind the permutations and combinations of virtual downward and upward energy transitions, how does a real fermion sitting at state n perturb the spectral density of virtual transitions? Transitions of fermions correspond to the presence/creation of bosons. Relate “transitions” to “time” and relate the creation/presence of bosons (stemming from the fermion transitions) to “space.” Placement of a fermion at the Nth energy level causes the decay of a virtual fermion located at this energy level, but, a la Feynman path integral formulation, decay by every possible permutation and combination. Each of the decayed energy modes corresponds to the presence of those momentum fluctuations, if the decayed energy modes are decayed once and for all, or is the decay of these modes continual? What differs between one consciousness and another – form, substance, something other? The Planck length is likely to be an absolute measure of the “graininess of spacetime.” Inconsistent with the would be the notion of time dilation/contraction of the Planck time/frequency. Similarly, a length contraction to dimensions smaller than the Planck length are ruled out. Approaching Planck dimensions, spacetime behaves according to the cellular automata (CA) model in which Lorenz invariance/covariance must be a bandoned. Here it is seen that the “physical” quantities of mass, length, and time are derivative in the CA model which is basically a data and information system. March 2011 Is it any coincidence that the Planck mass corresponds to a mass approximately equal to that of a grain of dust, which lies just at the visual resolution threshold of the unaided human eye? What is called uncertainty has two distinct senses, that of vagueness and

that of indecision. Information is originated through an act of will (interpretation of vagueness) and consciousness represents the outcome of interpretation or the effect of a decision. Each DNA is the product of the union of two single helix molecules, each single helix molecule taken from one of two double helix molecules composed of conjoined, complementary single helix molecules. The wonder of the intimately known is no lesser than that of the mysterious unknown. Wonder is not a function of knowledge, but of something transcending knowledge. Examples of which are the wonder the elderly person experiences when recollecting her childhood and the wonder experienced by a person in childhood. Neurolinguistic programming and the subtleties of natural selection. The natural selection mechanism must be infinitely subtler than any description that makes narrative sense to inhabitants of everydayness. This is on account of the infinitesimal ratio of historically occurring genetic combinations to that number of base pair combinations that are chemically and thermodynamically possible. Is not the feverish thought of philosophers so like similar attempts of a baby chick to peck its way out of its egg shell? Both endeavors are equally borne of instinct and equally directed toward a very real goal. We are led to the conclusion that the selective advantage of gene sequences is an illusion, along, perhaps, with all those sociobiological and anthropological evolutionary narratives of natural selection scenarios, now seen for the sophistical and disingenuous “just so” stories that they are. We have all along naively assumed that the environment is not quantum correlated to the DNA of the individuals in the competition for reproduction and survival. If the DNA were itself composed of

information, then could we say that its code is arbitrary, or just. . . The subjectivity or intersubjectivity of perception does not have any relevance to the ontological question concerning the reality or illusoriness of these perceptions. Like Union Pacific trains with cars one can see through if not empty, but which when empty are opaque, metaphors “work” because they are drawn from real, actual experience. A conscious computer would not be able to explore its state space without perturbing this state space in a non-negligible way, unless the state space is “just a projection.” Without “the arbitrariness of meanings” thought would be deterministic or, the symbolic realm would be a superfluous space within which thinking could perform non substantive work. The fact that there is no consciousness as such creates for a us a deep paradox. It seems to follow from this both 1) the only difference between two individual consciousnesses is a lack of numerical identity, and 2) everything about individual consciousness is different, except that they both are, analogically speaking, exemplars, but not instantiations of, consciousness (mine and/or his.) Ground state is the basis of the continuity of change of all that which is its manifestation. (Although there can be no “pure manifestation” of ground.) And the possibilities of a quantum system in a pure state embody the ground for change (continuous, deterministic) for that system, and so any change in the possibility space must be discontinuous. Form acquires substance. Symbols possess a capacity for recollecting their earlier contexts. The medium and implements of symbols and the contexts or spaces occupied and traversed by these implements in their

various media, by-produce contextual connections in the symbols they serve and support. This partially accounts for the arbitrariness of the particular complexion of meanings that each symbol has through historical possesses of acquisition of contexts. Why does a sudden break in audio input create the sensation of this break originating within one's own nervous system? This impression may be caused by an inadvertent back dating of memory, placing an act of volition immediately prior in time in memory to the perceived break. Consciousness is something one participates in: it is not something that one can represent. "Growing up in Earth's Sol System…' Beeblebrox."

"… played by Zaphod

It might be interesting to investigate how a person of one culture interprets manifestations of some other, highly distinct culture, e.g., how a young girl of the Czech Republic might interpret The Bob and Tom Show. Symbolic elements of a genetic nature do not require any over-arching, guiding intention of expression, in order to "contain" information and succeed in the expression of this information. Information is data in context, but data are the expression of information. Hunger of the Soul, by Deepak Chopra Supersymmetry appears to be necessary to consistently describe a quantized vacuum state in which the spacetime can be arbitrarily partitioned into a 3+1 Euclidean spacetime. The absence of local observer based time does not follow from the

nonexistence of a global or cosmological, i.e., absolute time. If global time is viewed as a particular class of inter relationship amongst local times, then global time would not determine loca time. Can we always choose a noninertial or inertial frame so that the density matrix is diagonalized so that we have a description of the system in terms of a pure state? If so, then the system as a whole cannot be nonlocally connected to another system. A system may be described by a Psi function, but contain no subsets described by their own, local Psi(I). Discreteness of spacetime 3+1 partitioning, each with its own local time vacuum with cutoff frequency, omega, cutoff. Perfect supersymmetry in each local vacuum is broken (and not required). Each local vacuum possesses a small enough quantum vacuum energy density if partial supersymmetry to solve the cosmological constant problem locally for each local spacetime (vacuum). The time evolution of pure state, i.e., an eigenstate of the Hamiltonian, does not imply the temporal evolution f possibility - possibility can only change discontinuously, through Psi collapse. There can be no deterministic evolution of the possibility space. What anchors the I think is the I think, I think, I think, I think, ad infinitum. It is a strange kind of Jacob's ladder style frequency of interaction underlying a connectivity which starts and ends in pure vacuum but passes through an unlimited number of the mutual grappling of two vacua. the interface for which may be the human brain. The human being is dual (of something) not a unity and therefore nothing in its own right, i.e., has no "essence." It was the way the bilateral symmetry of our bodies hints at this underlying lack of unity.

Can the normal dimensions of space and time be composed of carefully pieced together fractal space times? And can the "oscillation" of mind along its "recursion axis" be described consistently fractals (or, perhaps, hyperdimensional, fractals)? An abstract spatial continuum is the product (epiphenomenon) of the interconnection of an infinite number of fibers and fiber bundles. The actual spatial continuum is the product of the interacting of an infinite number of distinct (essentially distinct) time, continua. The many worlds that interfere with one another to produce the actual world in which observations are performed are not "worlds" with qualitatively distinct spatial and temporal foliations which is to say tha the time axis within each of the many worlds of Everett's interpretation of the quantum measurement problem does not correspond to an irreversible timeline. Moreover, the entropy of each of these worlds, fi it can even be defined, would be a constant (definable as zero?). Perhaps entropy can only be a function of subensembles of Everett’s "worlds." Failures of recollection, action of imagination, placing under erasure, tautologies, contradictions, paradoxes, parables, poems, riddles, etc., all the ways that human communication transcends binary logic. Data are the medium of information and energy, ultimately vacuum 3momentum, is the medium of data. Mater is the medium of vacuum 3momentum. Vacuum 3-momentum is the medium of data. Vacuum imaginary momentum  Information/form  matter/substance  vacuum 3-momentum  data  information/form. Gravitation  time  driving function Inertia  space  damping function. All images of the Alien, the other, derives from insights into the arbitrairness of our own human form, its bilaterl symmetry, etc.

The "medium" has both its discrete and continuous parts.

The Internet, hopefully should facilitate the “regathering of the tribes” which is the individualist’s search for what he/she defines as intelligent life. A universal time signal mediated differently in different regions of spacetime. Problems exist with the interpretation of the gravitational redshift. Ye, thee, thy, thou, etc. used in the King James Bible rings in the ears of the average churchgoer as being somehow closer to the time divine language. Investigate other examples of the “handwavingness” of human thought and speculation. Information is context dependent data and truth, then, is context dependent what? Adapting tiny variations on top of an enormous reservoir of information so that all of the untried combinations of DNA base pairs. The “fertile” chaotic medium is “seeded” by a principle of order/rationality. In this way the strengths of freedom and order are combined and the weaknesses of irrationality and inflexibility are mutually compensated. Web search: arbitrariness of the genetic code. Extrapolating the perceived behavior back toward some convergence point far afield from that person’s actual center.

Emotions evoked: internal triggering of ancient socio-sexual genetic algorithms. Song sig: “Night or day, they’re just not matchin’” A unified reality which is infinite may contain written itself the reason for its being/existence. Such is not the case for a plurality of infinite beings composing reality. The pounding beat of some rock music is anticipating building, creates primitive expectancy toward the hunt, tribal way, human sacrifice, etc. /\Pi x c = /\E is associated with spacelike momentum fluctuations within the crystal lattice. Changes in the circulation and flow of energy within the crystal requires power input into and power transfer through the crystalline matrix. A closed, dynamic system cannot be self sustaining in its dynamics as its elements must be continually regenerated from vacuum fluctuation energy.

The energy density of the vacuum induced in the presence of mass has, like electromagnetic radiation, an equation of state wherein the energy density is three times the pressure of the radiation. It is this inertial induced vacuum energy that gives photons within this region an effective mass – a kind of electromagnetic photon mass. Interestingly, the photon is connected with coupled pairs of electrons and positrons. This coupling is effected through an appropriately correlated positron pair, where each positron derives from two contiguous, virtual e-e+ pairs. A similar statement applies, where each electron also derives from contiguous, virtual e-e+ pairs. The space and time

components of these virtual pairs are /\xi and /\t, respectively. The density of virtual e-e+ pairs in time is decreased within a gravitational field and reduced /\E combined with increased /\t for these virtual e-e+ pairs implies a lower virtual power input into spacetime. While increased /\Pi x c over an increased /\t would imply a scaled down local value of c and so a similarly reduced spacelike virtual power transfer capability. In this way the ability of energy in matter and vacuum to redistribute itself in response to applied forces is similarly reduced, i.e., increased inertia. If my consciousness and that of each intelligent person possesses its own unity, then can there be room for a still more perfect unity, that of consciousness as such? But the notion of a unity of features of the individual’s own consciousness which transcends the unity of his individual consciousness seems nonsensical, if not contradictory. In nonrelativistic physics, any linear momentum can be transformed away via an appropriate Galilean transformation. This is not the case with angular momentum because this is motion not taking place within an inertial reference frame. In relativity, the 3-momentum can only be transformed away while preserving total 4-momentum. Use superposition to express /\Lz in four dimensional spacetime. There is a necessity of QM within relativistic physics. Gauge invariance is recaptured through the introduction of a new interaction in the form of an exchange particle (boson). Hypothesis: global gauge invariance is lost when a given symmetry is broken. Search: spin 0 particles. When a symmetry is broken, a good quantum number is lost. How is the least action principle restored? Are the lost quantum numbers recaptured through the appearance of a new gauge boson which is exchanged between the fermions with reduced quantum number set? With the loss of a quantum number as a result of symmetry breaking

(phase transition and loss of some finer structure within the vacuum lattice structure) certain permutations of state transitions, which may be virtual, are lost which are perhaps reintroduced through momentum transitions in the form of virtual gauge boson exchanges, and the appearance of new phases (mediating the phase transition of new vacuum state) or a new ground state? The neutrino was postulated by Fermi in order to have energy conserved in nuclear decay. The neutrino is a spin ½ particle (Fermion). When a global gauge (phase?) transformation is not possible, a broken symmetry exists, necessitating the introduction of an exchange particle (gauge boson) which restores the broken symmetry (locally at least?). Is momentum conservation regained in this manner? Is there a recoil momentum for fermions exchanging bosons between themselves? The 100 GeV energy cutoff for vacuum fluctuations may be due to a kind of temporal Casimir Effect where the resonance with harmonic hyperspherical potential is f = h/100 GeV. All conserved dynamical variables are purely timelike in free space. Inertia and gravitation are phenomena associated with the projection of these timelike four vectors into spacelike components. An important question here is whether there is a conserved four potential. Does the creation of spacelike components of four potential induce a change in the timelike four potential so that the sum of time and spacelike components of some new four potential vectorially sum to produce a new four potential with the same magnitude as the inertial free space four potential. Perhaps these dynamical variables are not purely timelike in “free space”, but possess balanced timelike and spacelike projections. There is a distinction to be made between the proposition that “substance is the basis of continuity” and “substance is defined as the basis of continuity. “

Research what is called The Shapiro Effect in Relativity Theory. The anomalous gravitational component experienced by pioneer (and other) spacecraft may be explained in terms of the effect of the Sun’s gravity upon its surrounding vacuum field to increase this field’s mass by a perhaps related to the gravitational gamma factor, GM/Rc**2. The discrepancy between predicted and observed sunward acceleration will increase as these space probes leave the solar system. The ZPF’s cannot act on themselves independently of imposed boundary conditions that alter the balanced distribution of the bosonic and fermionic components of these fields. With the classical gravitational field decaying with R**-2 and the mass of the vacuum decreases with “X” dependence to explain the Pioneer spacecraft gravitational anomalies. Or if there is a time-varying, cosmological constant, i.e., vacuum energy, a gradient in the local density of the vacuum energy would contribute a nonclassical component to the Sun’s gravitational field. The pervasive appearance of providential coincidence and meaning may be explicable in terms of an innate self-limiting structure of consciousness in that highest level processing of sensory and internal state data takes place within the unconscious which maintains a kind of mentor role relationship to the conscious mind, which plays the apprentice/ protégé` role. Maybe individual consciousness itself is a function of the brain’s internal model of its own mental states. Perhaps the extra confidence, altruism and sense of the urgency of self preservation is worth the extra processing power of the brain devoted to the maintenance of a self symbol. Certainly the raw data processing power of the individual brain would be much greater without the necessity of maintaining the self

symbol, but for the clan or tribal collective, survivability is greater if each individual possesses his own self symbol. A nondeterministic system cannot maintain its order without the input of information of closed systems, the less restrictive requirement of a closed system only needing Gibb’s free-energy to maintain its order. The excluded vacuum energy transitions define the new momentum fluctuations of the crystal. A photon that does not interact with any other real particle or field is just as real as a set of neither timelike nor spacelike, but null correlated vacuum fluctuations. A photon must acquire mass in a gravitational field – relative to an observer positioned in “free space.” This is the case because relative to this observer, the photon possesses a finite timelike motion as it “falls” into the gravitational well of an, e.g., star, e.g., the Sun. Only bound energy systems define discrete transition energy levels that are forbidden to the vacuum state. In the following, c.f., April 2000 issue of Scientific American, Quantum Teleportation article. Information is transmitted superluminally in the quantum teleportation experiments, but the code necessary to read this information, must be transmitted by conventional (subluminal) signals. Because teleporting Psi of the system is to teleport all that defines the system, this is equivalent to teleporting the system itself, c.f., principle of quantum indistinguishability of identical particles. No cloning theorem: cannot copy a quantum state without destroying the “original simulacrum.” Random measurement of a quantum state does not “disturb the state,”

meaning the uncertainties are unaffected? Can only quantum teleport what can exist as a fluctuation. Only pure quantum states can possess an antistate. Is thermodynamic equilibrium required to be in a pure quantum state – for matter without a fluctuation equivalent? E = pc for photon and p = hk, E = hw. The photon is completely spacelike in flat space because it has no energy associated with a timelike momentum. A pure quantum state does not have to be purely timelike, just coupled exclusively to the vacuum (the object as a whole). The object can have internal, spacelike momentum exchanges and still be in a pure state – just no momentum exchanges exceeding the momentum uncertainty of the object as a whole.

Can an observer move rapidly enough relative to two nonlocallyconnected particles of already measured +/- ½ spin (within the reference frame of two spacelike separated, inertial observers) so that within the relatively moving (accelerating) observer’s reference frame, a causal influence could have propagated from inertial observer A, where a spin measurement was performed, to inertial observer B, where the nonlocally-connected-to-particle-A particle B acquires a spin eigenstate? The nonlocally connected, spin ½ particles are simultaneous within all inertial frames; locally-connected particles are non-simultaneous in all inertial frames. The velocity of interference patters exhibited by interacting photons is indeed dependent upon the motion of the observer. There may be an absolute uncertainty of position determined by the

Planck length, which is necessarily associated with an absolute maximum density of 3-momentum fluctuations. The Planck particle must be as close to an energy eigenstate as possible, but perhaps it cannot be in an actual energy eigenstate due to the entropy of its Hawking radiation emitted by its minimal surface area. Is entropy quantized through the entropy of a Planck particle’s Hawking radiation? Independently existing force that one can then resolve into orthogonal component. But should one follow this same rule when representing a vector composed of fluctuations composed of virtual momentum and energy? Classical versus quantum may be generalized as intuitive (built upon experience of ordinary reality) versus counterintuitive (transcending ordinary world). Conceptually, the intuitive is underpinned by the counterintuitive. Practically, the counterintuitive is defined in terms of the intuitive. This is analogous to the philosophy of method embodied in the Copenhagen Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics. People don’t change because they are either incapable or unwilling to look at themselves as others may see them. One must dissociate somewhat in order to grapple with the psychological processes that underpin thought and emotion so as to understand more fully their laws of transformation. If the momentum-energy fluctuations drive the fluctuations in particle position-time fluctuation instead of momentum-energy fluctuations driving fluctuations in the metric as an intermediary step to causing position-time fluctuations, then perhaps the momentum-energy of the ZPF need not gravitate. Only closed universes can arise from quantum tunneling, c.f., From Newton’s Laws to the Wheeler-DeWitt Equation, by John W. Norbury.

The wavepacket possesses a degree of dispersion about the mean position in spacetime occupied by the classical particle with trajectory defined by a geodesic of spacetime. The Gaussian wavepacket is also characterized by expectation values, or mean values, of the quantities of momentum and energy. Does the Gaussian wavepacket of a “particle” traveling along a spacetime geodesic do so only in an approximate manner, determined by the expectation values of position and time? If so, then this has implications for the Einstein equivalence principle, particularly with regard to the Heisenberg uncertainties, or fluctuations in, time, position, energy, and momentum. The classical particle geodesic spacetime trajectory may possess an underlying dynamics in which the distinction between “particle” and spacetime is seen as not fundamental. Momentum and position fluctuations in the vacuum, as well as, fluctuations in energy and time must not occur independently of on another, but in a coordinated manner, which maintains the constancy of h-bar as well as the conservation of fluctuation momentum-energy. Since, according to David Bohm, c.f., Quantum Theory (1951), all causal connections may be recast into the form of correlations of fluctuations, we might justly suppose that the geodesic path of a classical particle through spacetime can be alternatively described in terms of a coherent set of quantum correlations obtaining between the fluctuation quantities in terms of which the particle’s momentum-energy may be defined and those fluctuations in terms of which the particle’s spacetime position may be defined. But to complete this alternative, fluctuation-correlation based description of particle dynamics, we require some way of connecting fluctuations in the spacetime metric to fluctuations in the particle’s position-time.

The purpose in performing abstraction of more relevant features of the concrete and suppression of the less so is just so that we can work with the realm of articulable symbols. In this way, if a truth is discovered, it

shall be reportable to the intersubjective collectivity. There is a distinction of the more or less intrinsic and the more or less extrinsic that we seek to discover as we turn the object around, this way and that, within our “hands” (tools and instruments of probing, detection, measurement). We are neurotic in not having confidence that we truly know something without the aid of the mediation of symbols whole only true purpose is to clue in others on what we ourselves are already intimately acquainted with. A misconception lies behind the philosopher’s and the scientist’s desire to “unlock the secrets of consciousness” read: consciousness “as such”. But what if the forms of consciousness are all that is communicable about that phenomenon, while the “raw feels” of one individual’s consciousness versus that of another’s is a comparison void of any sense or meaning or simply impossible (in concept and application). There is no collective, intersubjective knowledge to be had concerning that, which is itself infra-subjective, what is like to be me. And there is not subjective knowledge to be had concerning the nature of consciousness itself or as such. If there is no consciousness as such, that is, if there is not abstract feature common to all individual consciousnesses, such that each individual consciousness is an instantiation of this general consciousness, then each individual consciousness is unique and a law unto itself. So here we see that form is instantiated within an individual consciousness, but consciousness is not itself an instantiation of any general form. So the individual consciousness is neither an assembly of forms less general than itself, nor is it an instantiation of something more general than itself. That which is not an instantiation cannot possess a general nature. But that which is an instantiation of a metaphor can possess an analogical nature. What sort of analogy can obtain between to entities which are themselves formally describable? So the mystics are only partly correct: it is not the case that consciousness (as such) simply is; this is true of each individual consciousness! So the answer to the question what is the secret of consciousness? The secret of consciousness is the alterity of other minds. The answer is as far as a unified answer is possible is the state of one’s own being. This answer is infinitely plural, the knowledge of which is infinitely singular.

3-momentum fluctuations mediate reversible time. The imaginary component of 4-momentum fluctuations mediate irreversible (entropyladen) temporal evolution. On this view, the event horizon of a black hole being the collection of points at which spacelike and timelike intervals reverse themselves, and hence, timelike and spacelike fluctuations exchange roles. Therefore, we expect all irreversible momentum exchanges to be taking place at the black hole’s event horizon. So the entropy content of the black hole stems entirely from its surface area (event horizon) and so the density of the hole’s internal energy should be dependent upon the inverse square of the hole’s radius.

The vacuum’s energy fluctuation spectrum, within an accelerated reference frame, is that of a black body (Unruh Effect). The Hawking Radiation spectrum of a black hole is also that of a black body. Particle production with a black body spectrum may occur in a universe with hyperspherical potential, as in the case of an accelerating cosmological expansion. C.f., extend inflation theories, “cosmological quantum tunneling,” and “cosmological particle production”, etc. It is natural to imagine the other as cold, loveless, calculating and one’s self as well meaning, forthright and honest. In the realm of value neutral and competence-oriented endeavors, it is the other who is more naïve and less calculating. One’s own mistakes occurred through unforeseeable collusion of unfortunate circumstance, whereas the mistakes of one’s competitor are blunders, their successes are attributable to a combination of luck and influential persons. One can read the verses of the chapters of the book of Romans in reverse

order and these chapters read equally coherently. If the mind was unaffected by its own representations, then the state space idea might be a workable hypothesis for the presentational continuum. Creativity demands first, the development of “a culture of one.” To do some violence to Ms. Hilary Clinton, “it takes an individual.” Second, we must then become anthropologist to all our fellows. The more responsibility one takes for one’s own psychological and intellectual development, the more alien appear the artifacts and expressions of mainstream and/or mass culture. Alterity is highly pervasive within any individual consciousness that is a member of the highly mobile, information-saturated, postmodern age. Evolutionary theory of consciousness as constantly running an enemy psyche simulation. Human consciousness as a kind of enemy intelligence-counter intelligence simulator. Donate you old, used care commercial. Picture a little auto coughing and sputtering with cracked headlight and a few “teeth” missing it its grill. A couple discusses taking their old car to the junkyard. The car, sitting patiently in the garage, awaiting the opportunity to serve its driver, overhears all of this talk. The car evinces a twisted, sad frown and seems to shed a couple of tears. This little, animated sequence tugs at the hearts of the TV viewing audience. But what does such facile emotionality in response to mere cartoon images say about our emotionality when responding to the presence of our peers. Why do arbitrary juxtapositions of cultural manifestations so frequently “gel” and does so in the minds of most quite readily? The function of “indirect addressing” in the byte basic programming language. Do inchoate “bits” of “information” gel first and then the anatomy and taxonomy are inevitably worked out later. Can the suggestible human

mind make any arbitrary juxtaposition of incongruous elements weld together into a seamless whole. No, not without the requisite social, cultural “evolutionary support.” The incongruity of synchronic elements can always be overcome by the teleological determination of some diachronicity. When the gauge symmetry of a quantum field is broken, this field is no longer invariant under global gauge transformations. Is local gauge invariance in the absence of global gauge invariance the same thing as what is called “gauge covariance”? Most of my scientific research consists in collecting circumstantial evidence for the non-gravitating quantum vacuum gravity/inertia hypothesis. Chaos is at the opposite end of system behavior spectrum from highly energy degenerate systems. Scholarship is largely an exploration of links within the implicit hypertext. Possibility and actuality evolve in unison – how could they not, if they are at all tied to one another? Possibilities are largely suggested by actualities. Possibility lies in the imagination alone and is not latent and preexistent. But the possible and the actual may not be separable except through an act of conscious observation. In fact, possibility, actuality, and necessity are not separated in an isolated, deterministically evolving quantum system. “Isolation” of a quantum system, which is deterministically evolving according to the Schrodinger equation, must be understood to nevertheless remain coupled to the vacuum fluctuation field. It is just that in this particular case, the system is being sustained continuously and is not a conduit of back-reaction of an extraneous vacuum state upon this sustaining vacuum field.

If a fiancée or newly wed already finds that she must hedge or make excuses for her man/husband, then here is the small gray cloud on the horizon of their future life together. This little gray cloud may indeed not darken and grow over the ensuing “early years,” but the far greater chance is that it shall. I cannot change or duly influence your decision as I would like, but you can trust that I will still be here after things shall have run their natural, abortive course. The Good Life requires a stable, adequate infrastructure. initial conditions and failures of marriages.

Changing

The more intelligent, talented, creative, dynamic, etc., that two people are, the more important is the question of compatibility in marriage. Actually, it is a function of imagination. Recursiveness of creative thought and always alreadiness of metalevels of thought, above and below. Was “always alreadiness” a concept waiting to be discerned or was it invented by Derrida? Possibility and actuality cannot be completely disentangled as the are not orthogonal. If the source of inertia lies outside the spatial boundary of the object then the “object” is only a system representation – like a computer desktop icon. Some mechanism, which prevents directed dispersion of Psi packets, i.e., acceleration of Psi packets. Ontological priority of state space description over that of the spacetime manifold. The energy of a nonlocally connected field cannot gravitate without a modification of the Einstein field equations being required. Deficit of vacuum energy gravitates since the vacuum energy is probably of negative magnitude.

If civilization had to rebuild itself, different theories would lead to the discovery of very different theoretical entities, which would then be reified. Stability of extended objects is supported by Goldstone modes. Inertia is in terms of excitation and reconstruction of Goldstone modes. Obviously, if the energy density of the quantum vacuum is on the order of magnitude predicted by QM, matter cannot actually “pass through” this medium, but must traverse it by moving “atop” this hyperdense medium. Continuous reformation of particles and fields would be indicated here. At successive locations of spacetime appears the only viable means for matter to have motion within the vacuum. A ready analogy is the icon on a computer desktop. Spacetime is constituted out of information and its activity. So information is not transmitted “through” spacetime. Information has to be nonlocally encoded, that is, if any code at all is necessary (because consciousness is unmediated) In a self-reproducing system, the new incarnation of the system must also have knowledge about how to reproduce itself. This poses a recursion problem. So the system cannot be a closed or isolated system and reproduce itself – it must continually draw information in from outside of itself, which is not the same as entropy leaving the system: a limited amount of entropy can leave the system, but there is no theoretical limit to the quantity of information which can enter the system from outside. A unique, non-reproducible process cannot possess a complete description in terms of a set of definable physical laws. A process cannot be completely understood in terms of its phenomenological by-products.

Within a strictly logical chain of influence, there is no increase or decrease of the quantity of information represented by each logical step in deriving the concluding proposition or theorem from the premises. Although the successive production of each step in the sequence of logically demonstrating a valid theorem, as a manifestation of a process of thought on the part of a human consciousness, not in possession of either perfect logic or of unlimited calculating capacity, would not itself necessarily be a deterministic manipulation of data (logic is allegedly not empirically based, but that is another story) or of symbols. The particular sequence of inferential operations may itself constitute a kind of code which locates (identifies) the particular system of inference within some larger metasystem. Many logical equivalencies cannot be perceived directly, but require demonstration through rules of inference. Semantic equivalencies, however, are directly intuited (perceived) by anyone who understands both propositions. Same meaning and distinct, logical structures versus different meaning and identical logical structures. Abstract structures, like thermodynamic state variables, are overdetermined entities. Concrete structure, like quantum mechanical observables, are underdetermined entities. Derrida’s concept of “always alreadiness” seems to give the nod to the notion of a timeless absolute. C = /\E/ /\p Nondestructive quantum measurement and observation without interference with the system. Nonlocally connected quantum states may be understood as “co-present” states. Nonlocal interactions do not appear to contribute to an object’s inertial mass. Can the transcendent be understood as that part of reality lying altogether outside (possible) intersubjectivity? It is clear that the consciousness of the individual is not itself an artifact of intersubjectivity, but is subjectivity itself. Only the forms that appear within consciousness of the individual stem from intersubjectivity.

The demagogue’s arbitrary conceptions and suggestibility of his subjects are exactly complentary. Some counter-intuitive phenomena of Quantum Theory or, why Quantum Theory defies the Kantian categories: Time-energy uncertainty and position-momentum uncertainty relations. Indistinguishability of identical particles. Particles as localization’s of a field quantity Wave-particle duality Superposition principle Quantum tunneling Spontaneous emission/transition/decay Vacuum fluctuations Creation of matter out of the vacuum Bell nonlocality Indistinctness of particle trajectories Symmetrization postulate Pauli exclusion principle Bose condensation Nonconservation of energy Indeterminacy of wavefunction collapse Nonphysical nature of wavefunction amplitude and phase Time not being an observable in quantum mechanics Intrinsic spin Correlation of random signals Degeneracy Why is the energy density of the vacuum not simply the energy contained in each Planck volume summed together that can be packed into a cubic meter, in the case of vacuum energy in Joules per cubic meter? Is it possible that the 3-momentum components of this otherwise enormous vacuum energy largely counterpoise the timelike component of the quantum vacuum energy so that the density of energy of the vacuum globally averages to some small value of the

cosmological constant? Is the enormous potential of this largely selfcompensated vacuum energy only tapped when appropriate boundary conditions are applied, say, those posed by bound systems of real fermions? Scattering amplitudes for collision of two identical particles interfere constructively for bosons and destructively for fermions, c.f., p. 1405, QM, vol. 2. Because the symmetrization postulate does not apply to well separated particles, a spin-based theory of gravity would be expected to be a local theory. Virtual particle/field reactions and processes may be viewed as the fundamental processes undergone by vacua in their quiescent, unperturbed state and real particles and fields are manifestation of the vacuum when perturbed by a driving source term such as an applied electric or magnetic field. In bound energy systems, changes in energy are always associated with emission or absorption of bosons by the system as bound fermions undergo discrete transitions in energy. The discrete energy structure of matter, e.g., discrete orbitals in the Hydrogen atom, are modified according to the splitting of degeneracy’s resulting from this atom being incorporated into a crystalline atomic lattice. The exact structure, or fine structure, is coordinate to the vastly increased number of discrete virtual transitions that the atom is now able to make after being incorporated into the bound, material structure of the crystal. To each new possible discrete energy, transition there corresponds an exchange of a virtual photon of atoms within the crystal of lattice. The discrete, virtual transitions of the crystal lattice energy which are forbidden to the vacuum state of the crystal occur, but are driven by

vacuum momentum fluctuations, manifesting themselves as exchanges in virtual bosons between fermions of the crystal lattice. The enhanced fluctuation momentum current density of spacetime within the volume occupied by the crystal exists in combination with a decreased fluctuation energy current density. Consequently, the crystal induces a shift in the volume of spacetime it occupies of the fluctuation momentum-energy current density so that the density of uncertainty energy, /\E / cm**3, is decreased by the same fraction that the density of uncertainty momentum, /\p / cm**3, of the quantum vacuum is increased. The velocity of the crystal mass through time is less than the in vacuo velocity of light by a certain fraction. This fraction is determined by the ratio of the energy density of the crystal to the energy density of the free space vacuum occupied by the crystal. This fraction is also the fraction by which the velocity of light through space is less than that of the free space vacuum. And this fraction is determined by the ratio of the free space momentum density of the crystal relative to the momentum density of the volume occupied by the crystal. Although the timelike momentum of the relativistic mass is unchanged by the effects of the crystal lattice’s mass upon the supporting quantum vacuum, the timelike momentum of the nonrelativistic mass, has decreased by a fraction equal to the fraction by which the spacelike mass of the crystal has increased. Since the crystal is at rest within its embedding 3-space, we cannot consistently compare any shifts in the timelike and spacelike momenta of the bulk mass. The angle of rotation of the spacetime coordinate system of the mass, i.e., the crystal lattice, relative to a spacetime coordinate system in vacuo, must then be determined by the relative shifts in the magnitudes of the timelike and spacelike momentum flux (or current) densities. In order to decide whether it is the momentum flux densities or the momentum current densities which are the relevant physical quantities, we shall have to make some general observations concerning how these two easily confused quantities compare. First of all, the momentum current density is a four vector, while the momentum flux density is a one form. The relativistic effects upon mass, length, and time within special relativity derive from spacetime

rotations, called Lorenz boosts, of some object’s four momentum. The relativistic effects within general relativity are ultimately founded upon the possibility of defining spacetime rotations of the momentum flux density of the vacuum relative to its “free space” momentum flux density. What is interesting in comparing the momentum current densities of special relativity with the momentum flux densities of general relativity is that the former are defined for bulk matter while the latter are defined for matter understood as an interconnected network of flux meta-stabilities in the activity of the quantum vacuum. The momentum of matter, understood as the momentum of vacuum fluctuation fluxes, modulated by imposed boundary conditions (represented by the presence of matter), is very much in keeping with the cellular automata theoretic interpretation of matter as a pattern of oscillation of the unit cells. The resistance to deformation and the resistance to accelerated motion displayed by cellular automata both originate in the mutual back-reaction of matter and vacuum. The matter of special relativity possesses a continuous existence as inert quantities of bulk material, i.e., substances, indifferent to the passage of time. Within our interpretation of general relativity underpinned by quantum processes, matter does not possess a continuous existence as a substance, but only as a more or less sustained pattern of activity in vacuum. This activity is exhausted in the fluctuations of the quantum vacuum’s momentum-energy. Although length contraction is a reversible effect within special relativity, time dilation is itself an irreversible operation. Is it possible to have nested quantum mechanical systems such that there exist two or more distinct energy uncertainties, October 2011 for example a single, overarching system may possess myriad distinct “compartments”, each possessing its own density matrix description with associated “entropy”. In this way, acceleration of overlapping, nested systems would not be

merely relative, but the acceleration of one or the other system would be marked by distinctly different spectra of particles produced out of the vacuum, i.e., distinctly different type of Unruh radiation. Within cellular automata theory, there is no reason to view, for example, the electron of the Hydrogen atom as possessing an angular momentum independent of quantum mechanical, i.e., intrinsic, spin. On this view, a particle’s angular momentum is composed of two parts, timelike and spacelike components of intrinsic spin. The spacelike component of such an electron’s angular momentum would be constituted by a connection (possibly Bell nonlocal) between the virtual e+e- pairs along the electron’s orbital trajectory. The electron’s total angular momentum, J, is conserved and is composed of the two parts such that J = L + S. In special relativity it is possible to derive all of the relativistic effects of velocity upon mass, length, and time through treating the 3-momentum of a mass as resulting from a spacetime rotation. This spacetime rotation is just the projection of the mass’ 4-momentum, initially completely timelike, i.e., imaginary, onto a new spacetime coordinate system, rotated in the direction of motion of the mass, relative to the “rest” spacetime coordinate axes. The inverse hyperbolic tangent of the ratio of the mass’ real 3-momentum to its initial imaginary 4-momentum determines the angle of spacetime rotation. Alternately, at least for v c, this angle of spacetime rotation may be determined by the ratio of the mass’ 3-velocity to the velocity of light (in vacuo). What we might term energy density energy space density is a function of both energy and volume. A complementary quantity may be defined as inverse momentum time density. This quantity has units of sec/ kg-msec**-1 or kg-m**-1. This quantity is the momentum density of time. But time itself is not a quantity, but only intervals of time may be treated as true quantities. The same observation applies to position and position intervals. The energy content of matter possess a seeming absolute physical

meaning because this energy is secretly relative to the energy of the vacuum. But the component of the vacuum’s energy, which is not constrained by any quantum field, initial, or boundary conditions, does not possess an energy of absolute magnitude. This is because, in the absence of boundary conditions, e.g., the age and physical radius of the observable Universe, there is no possibility of defining a global energy density, i.e., cosmological constant. This difficulty is similar to that of speaking of a gravitational potential when no position of zero gravitational potential has been defined. Brain energy levels, transitions between these energy levels and corresponding exchanges of “momentum” between neurons. There is a dialectical, two-way transformation, which takes place between hypothesis, and theory, which is driven by intuition. It is similar to attempting to make conversation with a native of a foreign language when one has only a rudimentary working knowledge of the foreign tongue. Nature is the native speaker and Man is the touristing foreigner. This foreign language is mathematics and the foreign native and his language comprise here a unity. Mathematics is a unified, infinite, unbounded, but temporally evolving system. Classes of infinity points to the possibility that mathematics’ infinite self-knowledge is inadequate to span its depths. Why should people be sent to hell when God is all good and fair??? No one is bad enough to deserve living in eternal damnation. Damnation is simply separation from God, which is always ultimately the choice of the individual. God would that all souls spend eternity in loving union with Him. However, God, in His infinite mercy, could not subject an individual with unforgiven Sin on his soul to “stand eternally in His Presence,” as this would amount to a far greater torment for this person than would result from the eternal separation of this person from his Creator.

Furthermore, such a person is really not capable of the love when God desires from his “children.” Now if an individual were given full knowledge of the stark nature of the alternatives between which he wee to choose, God or separation from Him, the choice for such a person could hardly be a freely willed one, but would be a merely “calculated choice” coerced by fear. God desires that all choose Him out of Love. Well, the consequence of this choice for each soul is final because real choices are dependent for their reality upon real consequences. God did not desire to create a false and hollow realm in which the unfolding dramas were to be so much mere play-acting. God desired to create not to merely recreate. Recreation constituted by ultimately pointless amusements is perhaps an adequate distraction for temporal Man, but does nothing to assuage a truly Cosmic Loneliness. The creation of Man opened up new (and real) experiences of finitude for the Godhead: fear, joy, uncertainty, hope, ambiguity, conceptual thought, emotion, revelation, none of these powerful experiences being possible for a Being beyond Time and Space and transcending all dual distinctions such as Life/Death, Good/Evil, Male/Female, etc. After all, God created Adam, and by extension, all humans, through breathing into “inanimate matter” the breath of His eternal Spirit. The reality of the human person requires that his/her independence from God be potentially eternal. The possibility of him/her actually loving God requires that his/her choice of God be radically free. God seeks Real Love, in other words! Complete descriptions from rival viewpoints which cannot be reconciled, but only transcended, e.g., reductionism versus teleology. E > /\E ~ causes of my doing “x” E < /\E ~ reasons for my doing “x”

E < /\E not bound by law of conservation of energy, information is operative here. E > /\E conservation laws apply and there is here merely a manipulation of context-free data according to deterministic laws. Causality ~ laws Reason ~ rules Modern Philosophy by Roger Scruton Objects or forms are eternal not because they have always secretly existed, but because they were created genuinely de novo. It will always be the case that such objects had existed. An eternal form or object conceived in the traditional sense of “eternal” may never actually come to be concretized as an existent entity or thing. A real particle may be chosen as the origin of a spacetime coordinate system, but a virtual particle, i.e., a vacuum fluctuation cannot be so chosen. Any number of events may be simultaneous with one another, that is, occupy the same time. However, this is not the case where space, as opposed to time, is concerned. P. 378, Modern Philosophy, Roger Scruton. The last paragraph applies to my theory of purpose of human existence. P. 481, MP, R.S. The Self is a social construct so that the program of deconstruction cannot be consistently carried through. P. 482, God is not a particular being among particular beings in the same way that the transcendental self is not. We are different from the worm in precisely the same way in that we are similar to God. This answers the question, if God is as much greater than Man as man is greater than a worm, in which Man is certainly not interested, then how can God truly have an interest in man, if not merely in the sense in which a zoologist is interested in a mere worm?

Critique of Pure Reason, p. 116 Dynamical versus mathematical as a dichotomy within the categories. This is reminiscent of the distinction of conserved versus unconserved quantities. That which is quantized vs. that which is empirical. Correspondence, coherence, pragmatic or consequential truth. Paragraph two, p. 148, there is the unity of experience in the moment and there is the unity of experience within all moments of experience (within all possible experience?) p. 32, Paragraph One. “Time itself does not alter, but only something which is in time.” p. 327 Paragraph One. p. 367 Escape From Freedom p. 148 The completely unassuming individual is equated with the typical or average psychologically and socially well-adjusted individual. But when one considers that society itself in the post industrial age may possess pathological traits. . . For the intelligent, sensitive soul, the world must always be experienced through some sort of psychological condition which assuredly has been catalogued in some clinician’s diagnostic manual or psychological research journal. The question is whether such “psychological conditions” are merely modes of thought and perception which the individual finds convenient and expedient for the interpreting of his experience for the at a particular juncture of life, or whether it is a relatively inflexible manifestation of an abiding character trait. p. 166, Escape From Freedom. Censorship not at the printing press but

at the level of the formation of ideas. Dissent is encouraged to prevent the people from perceiving monolith against which they might rebel. Fromm’s idea of the power of anonymous authority, as opposed to the external authority or conscience. p. 168, Eric Hoffer’s observation that ex-communists made the best fascists and vice versa. Radicalism versus extreme authoritarianism is Fromm’s similar concept. p. 209, Critique of Pure Reason That which constitutes objects out of appearances presupposes the operation of the forms of intuition, that is, space and time. The dynamical relation of that which constitutes objects relative to this relation in its constitution of the possibility of objects as such determines the gravity of the particular objects. The principle of coherence by which other objects could be engendered in its place as alterations of the original object constitutes the objects’ inertia. p. 219 The appearance of objects of experience as codetermined, that is, as compresent with one another, cannot conform to a causal principle applying to relations discernable between the compresent objects, i.e., the objects are simultaneously present. Changes in state versus changes in that, merely to which states may be attributed. Critique of Pure Reason, pp. 228-229 Substance is active because equated with the indeterminate the negation of which does not yield its dual opposite and so the determinations of substance are never external but arise within it. Since time is the successive determination of substance, we see that the basis of all change is the activity of substance itself acting through itself. The ultimate explanation for the interaction, mutually, of various

determination of substance must lie with the action of substance itself within condition established through but not by, previous of its determinations. If there are not limitations or boundary conditions through which substance acts, then no object can be given which may be thought to enjoy a particular state or other and so the concept of inertia, or the resistance to a change in state, would not apply to such a completely unrestrained activity on the part of substance. Attempting to apply the concepts of inertia and gravitation to the activity of the quantum vacuum in the total absence of boundary conditions being placed upon it reminds us of the misguided attempt to constitute the transcendent ground and the principle of its activity in terms of merely empirical relationships obtaining between its various temporal manifestations. Gravity and inertia are different modes of interaction or relationship between existents as determinations of substance or ground and do not apply to ground’s self-operation or activity. For an activity to exist it must, first of all, persist, that is, maintain itself against the activity of the ground which brought it forth to being with. The entity by existing, serves as a condition upon ground’s continuing activity in its production of and mediation of the changes to other entities that it supports and this is how the gravitational influence of one entity upon another becomes possible. Critique of Pure Reason, p. 233 Gravitation cannot act instantaneously through nonlocal quantum interactions. Since the negation of the indeterminate is not defined in the sense of determinate thing, the determination of substance arises from within substance itself.

In Hume, there is no distinction between arising of new objects and the alteration of the same object. Application of logic cannot be explicated in logical terms. There are difficulties with the correspondence theory of truth where recursive propositions are concerned. Methodological arrangement versus systematic unity. Intuition is the simultaneous arising de novo of a new concept with its founding exemplar so intuition involves a much more intimate relationship between the concept and one of its objects. The understanding applies concepts to the categorizing of its objects. What about the application of concepts to sensation which underpins the perception of or emergence of objects within sensation? The momentum of a particle cannot be greater than p = mc, where m is the mass of the particle. Measures of uncertainty of an observable in terms of the observable’s eigenfunction expansion. There are an unlimited number of eigenfunction spectra which possess the same uncertainty of the associated observable. We may distinguish the probability that a system is in a particular quantum state, Psi, from the probability that a measurement of a Psi observable will produce the eigenvalue, O(j), associated with Psi(j). Such a distinction would exist where degeneracy’s, the probability of O(j) is greater than |Psi|. If the energy uncertainty of a particle could be attributed to the particle itself and not to some medium with which the particle interacts, still better, which continually reconstitutes the particle, then the uncertainty of the particle’s energy must be attributed to the observer. “Erfahrung als ob” is intimately related to the question of the mythological dimension of perception. Objects given in the presentational continuum are always artifacts of intentionality, i.e., on imposed flux stability. Inertia is a property of coherence. Everything

changes as fast as it can if left to itself. Change is always communicated from “outside.” Outside has two aspects. These may be termed “constituted” and “constituting.” Dasein is the uniquely human aspect of human Being which cannot be reduced analyzed or represented or simulated (by a computer). The being which is unique to the individual ego is not the being which exists in any communication medium. One has the suspicion that one is not at home, still more, that one does not exist. Intimacy has been almost wholly converted into sexuality or a way of being unto sex, if you will. No distinction between the profound and the merely trivial or banal. There is no basis for judging something more good or beautiful than another. The working vocabulary is always much smaller than the recognition vocabulary. Coincidence of meaning are generated by the tendency of the act of perception to be thematic. The transcendent being has no knowledge of itself as other. We have silently conspired collectively to ignore the blatant fact that our lives are a mystery in terms of their origin, mode, and destiny. May 2013 epi= "Your dreams are someone else's waking experiences, your waking experiences, someone else's dream." (Self as other) A phrase uttered many times unreflectingly until one day one finds oneself in the circumstances which at first occasioned its first use. One then says to oneself, “Oh, so that’s what “they” mean by this!” One feels privileged to have entered into and connected with one’s own everyday culture. One may now use the phrase in the presence of others that only understood it by having paid lip service by mimicry and one may

attempt to signal one’s deeper, substantive new understanding through demonstrating a particularly knowing and explicit use of the phrase. The height of clueless geekiness would be the case where one indulges this impulse while secretly these others had always understood what the meaning of this magic phrase. One’s ridiculous misinterpretation of the situation would probably be readily apparent to the more perceptive individuals. Because the choice to perform an observation is initiated from outside the composite system observer’s brain/system-to-be-observed, namely through the free will of the observer, based in transcendence, of the observer/experimenter, the new quantum mechanical system, though expandable in terms of the eigenfunctions (energy) of the old system, must end up in either an excited or de-excited state, assuming the system had previously been prepared in on of its available eigenstates. But what about the case where the system is not in a prepared eigenstate? Time is not reducible to mere change occurring to existent things. For one could imagine a case in which all processes in the universe had been frozen into a state of unchangedness and then ask for who long this state of global unchangedness has been in effect, in a word ask for this state’s duration. Time is not reversible. For we can imagine that if the direction of time’s flow were reversed, then this event would have to have occurred at some particular time or other. If the even of time reversal is included among the other evens making up the time stream so reversed then this event would recede ever further into the future, and so, with regard to the new direction of time hasn’t happened yet. In other words, the time reversal, in this case, will have never happened at any time in the past and could not be thought to have occurred at all. On the other hand, if the event of the time reversal is not included in the time stream reversed, then it along with all its contemporaneous events recedes ever further into the past and so in this case too the time reversal cannot properly be thought to have taken place.

There are a number of difficulties with McTaggart's famous proof of the unreality of Time. The proof presupposes that the predicates, past, present, and future may be treated entirely on an equal footing as categories. I believe this is fundamentally mistaken because past, present and future may be distinguished by the fact that the past is determined, the present is the activity of the past determining itself, or of the present determining itself as past, whereas the term "future" does not refer to a determinate category at all, that is, if Reality is, indeed, an open system as we have argued for extensively thought this text. Even the past itself may not be so easily characterized as determinate since the past, at the time it was present, may not have succeeded in fully determining itself as past at the precise moment in which that heretofore present moment determined itself as a forever past moment. We may then distinguish two presents, what we may term the temporal present and the eternal present. The temporal present is that part of the present which itself fully succeeded in determining itself as past within some previous present moment. The eternal present, on the other hand, is that component of this identical present moment which existed in all previous present moments and which may well exist in all succeeding present moments, namely that component which never succeeds in determining itself as past, but which may therefore be thought to have the essential role in determining the present as past in every case of temporal succession of moments. There is, of course, nothing to prevent the existence of a kind of present which falls somewhere between these two extremes of the temporal and eternal present. For example, part of the indeterminate with which some present moment is continuous may not succeed in determining itself as past before the next succeeding moment, but may succeed in doing so at some later moment. Of course, in a completely closed universe, in which time is completely reversible and possessing no intrinsic scale, the earlier/later distinction of the B series is undercut while the distinction between past, present and future is likewise undercut within the A series.

Past may be thought of as the “interpreted present.” The future may be thought of as the “uninterpreted present.” Eternal present as ground , temporal present as presentational continuum.

This seems contradictory, but there is an equivocation of the sense in which the term past is being used. “Past” may be understood as determined or may be understood in the more orthodox or common sense relational sense, that of the relation of some moment to the present moment or to a moment later in time in relation to this moment. Order is a structuring of data and not of information. Classical data and quantum information. Feynman Lectures on Gravitation. p. 139, eqn. 10.1.23, A(u;v) – A(v;u) = A(u,v) – A(v,u) In other words, the covariant curl is the same as the ordinary curl. Moreover, by eqn. 10.1.21, Phi;v = Phi, v, in other words, the covariant gradients are the same as the ordinary gradients. How would we describe in General Relativity a vibrating 3-hypersurface. Wouldn’t such a a “motion of spacetime” be considered to be “nonphysical” within this theory? Space and time cannot be quantized because their complementary observables, momentum and energy, already are quantized, conserved

quantities. Phi, v x Phi, v = (phi,v)**2 ~= Phi,v x Phi, V, Just as d**2/dx**2 ~= (d/dx)**2? equations with d/dx are not linear?

Then d/dx is not an operator and

There must be a non-phenomenological basis for psychic continuity. Time paradoxes stem from the attempt to “spatialize time.” We can illustrate this confusion by contrasting changes in time zone due to rapid travel over the Earth’s surface versus keeping a constant position on the Earth’s surface and “waiting” for the time zone to change due to the Earth’s rotation. If going forward in time and cross international dateline, go back 24 hours (on day). If going backward in time and crossing International Dateline, go forward 24 hours (1 day). The very substance of one’s subjective reality is comprised by the various personality blind spots composed of all of the unquestioned assumptions, biases, and prejudices which sustain the hidden context of one’s conscious daily life. Relativity, Cosmology and Thermodynamics p. 226, Paragraph two. Time rate of changes of energy (real) is determined by conditions prevailing at the boundary separating the system from its surroundings. P. 221, paragraph two, the current density of every fluid element is decreasing when the system is expanding and vice versa. The is Large, p.43 The Many World’s Interpretation of QM presupposes a clear-cut distinction between real ad virtual states (worlds). But since any possible world, if made real, cannot be what it is completely free of

quantum superposition states, we are forced to introduce the concept of “possible possible worlds.” In turn, we must admit the “existence.” In turn, we must admit the “existence” of possible possible possible worlds, etc., ad infinitum. Because the definition of order is always at least partly conventional (to an indeterminate and changing degree), as is reflected in the necessarily partially arbitrary formulation of physical laws, we are forced to admit the relevance to the temporal evolution of dynamical systems, of the concept of “metaentropy.” This concept of metaentropy may be connected in an important way to the fact that even at 0 degrees Kelvin, a “perfect crystal,” for example, possesses a nonzero energy, which may be attributed to the interaction of the quantum vacuum with the crystal. That which is necessarily not an object for a consciousness must be constitutive of it. Currents in Particle Theory, Encycl. of Phys. Consciousness demands an open system because thinking is only provoked when old information is reprocessed and reinterpreted in the light of new experience. Metaphor is the opposite tendency to the rendering of the repetitive unconscious by rendering the novel familiar. Transfer of context to make sense of the novel and unique. Existence is just Being placed in a context. metaphors which have become mimetic.

Heidegger unearths

Persistence of self, stability of self against historical conditions which, by changing, threatens to reinterpret the self along discontinuous lives. Existence is Being in the presence of limitation.

If the immanent were a creative expression of, as opposed to a causal manifestation of, a realm transcending duality, i.e., form, then there would be an irreversibility to the linking of th etwo realms such that no body of evidence collected from within the bounded spatiotemporal domain could possibly server as proof or identification of the character which originally brought this realm into existence. The argument against personal immortality is frequently based upon the distinction between mnemonic versus bodily continuity in which it is claimed that the former is of a weaker variety than the latter. But bodily continuity is only a statistically based appearance within the context of quantum theory and is a uniquely classical physical concept, valid only within a certain limited domain and to a certain approximation. It is thought that the ultimate means of distinguishing mind A from mind B is through the different physical locations of their bodies. In a closed system there is no basis for distinguishing the first from the second, third, etc. times the system has “occupied” an identical state. Similarly, there is no basis for distinguishing in conscious experiential content. But states and persons are distinguishable though their not being disembodied in the sense of isolated. To say that a mind disembodied is really to imagine it, superficially, as detached from a body, but, fundamentally, as decoupled from the open system in which the “body” in its mere thinghood is a mere interface to an open-ended information context. But if a mind were to be disembodied in this more “full-blooded” sense, it could not constitute a mind at all in the first instance. Identity of the self is ultimately by virtue of its connectino to some openended ground of coherent, convergent activity. If this connection is severed, this self is instantly revealed as a mere projection which is suddenly extinguished. But if this connection is extinguished. Bidirectional…

That activity of the ground of the self does not cease with the destruction of the physical interface of this transcendent activity with the immanent realm of spacetime. Immortality, therefore, may only be achieved if one comes to identify oneself with this underlying self process, rather than its epiphenomenal manifestation which is the ego. January 2012 It is likely that the ground of being is a multiplicity with each individual consciousness rooted in its own unique transcendental ground. Consciousness may only be formally epiphenomenal, but not substantively so, if the causal relationships of the brain’s dynamics are themselves rooted in an underlying nonlocally connected spectrum of quantum entangled vacuum stress-momentum-energy fluctuations. On this view each individual person’s brain tunes to and resonantes with its own unique spectrum of nonlocally connected vacuum electromagnetic field fluctuations. We think of consciousness as an instantaneous or transient phenomenon, but the appearance of consciousness in attendance with various integrated brain physiological processes seems to demand that something cumulative is taking place within the open-ended context to which it is connected, and which is its partial expression, which therefore makes a difference to the Universe as a whole. Now not all of the basis for the temporal interpretation of consciousness, therefore, is to be found within observable brain processes. Moreover, Reality or the Universe “as a whole” is not a “whole” in a way which could ever be formalized. The wholeness of the Universe in this metaphysical sense may only be unified in a nonrepresentational fashion, say, through will or origination, that is, from outside of historical time. And history itself always originates from outside itself (paradoxically enough). September 2012

People who require a greater justice born of extraordinary vengeance for a mass murder, e.g., Oklahoma City bombing, than say, a recompense equivalent in magnitude to that of the greatest suffering and death individually experienced from among all of the victims of the crime in question, seem to instinctively subscribe to the notion that there is such a thing as cumulative and collective suffering, i.e, suffering that

is akin somehow to the sum of the suffering of all of the victims in the mass crime. This instinctive and subconscious belief makes perfect sense in a theist, but makes no philosophical or rational sense whatever for an atheist. Why do I say this? Well, because there is no active experiential matrix in which the collective suffering of the myriad victims is placed so as to permit the suffereing’s processing as “a sum total of human suffereing”. In the case of the theist, there is indeed such an active experiential matrix, which is to say, God. In our social interactions we are responding simultaneously to a black box and a façade. Substance, which is the seat of change, must itself be timeless, unchanging, and hence, context free. Then how is it that come substances underlie one set of phenomenal qualities and not another? The substance/phenomenon or appearance/reality distinction does not exist for God. When a neural impulse passes from one part of the brain to another, there is actually no substance which passes physically between these two locations in the brain. Nothing = No Thing? Nothing exists without a cause. Nothing is infinite. Nothing is timeless. Nothing necessarily exists. Nothing is conscious. Nothing is its own reason for being. Nothing is contingent. Nothing is indivisible. Nothing can travel faster than light.

kwo=

“It is precisely because there is nothing within the One that all things are from it.” ~ Plotinus Nothing is indeterminate. This can only be true if a thing is defined as such only to the extent that it possesses determination. No thing is a mere absence. This is false, since “nothing is a mere absence” is false: there are things which are defined in terms of an absence. Nothing is an abstraction. This is false so some abstractions are things, which is to say, some entities are merely theoretical or mathematical. The complete negation of nothing, conceived of so the indeterminate, does not imply the existence of all things (possible), as no indeterminate ground would be left over to support/ sustain the existence of the things created from the indeterminate via its negation. Things come to exist through negation carried on within the indeterminate, not through negation of the indeterminate. Nothing is identical to everything.

An experimenter or observer performing quantum measurements is aware of considerably more than the particular system upon which he is to perform a measurement. The experimenter/observer is also connected, through the other sensory modalities of his consciousness, with other phenomena associated with the physical context of the experimental setup/apparatus through the consciousness of the experimenter, various mental contents or elements are nonlocally connected through all being simultaneously compresent within the experimenters mind, sensorium, etc. And if there is respective back-

reaction of various of these individual mental elements upon physical system components/features that collectively comprise the contents of the observers conscious perception, then the nonlocality, which is a necessary feature of the observer’s consciousness, then becomes a contingent feature, through back-reaction, of the spatially distinct components of the quantum mechanical system under observation. In the particular case of the spontaneous decay of a spin 0 particle into rapidly separating +/- ½ spin fermions, the nonlocal connection of the results of spin measurements performed upon both halves of the original system (Psi-system), i.e., the spin +1/2 and the spin – ½ particles, is effected via the continuity provided by the observer’s consciousness, back-reacting bi-directionally in time. To wit, it is the nonlocality of the observers back-reacting consciousness, occurring at both spin measurements, that is responsible for the phenomenon of Einstein, Podolsky, Rosen (EPR) nonlocality of these +/-spin ½ particles. The flow of negative charges in one direction within an electronic circuit may be alternatively described as the flow of positive current in an antiparallel direction. Does “back-reaction” occur when this matter/antimatter flow symmetry is broken? Frequently when writing, I experience a slight psychic “jolt” every time I write a misspelled word. I am more conscious of he hypertextual structure of the psychological associations which lie behind my intuitions and perceptions of meaning. This is a case of new technology suggesting pregnant metaphors that work on the human psychic processes, effecting pervasive transformations in the individual’s perception of his self, the other, and reality itself. Metaphor is what sustains the unbounded openness of thought. Imagine that the periodic table of chemical elements possessed certain blank spaces or “gaps” in various of its chemical group columns. These gaps would here correspond with descriptions of chemical elements not actually found in nature, not stable if produced artificially, nor obtainable even as short-lived atomic/nuclear resonances. In such a

case as this, we might suspect hat there was some inconsistency or incompleteness in our chemical taxonomic system. Actually such a system would be termed “inconsistent” since the system of description predicts entities not capable of existing. The converse situation would be that tin which chemical elements were discovered in the debris of accelerator collisions, which were not predicted by our chemical table of elements. This situation is best described as the system of description (embodied in our chemical table) being “incomplete.” But it is not difference alone by which language and the understanding function, but difference supplemented by insight. Gödel’s Theorem, by asserting an either-or proposition regarding the incompleteness or inconsistency of formal systems of mathematics and logic, presupposes the truth of the platonic hypothesis for mathematics. Certainly this realization about Gödel could have been arrived at through the Incompleteness Theorem’s effective assertion that “Truth is a stronger notion than provability.” For if the realm of “mathematical entities” is not indeed timeless (eternal in the Platonic heaven sense), but possesses temporality, i.e., nondeterministic and noncomputable changeableness, then formal systems of mathematics may at time, t(1), be inconsistent and complete, but at some later time, t(2) become incomplete but consistent. Presence is presence. It does not admit of variety of distinct kinds. Distinct consciousnesses cannot be pure presences. The notion of pure presence implies absence of depth, potential or the merely intentional. A somewhat related paradox to that of “pure presence” is that posed by pure intentionality. A pure presence may only possess an epiphenomenal temporality, that is, temporality of a pure presence is completely derivative of some underlying temporal process that gives of pure presence as epiphenomenon. Pure presence cannot be integrally whole, as the pure superficiality of presence possesses no internal degree of freedom through which integration might be effected and sustained. The Pauli Principle only applies to bound systems of energy therefore

possessing discrete energy eigenstates. The genuine possibility of objective knowledge is based in the “really thereness” of that which figures in the mind’s perceptual interpretation of external sense data. If grace really exists it does so in its purest form as it is involved with consciousness as such. This is because there are not conditions necessary to “make consciousness alive.” Are individual consciousnesses merely particular modifications of some general or universal consciousness as such. There is not actual, substantial quality, common to all individual consciousnesses that makes each of them particular exemplars of consciousness per se. But then what does make each individual consciousness an exemplar of consciousness as such must be some relation of analogousness obtaining between each such exemplar. Or perhaps such an analogical relatedness is derivative wherein the real mutual commonality of individual consciousness exemplars pertains to each’s common relationship to alterity. This may be thought of as the mutually analogous manner in which each self is uniquely defined through its relationship to indeterminate ground- even through this ground be different in the particular case of each individual. Consciousness is, by its essential nature, in a state of constant change and transformation. The self is infinitely degenerate with respect to global changes in consciousness. So there is not global transformation to the self’s consciousness which could succeed, master-slave fashion, in transforming this self into that of another this is because what give the self its identity is relationship to a proprietary indeterminate round in which the only connection between this relationship and that they which other selves are related to their indeterminate ground is one of analogy only. But this similarity of individual consciousnesses is of necessity transcendental. Resonance of the quantum brain with its nonlocal vacuum state is maintained through some active principle of synchronization, e.g.,

phase-locking feedback of brain superposition states with some eigenstate of the nonlocal vacuum. Transmission of information as opposed to energy between two or more nonlocal vacuums would involve an exchange of a supraliminal gravitational wave with 0 momentum-energy which would induce a change in Psi of the other nonlocal vacuum which would not change the energy of this vacuum. This change in Psi(2) would not be on that vac(2) was otherwise “poised to make.” Nonlocal vacua mutually interact to produce a spacetime into which their noninteracting components project which then may interact through the intermediaries of real momentum and energy. We are not ready to assimilate the behavior patterns of others until we have already imbued our perceptions of their behavior through having projected onto them something internal to the self. Consciousness is not characterized by Psi since the temporal evolution of Psi is a deterministic process, while the temporal evolution of an individual consciousness is nondeterministic. Psi evolves temporally in the absence of energy exchange of the system characterized by Psi with the vacuum zero-point energy field. Creating the illusion of presence so to contribute one’s fair share to the economy of vicarious, heroic sense of the individual’s self-significance. Whether the brain be a closed or an open system, the sustainment of an individual consciousness requires an infinite degeneracy of the system supposed to be productive of conscious mental states. Quantum superposition/quantum fluctuation versus “fuzziness” of human consciousness, the fundamental nature of which is endless change and transformation. C.f., Wheeler’s “it from bit.” Nonlocality and binding of conscious mental states.

Somehow the

conscious observer does not interfere with his own conscious states merely by being passively aware of his own mental states. Observer and observed are always characterized by commuting observables. Every measurement that the observer seeks to perform upon his own mental states is with respect to observables that commute with the observables of the eigenstate that the observed mind as a quantum mechanical system has already been prepared in. Here preparation and observation of the observer-as-system are an indissoluble unity. Ratio and proportion are artifacts of and apply to the phenomena particular to closed systems. A self-fulfilling prophecy operating in the background of the combined action of time and chance shall succeed in confirming any prognostication. C.f., Quantum noise in Photonics. Momentum fluctuations with energies defined by the allowed transition energies of the crystal lattice. Is it possible that vacuum momentum fluctuations have a precise position but cause particles to be “smeared out” in their position, across an interval of /\x? Concepts names and the Velveteen Rabbit Effect. Definition through use which begins from arbitrariness but with historical accumulation of contextual association with other better established concepts. No temporality in the production of conscious mental states if a deterministic connection between input and output of the “system of the mind” is assumed. Here we see that the action of Derrida’s concept of deferance, i.e., both difference and deferment is necessary to the production of meaning and perception.

Writers typically indulge in self-plagiarism and quote passages from their works, working material forcibly, bodily into their spoken communications. Again, the motive behind this is to maintain the illusion of constant presence before and constant connection with an audience. Does the vacuum energy expand so as to maintain an isotropic, homogeneous and minimal ground state energy? E.g., so that there is not spatial momentum flux density variation? I.e., in such a way that the vacuum possesses no mass. Here we are considering “empty spacetimes.” In nonempty spacetimes, gravitation must exist to maintain spacetime flatness. The ineradicable nature of quantum vacuum energy fluctuations is responsible for the three fundamental laws of thermodynamics possessing merely relative or approximate validity. 1. 2. 3.

Energy can be neither created nor destroyed. Entropy always increases in any thermal processes taking place within a closed system The internal energy of a perfectly ordered crystal is zero at 0 degrees K.

Qualitative changes would take place from within the system’s framework of description. Not so for qualitative changes which stem from alterations in the framework itself which are not explicable in terms of processes within the changing framework. Global changes in a system cannot be understood in terms of a summing together of changes within all of the localities comprising the system. Causal connections between two entities in their aspect as determinate independently existing things were through interaction. Causal connections between the phenomenal grounds of both entities we term, following Bohm, reciprocal relationship, c.f., p. 144, Causality and

Chance in Modern Physics. Each member of the couple could try to find ways to confirm devaluative stereotypes. I don’t talk to strangers with day planners. Evangelical Christian, Sales, Marketing, Advertising, Business, Finance. .. Losers go tot law school as a last ditch attempt to acquire approval from the internalized bourgeois parents. Desperate and understandable loneliness: widows, widowers, divorced or never married individuals, persons who have been or allowed themselves to be marginalized. How does marginalization occur? Only that which persists through change unchanged experiences the passage of time. Literally, the passage of time is a purely relative, geometrical, and hence, formalizable phenomenon. When objects are not indifferent to the passage of time, the temporality “experienced” by the object is not reversible. If change is discrete, then there is not means of differentiating one rate of succession from another, on the one hand; if change is continuous, on the other, there is no means of differentiating different durations of the same underlying continuous substrate to this change. For temporal change to be integrable into more comprehensive wholes, frequency must be more fundamental than time. Energy, in other words must provide the basis of temporality, c.f., cit=Time in Quantum Mechanics (Muga, Mayato, Egusquiza):

We cannot think of the “waving” of the amplitudes of Psi as some sort of continuous temporal change in the wavefunction because in the energy representation of this temporal evolution of an amplitude, the square of the wavefunction in this representation only makes a swing in energy of /\E in an amount of time, t = 1/f, and the change in energy must be greater than /\E in this amount of time, if this change in energy is to be physically measurable and be considered actual physical change. Why do people continually look around when in a public space? Partly this is a genetically programmed survival, oriented behavior. Are they checking to see if someone out there is looking at them? This is common for many younge people who are in the processes of developing their identity and its representation or image. Each young girl, if she is in some way better than average looking is conscious of her potential celebrity in the random public space, especially if she is trying to emulate some entertainment personality. Broken homes and families Mental illness Drug abuse Self-inflicted poor health Too short range financial planning Development of special interests versus assimilation to prevailing mass culture Positive feedback through sensitivity and projection of anger and hostility experienced by both parties as each others’ hostility. Double bind of being labeled when denial of the label is one of the symptoms of the label’s applicability. U-1 A U = [A] Each number represented as an infinite square matrix which can be diagonalized.

P(1) = 1 P(2) = 2 P(3) = 3 P(4) = 5 P(5) = 7 . . Diagonalize Pmn P* mn = [ P11 P21 P31 . . . ] [P12 P22 ] [P13 [ . [ Young men’s aggression, territoriality, middle class or bourgeois couple without children, trying to see if a strange couple or woman is enjoying more status, freedom, beauty, prosperity, health, recognition, etc. Past, present, future: McTaggart’s 2nd order temporal predicates: Past in the past Past in the present Past in the future Present in the past Present in the present Present in the future Future in the past Future in the present Future in the future Projection onto and emulation of persons are operations which may become inextricably intertwined or confused. Projection can be a

manifestation of the attempt to penetrate the mysterious alterity of the other. Mimesis may be a closely related attempt at this penetration. Derrida’s long-standing critique of the “metaphysics of presence” may have an underlying motivation of a necrophilia of metaphysical proportions. There is apparently much scholarly evidence for the close kinship of Derrida and Hegel. Imitation presupposes a projection originating in the self – one projects a persona or identity or mode of being onto some person and then incorporates ones projection into one’s own being. “What caused you to lift your arm just now?” “Why you did, of course!” “Do you suppose that the body were a closed system, or a component of a closed system – that it could bootstrap itself into action? The body is merely the instrument of a transcendent being. The unknowable nature of “other minds.” Consciousness as an integral, unified open system. The disjoint of orthogonal relationship of subjective and intersubjective Reality is too complex to be unified. Irreducibility of identity. How the human being differs from the “beasts of the field”: The moral sense Language Consciousness of self/Ego Altruism Laughter/humor Wonder Curiosity Mysticism

Dreaming Eroticism Empathy Detachment Perception of Nothingness Meditative States Transcendence Culture Means  Ends transforming Art Music Literature Politics Collective Combat/Warfare Knowledge of one’s own death Religion Metaphysics/philosophy Science Aesthetic sense The question of projection transferred from the reading/writing to the speaking/listening context. Information concerns the “state” of some integral system. Data concerns objects participating within such an integral, open system in which the particular embedding system is uncoupled from the object. epi=fcbk=

You accuse me of having a chip on my shoulder, but how else am I to regard those who would gloat over my misfortune and still more, secretly revel in my downfall and ruin? epi=fcbk=

Ceteris paribus institutionalized non-investment in an idea or thing commits one to its worthlessness in the absence of proof.

Any behavior whose impulse or motive possesses pride in its genealogy is no sin at all (rather, is a manifestation of sin). @$

Sufi mystics have put an unexpected and surprising spin on the concept of “personal savoir.” epi=fcbk=

“The petty, mean-spirited person views the ambitions and dreams of others as hubris, but people in the grip of a joyful vision are secretly an indictment of petty peoples’ own lack of (or failed) ambitions.” Is Lorenz invariance/covariance an artifact of a broader symmetry than that described by the Poincare group? This question arose in light of the necessity of Lorenz invariance being a mere manifestation of some underlying physical vacuum mechanism. And might this broader symmetry be that of supersymmetry? The speed of light is an average value because it is the ratio of two uncertainties, i.e., c = /\E / /\p = the ratio of timelike to spacelike 4-momentum fluctuations. Supersymmetry seems involved because the hypervolume of uncertainty may be arbitrarily partitioned into timelike and spacelike momentum (current) density components (Lorentz invariance of the physical vacuum dictates that there is no unique foliation of spacetime into a “3 + 1” structure of space and time), while these spacelike and timelike components are respectively constituted from boson and fermion fluctuations of the vacuum field. October 2011 Supersymmetry allows Lorentz invariance of the vacuum despite the presence of an “energy cutoff”, e.g., of the Planck energy or smaller. epi=

If others were really as concerned with my affairs as I suspect, I should already be dead or famous. epi=

The curvature knows that it will go down to ruin and would drag its “lord” down with it. epi=

We think ill of our betters to help us live down their rankling superiority.

Greater outcrossing enhances the control of natural selection on the course of evolution by increasing the probability of generating novel genetic sequences. But depending on the rate of change in environmental conditions, either inbreeding or outcrossing will offer a breeding population the greatest survivability in the short term. But both tendencies of sexual selection, i.e., endogamous and exogamous must be retained in the global population for maximal survivability of the species as a whole. One’s eternal individuality can only be God’s knowledge of one’s identity. One’s infinite, unlimited being is but one among the infinite number of God’s living and infinite ideas/principles. Here we have the notion of orders of infinity. Can a mathematical group possess a nondenumerable infinity of elements and still be comprised by transformation symmetry? Is this how permutation and combination is reconciled with novelty and emergence? Music that induces a state of transcendence and Buddhistic detachment produces a great inner joy. One’s metaphysics or ontology is only important for aesthetic, rhetorical, moral/ethical, political, etc. reasons one’s metaphysics brings a certain coherence to the spheres of being-in-the-world. Morally degenerate: one’s principles do not imply a certain particular mode of conduct with respect to one’s fellow human beings. On this view, even gangsterism cannot be termed “morally degenerate” as its underlying doctrine prescribes a definite code of personal conduct. Abstract versus literary metaphors. abstract/linguistic metaphors.

Ebonics seems replete with

“As it were” is an example of a seemingly ungrammatical idiom which contains an untapped potential of literal interpretation. In fact, this is

how most idioms are born: they are fragments of denotative expression surviving from a much earlier period in the history of the speaker’s language. “Is it true that you are the professor who first discovered 10-10-220?” epi= Scholars are rediscoverers (or merely opportunists) in the garage sale of ideas. In contrast to the linear concept of time and progress we could counterpoise the notion of each civilization eventually discovering some earlier, more advanced civilization who built a deeper layer of the infrastructure that the younger civilization had heretofore mistaken for the system’s “physical universe” now revealed as simulation. So instead of linear technological progressive, we have the notion of progressive, internal nesting of simulations, virtual realities. @$ Discovery, invention and technological advance are an index not of the linear progressiveness of time into the future, but of retrogression into the past, c.f., the “they” informed by Derrida’s concept of “always alreadiness.” Insight as rationalization of aspects of the collective consciousness’ sociolinguistic infrastructure of thought. @$

Although the action of projection (from higher to lower dimensional spaces) is not generally a reversible operation, the interaction and interrelation of these projections within this lower dimensional space may indeed be reversible and deterministic. The diachronic nature of the sign supplements the synchronic nature, i.e., instantaneous context-based meaning of the sign. What is the relation of the motions of God’s glory, grace, original sin, transcendence. . . Intimate knowledge of original sin within oneself is the channel of faith.

Unfortunate to have been born with the third eye partially uncovered – but only partially. . . We only rarely catch an insight into how surprisingly little perception or “reality” checking is involved in most human social interactions. Examples. . . Convention, institution, organization, etc., ultimately social or collective (conscious or unconscious) is required for the open-ended, degenerate, over-determined chaos of reality to manifest itself in such a way as to keep distinct structure and function, so that function is reducible to form and hence communicable. Only conventions can be communicated. Speech versus Writing. . . Being “called” to a mission, profession, etc., versus taking up one’s father’s. Founders of institutions versus bureaucrats, functionaries, etc., occupying positions within a long-established institute, foundation, etc. eip=

The ultimate meaning of one’s life is twofold: the object of private meditation and the raw material of metaphor via which one may commune with the other. ess=

Investigate the idea that conscious/unconscious representation/will, perception/thought are inverted in the sense of “inside-out”, as are internal and external, during dreaming. All discussion and explanation of a theoretical nature necessarily involves an irreducible component of “hand-waving” after the fashion of “and then at this step, a miracle happens.” Any attempt to reduce this core of vagueness through supplemental explications inevitably brings distinctions, etc., which can this themselves be questioned (as sources of contradiction, confusion, paradoxicalness, and vagueness). Commonality of conventionally agreed upon sociolinguistic culture consents to pass

over these spots of vagueness. Closed systems . . . relative to what? A system may be “open” and yet be inaccessible to human instrumentation or even to the human mind itself. A ready example of which is, simply, the subjective, mental processes of the other. Nonetheless, there is indirect, i.e., spacetimemediated mutual accessibility. Active information (in Bohm’s sense) is concrete and nonrepresentational and is based in a system of (causally connected) dynamically counterpoised wills. Objective information is abstract and representational and is based in a system of correlated or (superposed?) consciousnesses. Mind cannot enter an energy eigenstate and so is comprised by energy fluctuations which are immune and exempt from the action of external energy measurements, i.e., observations. In Aristotle’s hylomorphism theory, matter and form are merely relatively distinct. Was: aaaNotes – Clipboard Can mind discover the laws, if any, which “govern” its operations? Can the laws which it “defines” which describe its operation limit mind? All “laws” in the sense of governing structures are provisional and heuristic, which is to say, hermeneutical. What I want to know is, who be this Herman Eutic, and do he believe in The Word of God?” (Stuart Young told me that, during the mid 1980’s, a young black man actually stood up in his hermeneutics class at SMU and earnestly asked this question!) Would the asymmetry of time be proof that time is plural and

nonunified? One integrates the differential of the functional representing the Lorenz transformation along the geodesic path of the test particle to transform from frame A(x`,y`,z`,t`) to B(x``,y``,z``,t``) within a gravitational field. The steady state response of the system is, under certain conditions (boundary and initial), the infinite sum of all of its possible transient responses. Of course, each of the system’s transient responses may be alternatively represented in the frequency domain via Fourier analysis. Jazz, unlike most rock, is for people living in the present moment, who are sentimental or nostalgic about the now while it is in the very act of happening. Contrast this to rock/alternative with its constant delusions of reference and ego-projections – very narcissistic. Jazz helps one to experience oneself as other, i.e., “the other as oneself”. To understand original sin, explore all those tendencies in one's makeup, which one is powerless to help or prevent. However much exploration or investigation of one's own sin nature one undertakes, never will a trait, tendency, or character flaw be unearthed which does not incorporate pride and ego as integral, organic components. Prideful attacks upon one's fellow humans cannot be lightly excused as understandable manifestations of the survival instinct within the symbolic realm. Even when these prideful attacks are of a defensive nature, they are typically unduly proactive. Human being's identity is based in a transcendent order, but what is responsible for the being of this order? Can the merely symbolic have an import beyond the epistemological, i.e., metaphysical? American film possesses what might be termed a “foveal fetish.” Also the rapidity with which scenes change in American films is considerably

greater than this rate in European films. “At night, the periphery of the eye's retina is more sensitive to faint light than the center. This area of the eye is more sensitive to light, color, and detail in objects. Looking slightly to one side of a faint object (averted vision), so that the faint light falls on the more sensitive outer part of the retina, usually reveals the object more clearly than looking directly at it. Even with brighter objects, this will reveal more detail. If the object is in the center of the FOV avert your vision and give it a few moments. Allow your eyes to absorb the light. The longer you look, the more the area comes into focus”, c.f., Ready Set Go – A Head Start to the Stars and Beyond. Foveal fetish metaphor vs. retinal blind spot metaphor. The c/t is paradoxical because it is an expression of periphery at the foveal center. Reconstituting the concept, redrawing of symbolic maps, reprocessing of experience – this is what is called thinking – Heidegger’s transcendental horizonal repositioning. Metaphysical assumptions can only survive and thrive within the mind of the solitary thinker, the cloister of an intellectual, mutual admiration society, or within the confined space of religious subculture. Courtesy system: politeness, manners, deferring to the other, etc. symbolizes endorsement of such consideration extended to oneself. Why websites (personal) are geeky/narcissistic wherein one showcases ones fantasies about oneself, delusions of adequacy, ideal self, etc. Everyone presents their credentials as persons “with a life”, i.e., as not being “existentially challenged” and who “have something to say.” Although the boundary conditions of the vacuum which constitutes the conduit of consciousness may have indeed evolved. @$The fact-value distinction points to a higher order of being than information. Loss of continuity with personal nonlocal vacuum, i.e., ground through insufficient updating of memory pointers.

Can’t the quantum vacuum be understood as a cosmic internet and each human neural network a quantum computing terminal. Can a given nonlocal vacuum be accessed by multiple users? The quantum nocloning theorem suggests the impossibility of this. Jazz, unlike most rock, is for people living in the present moment, who are sentimental or nostalgic about the now while it is presently happening. Contrast this to rock/alternative music with its constant suggestions of delusions of reference in the listener. Jazz helps one to experience oneself as other. The problem with the filter theory of thought and perception is that it leaves no room for individuality, for the unique contributions of each person to the subjective content of his own experience. But certainly resonance with external information fields do play some role, perhaps, the predominant one, in the constituting of the individual’s experience. Most of the seemingly individual content is perhaps provided through resonance not with some impersonal field, but with the fields of others “like oneself.” Biblical criticism as the ad hominem argument against God. Biological criticism and Necrophilia. Can the mind discover the laws, if any, which “govern” its operation? Can mind be limited by the laws which it “defines” which describe its operation. All “laws” in the sense of “governing structures,” are provisional and heuristic, which is to say hermeneutic. “What I want to know is, who be this Herman Neutic, and do he believe in the Word of God?” Would the asymmetry of time be proof that time is plural and nonunified?

Consciousness ~ time asymmetry and energy nonconservation. Free will ~ spatial asymmetry and momentum nonconservation. Consciousness ~ telepathy. Free Will ~ telekinesis. The DNA’s base pairs are arranged according to and are an expression of a kind of Chomskian generative grammar in that gene sequences that are utterly novel are nonetheless meaningful and most of the “superior” genetic combinations remain untried, indeed, > 99.9999…% of combinations superior to ones that have already been tried in the history of the human race on this planet have never once occurred, naturally, that is. But don’t the untried possibilities somehow “inform” those that actually come to exist? August 2013 An admittedly tiny minority of gene sequences that are inordinately unlikely to ever occur within the lifetime of the universe or, indeed, within a span during which a quadrillion universes might come into being and pass away, are nevertheless meaningful sequences of genetic base pairs, should they per impossible occur, leading as they would to either the coding of highly functional proteins or to a still higher and more efficient regulation of the genome, which has thus far evolved. Our failure to understand how prayer works is not a question of ignorance as there are no facts that can be ascertained about prayer’s would-be mechanism. Insight is always the epiphany of the obvious, heretofore lain hidden. The manifestations of original sin the individual is powerless to help, i.e., gloating over the misfortunes of our betters, etc. Worship without spirituality is idolatry. Projection of otherness onto self is selfglorification. Projection of self onto other – these two modes form with one another a superposition. Coherence, holism, state space, representation, binding forces, cellular automata, etc. Exploring vs. discovering versus imagining vs. inventing.

Of course, the concept of an ordinary reality/world is a pernicious myth. The older one becomes the more historically determined become one’s emotions, insights, and perceptions and the more one expresses oneself not to the Other but to one’s transcendent, alter ego, which stands in its intimate and necessary complementary relationship to one’s finite spatiotemporal self. One begins more and more to speak “for the record” only. Man is first and foremost in love with the products of his own imagination. Myriad distinct minds co-determine a common medium of their compartmentalized and mutual interaction, which in turn determines boundary conditions upon these transcendental minds. Discretion, privacy, personal reasons that we should be free to make up as we go along when asked to give an account. Freedom to interpret our own recollections of events to which only oneself was witness. What was not a question for one may become so at any time as a result of confidential inquiries? The more personal one’s experience, the more latitude one has in self-definition free of the tyranny of so-called objective standards, c.f., de gustabus non disputandum and “there is no accounting for taste,” “walk a mile in a man’s shoes”, etc. There are always facts and values informing one’s personal decisions and priorities, which are incommensurate with those of one’s peers. Mutual respect is absolute among the gods. The consciousness of persons possesses only an analogical unity. One’s consciousness is the metaphor that one applies to understand that of other persons, but the consciousness of the Other is not literally like that of one’s self. The polyemanationist doctrine may be arrived at through the positing of merely two simple postulates. @$One, reality is too complex to be objectively unified, and two, personal identity, in the broadest sense of individual consciousness, is an unanalyzable, irreducible concept. These

two postulates are not really so independent of one another, and it may be possible to subsume them under a single, broader one. If, along with Kant, we consider the objective to be merely that which can be a proper object of knowledge, then the postulate of the irreducibility of individual consciousness means that a unified consciousness, or at least an underlying unity to all individual consciousness qua consciousness, is not possible so that there can be no object of knowledge for such a universal consciousness. This is all to say that the postulate of the irreducibility of personal consciousness implies, a la Kant, that no unified object of knowledge exists, and that, therefore, reality itself is not unified. @$By tying the cash value of concepts to possible or potential experience, the concept of unity (of reality) has no cash value if there is no hypothetical universal consciousness which can have reality itself (as a whole) as an object of its knowledge. To wit, if there is not any objective unity of consciousness so that individual consciousnesses are reducible/analyzable, then no “God’s eye view” of reality is possible. Given the omniscience of God, this would imply a non-unified reality. Speculate upon the possible meaning of the phrase, “intersubjective subjectivity”. “In India the Sankya philosophy of the Many fought the Vedanta philosophy of the One,” cit=A Defense of Idealism, au=May Sinclair. Further evidence for the irreducibility of personal identities is the fact of the profoundly distinct nature of formal, temporal, and numerical identity. One is not “numerically identical with oneself except in the present moment, but one is temporally identical. One may be formally identical to another in the somewhat restrictive sense of that component of the self which possesses a formal description may be structurally identical to this component in another individual. No amount of temporal evolution will bring two entities, originally separate, into a coincidence of rigorous numerical identity. Now due to various conservation laws, this is not even possible for quantum particles that are themselves completely indistinguishable! So it appears from the discussion thus far that there are at least four distinct kinds of identity: formal, temporal, numerical, and what we will term here quantum

identity. January 2000

A purely denotative concept – is such a thing possible? Doesn’t abstraction necessitate the creation of metaphor? Do we have a concept of what constitutes a metaphor? Or is metaphor, paradoxically, itself merely metaphorical? May we liken an object present-to-hand, as a representation while a tool is an object ready-to-hand? Is this an essential component of creativity and the unpredictability of technological evolutions – which the present-to-hand can always transform into the ready-to-hand? Are words essentially recursive through a blurring of the use/mention distinction? Only deterministic causal functions may denote. This is a paradox of denotation. Genetic dust bin theory of aging is the theory that natural selection only applies to the fitness of the genome during pre-reproductive and reproductive years. Genes that are “switched on” or expressed during the post-reproductive part of the species life span can never be culled out of the gene pool through natural selection. Certainly genes which only express themselves after the end of the reproductive years plus the maturation of time of the youngest individuals in total contribution of offspring can have little or no effect upon the fitness/survivability of those offspring. Freud said that culture was a manifestation of the sublimation of frustrated sexual impulses. Philosophy is maintaining idealism in the face of disillusionment. It is also itself a kind of sublimation – which of frustrated impulses to counter various affronts and insults to the ego. What is quite puzzling about what is called discourse is that, unlike in the cases of language, logic, mathematics, etc., i.e., metalanguage, metalogic, metamathematics, etc., there does not seem to be any means of grounding the concept of metadiscourse. When two subjects encounter, perceive and converse with one another

concerning this object encountered in common, what each speaks concerning it is one’s own successful partial efforts in constituting the object, i.e., that which is in harmony, not with the object per se, but with other constitutive forces by which the object is being sustained as such. All unsuccessful attempts at doing this, i.e., those which aren’t ratified by the history of this collectivity whose combined action have historically constituted the object, or at least what does not have any chance of honoring any prior claim to the object’s constitution – these efforts almost always find themselves suppressed, unless some larger collective body of prior claims on the object’s identity can be ascertained and appealed to. Modularity and holism must merely be modes between which a control system selects, in the case of truly flexible cybernetic or adaptive biological systems. Naturally such a control system will defy the categorical distinction of modular versus holistic. The higher the gene in the gene regulatory network (GRN), the more likely and the greater degree to which this gene acts as a two-way interface between the genome and the environment. The GRN selects between, for example, the exogamous and endogamous tendencies in sexual selection based upon the stability or instability of the breeding population’s environmental conditions, i.e., between miscegenation and incest. As we ascend the GRN, we move up the continuum from signal to sign to metasymbol, etc. Perhaps the structural genes provide signals to the open chemical system in which it is embedded and with which it exchanges energy, data, and information. But what is introduced to the GRN at its “top” are perhaps not signals, but signs. There are not characters for vowels in the Hebrew alphabet. Consonants, which are just interruptions and channelings, i.e., modulations of the breath (of life) are all that is recorded within a

Hebrew text. This fact seems to bear witness to the implicit acknowledgement by Hebrew culture that text by itself is not connected to the breath which gives substance, in the form of resonant sound, to speech evoked by a written text. As we know from the early chapters of Genesis this breath was originally imparted to the inert lump of clay in human form, i.e., Adam. Here sin as rebellion against God may be understood in terms of the metaphor of the silencing of thought by the subversion of the authority of speech by text. Reality is perhaps final in the sense of being an absolute, but there is not finality in the mind’s conception of this reality. “make the worse side of an argument appear” received the following correction from this text program’s grammar checking software. “make the worse side of an argument appears” So the grammar program was going by the rule of simple verb agreement, independent of larger grammatical context.

The paradox of information processing and the open-endedness of internality. Topological change is transcendental because of the necessary discontinuity of substance involved. Re: Todd Desiato’s Probability Wave Dispersion Interpretation of Relativity. To include inertia use the analogy of an RLC circuit. The “L” and “C” components of the circuit mediate time/energy and the “R” component, the position/momentum component of the Heisenberg uncertainty. “Unreferenceable changes in the system.” Subjective vs. objective without an “Interworld” being given. Merleau-Ponty thought that the absence of an interworld would lead to solipsism. The repeatability of experimental results is commonly thought to be a perquisite for the

possibility of scientific endeavor. Perhaps all that is really required is the appearance of repeatability of experimental results. Since the observer and the system or systems being observed, subject to experimental probing, etc. are equally physical systems (at least this a common assumption within conventional science), it may be possible for experimental results to not be strictly repeatable while maintaining the appearance of the desired repeatability, provided that appropriate compensatory adjustments to the observer(s) brain(s) take place between successive iterations of the self-same experiment. This is related to Bohm’s statement that all causal relationships could be alternatively expressed in terms of correlations. July 2011

If such a situation were indeed the case, then not only the objectivity, but also the rationality of the universe would be an appearance stemming from sustained collaborative effort. No metaphysical description can claim greater validity than another can. This clash of metaphysical depiction of reality, i.e., what is the case. Speaking of “the lure of the moon” by anthropologists, scientists, e.g., Carl Sagan, are engaged in a projection of a modern poetic metaphor onto the consciousness of primitive people’s. The moon allegedly led Man to “look up” and notice the heavens.” Contents of consciousness’ late historicity are frequently seized upon in order to explicate the motivations and perceptions of ancient or primitive peoples. On the other hand, drawing from the observation of different species of primates is bound to be a misleading oversimplification. The dignity of a human being is connected with several distinct considerations having to do with the nature of subjectivity. Firstly, the individual possesses a great store of potential which, though perhaps never utilized during the course of his human existence, is nonetheless uniquely possessed by, and valuable to, his actually realized self. Much that is actual is not communicable through discourse-ive, that is, discursive language. Any given individual is likely to possess resources

of happiness and spirituality not tied to visible or tangible activities or goods. Some of the humblest persons are those possessing greatest inner peace. Rock and so-called alternative music seem carefully crafted to encourage narcissistic delusions of reference in the listener. Deconstructionists are: idol smashers, nihilists, sincere searchers after truth, accepting no mere verisimilitude thereof, skeptics, Marxists, existentialists, phenomenologists, failed philosophers, poets painters, novelists, debunkers of poseurs and imposters, disappointed believers in the power of transcendence – disillusioned would-be metaphysicians. If is were not a fact that some human genomes are better than others, there would be nothing for Darwinian natural selection to work with. Of course, some individuals are genetically superior to others! Exogamous sexual urges possess a sound evolutionary basis in protecting the breeding population from adverse environmental change. Although the form of ordinary human communication is largely after the fashion of an absolute, the substance thereof is by and large metaphysical. An idiom may be thought of as a latent metaphor expressed in the grammar current when the idiom’s metaphor was more or less explicit. One may indeed mistake the intuition of the irreducibility of one’s personal identity for a glimpse of solipsistic truth. No clearer basis for the foundation exists for the distinction of good and evil, which at the same time respects freedom of the will. Not just irreducibility of personal identity but inevitability of one’s existence is a mistaken intuition of the fact of the absolute personal choice to exist, to descend from the realm of unconditional, personal Being. But how can being be unconditional and be based in one’s particular Self in contradistinction to the Selves through which others enjoy their Being? Is the flaw in the

metaphysics of being not the mistaking of presence for absence, but the mistaking of one presence for another? Of course, determinate being is necessarily limited being for determination is limitation. Negation can only be defined through the negation of some prior or preexisting negation. There can be no negation of being which is absolutely positive and not dependent upon some preexistent negation. Being independent of worldhood is absolute being, that is, being independent of negation. Such being is not system dependent and so is given without any framework for negation to operate. The basis of absence is the “gap” caused by the misidentification of one form for another. A mass moves as though it has a conserved four-momentum within a (+ ++-) signature four-dimensional spacetime. Time axis as direction of centripetal/centrifugal force makes the notion of local spacetime concrete. The more original a proposition which does not conflict with prior art, the greater the appeal to the authority of the unknown. Action at a distance seems paradoxical and counterintuitive. Does this require that action at a distance be a mere appearance? The past’s future has no past identical to it. Does irreversibility therefore imply multidimensional or infinite dimensional time? Morality is just the ethics of narrow-minded people. We seem to automatically grant presence to that of which we are reminded. Or is it presence granted to that through which we recollect something that is emotionally charged? Signal is to sign as data is to information. Every sign possesses a signal component due to the physical medium in which the sign is embodied.

Logocentrism and the kingdom of ends. Kwd=reification of instinct and technique into art, which is an end in itself. Instinct is for repeating the cycle of life. Technique is to facilitate the solution of the survival problem. Advent of agriculture and the birth of the urban way of life, the creation of writing and the evolution of language. An open system cannot be identical with itself because it has not identity. But a unified open system has an identity. Arbitrary symbols do not back react upon the messages of which their strings are arbitrary expressions. Much insight is admittedly the discovery of relationships of ideas buried deep within the semantic/syntactic structure of language. Latent complexes of meaning and logic may not mediate seemingly ordinary communications, complexes which have never been abstracted or "“brought to light.” Because of the classical Darwinian concept of the gene as expressing but not exchanging information with the external environment, the gene and its sequences possess arbitrary meaning. Rather than whole genetic sequences having been selected for after the advent, this selection must have fundamentally taken place at the time the relative molecular stabilities of all possible gene sequences was worked out (in the vacuum between virtual base pair sequences), c.f., protein folding solutions found by nature in 10**-12 seconds. Obviously these protein folding solutions are found so quickly because of massively parallel computations performed by the nonlocally connected quantum vacuum state with which the denatured protein interacts. Perhaps base pair sequences rather than gene sequences were selected for. Some philosophers wisely seek to mine the metaphysical and metaphorical deposits of insight somehow laid down within the language and myth of the past 50,000 years of man’s cultural history for individual revelations of their own. These philosophers are what might be termed archeologists of the collective human psyche. The metaphysics of the individual are largely derived from the unconscious metaphysical assumptions inherited by collective humanity.

A combination of Zen-like wisdom and logical incoherence is to be found in Yogi Bera-isms. Biographies always possess greater coherence than the lives they describe. But then this observation is generally true of narratives and the situations they describe. Humans engage in narcissistic fantasies instinctively and spontaneously and neither understand the necessity nor the manner of analyzing them. So the word is always a simulacrum of itself rather than being semantically self-identical. Connection to myriad absent contexts helps to supplement the inadequate presence marked by the use of the word in the present context. It is not the word but the palimpsest, which is the unit of “transmitted” meaning. This palimpsest is a kind of metaphor memory in which the “would-be” units of meaning represented by the literal word-as-tokeninscription are processed. “You don’t get it.” “There is no “it” to get.” So says Derrida to one of his starry-eyed admirers who wishes to simply behold this great philosopher and stand “in his presence,” believing himself to have finally reached the same epiphany as was aboriginally glimpsed and expounded by the great philosopher. Book Title: Derrida’s Necrophilic Project Failure of self identity through non-interability or non-repeatability of words. So to repeat a word is to mention the word with various provinences with its various prior uses. Two

passing

strangers

waving

to

one

another:

Being’s

acknowledgement of itself. Nostalgia versus presence in the present, e.g., music of the royal court as elegant, graceful, noble, regal, etc. Arbitrary or only subtly culturally indicated choices of musical theme, in the case of productions within an emergent genre, become sharper and more marked with time as the genre develops itself. Linkage of new themes, as well as the forging of new links between old, taking place within the developing genre are always determined via factors more or less extraneous to what are later understood as principles of thematic and artistic unity after this genre has reached “maturity.” Deconstruction is partly a back engineering of this historical process in which “chance and necessity” form an indissoluble mixture. Chance, not as an absolute, but in the sense of alterity and extraneousness with respect to predetermined and coherent lines of deterministic development, is necessarily involved in the evolution of genre because dialectical development is always constituted by clashes between incommensurable forces. So presence exists prior to its being recognized upon and for a time after its advent. It is with the unfair advantage of hindsight the thinkers further down the line of cultural evolution that these entities or “presences” are identified. Upon these presences being identified it becomes possible to step outside of their magical influence – not unlike the phenomenon of abreaction in the psychoanalytic subject. Music  Scenes  Dialogue  Music Books I want to write: Crystal Blue, The Necrophile, The Hegelian Edifice of Postmodernism, Phenomenology of the Mysterious, Spin Based Digital Mechanics of Spacetime, Naïve Presumption: The Failed Project of Hard AI, The NoDesign Basis of Human Consciousness. Open system unity and consciousness – are they compatible? The object provides a context for the object’s context.

The endless proliferation of specialized languages of various, e.g., professional, academic, etc. eclipses is no more in effect than is the culture itself influential in its structuring of the lives of individuals. The language of mainstream or “dominant” culture may be likened to a pidgin language which comes into being piecemeal solely for getting on with the unavoidable inter-dealings of various subcultures, e.g., police and local urban gang. Only the language that one is born and raised up in gives one “transparent access” to both self and the other (but “other” within one’s own subculture/clan). Self as social, linguistic construct mediated through subcultural acculturation. Borderline personality disorder as a disease of social self-construction and maintenance. It has been argued against bilingual elementary education that if immigrant children are taught English prior to having completed the process of mastering their “native tongue” there results a pseudo-bilingual individual with logical and cognitive impairments caused by his lack of possession of a native tongue or first language. Difficulties on the part of urban ghetto black children in internalizing the dominant language and its values/norms in the public school system are not due to cognitive or intellectual inferiority on their part but are culturally influenced and principled individual choices (in large part). It has been noted that groups of babies raised together spontaneously develop a language between themselves. Was this a pattern established by evolution, which is no longer being followed? Are man’s current social arrangements so vastly at odds with the social organization that he followed for countless millennia that he is presently unwittingly handicapped by cognitive, psychological and social ills of his own making. This is why the study of anthropology is perhaps the most important academic endeavor. The following excerpt is taken from Derrida and the End of History (1999).

“Derrida claims that he can use the same terms as his opponents, while denying that they carry the same significance for him, since he is to be considered as using them ‘under erasure’ (sous rature): that is, as if they had a line crossed through them. Another way to think of this method of operation would be to imagine that everything Derrida says is in quotation marks.” Consider the following excerpt from this aaaNotes – clipboard text. Pictorial representation is followed by abstract or stylized representation, which is in turn followed by arbitrary representation in the form of language/writing. Abstract versus concrete is not an exact binary opposition because however concrete experience is, it presupposes a certain amount of processing and filtering of sensory (both “internal” and “external”) data. The “concept” “arbitrary” does not quite succeed in being what it appears to be because arbitrary representations are always implemented within some medium in which the medium takes on some small but not nonexistent role in determining the meaning of the so-called arbitrary symbols transmitted “through it.” @$We see that each entity is what it is in part by being infused with its other. This is particularly striking in the case of representation in which there is a closed system of complementary figure and ground. If it is true that we do not really possess genuine concepts, then whenever a concept is referred to by its name, we should, in recognition of this fundamental limitation of all our concepts, place the concept name within quotation marks. The lack of clarity and distinctness of all concepts means that the binary opposition of use versus mention must break down, and con= Cartesian epistemology along with it. But perhaps this vagueness of concepts is one akin to the vagueness involved with the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle in which the vagueness is due to the operation of a dynamism, rather than being the product of lack of knowledge with reactivity of the system to observer interference. Because concepts “perform work” within the mind of the individual, although perhaps intended to be merely descriptive in the context of intersubjective communication, there must be some back-reaction of concepts upon the process of thought that both a., brings them into being, and b., utilizes

them for the mediation of both infrasubjective and intersubjective thought. The above was written by me a couple of weeks before having read the above excerpt from DEH. The above was also written before having learned about Derrida’s critique of the “effacement of the signifier” as an illusory phenomenon of language’s transparence to the transmission of meaning. The notion of the entity being what it is being in part dependent upon “being infused with the other” could have been derived from a notion of mine from at least several years ago (long before I had studied postmodernism/deconstruction). But it can also be more au= directly a rephrasing of Derrida’s notion of “no thing being identical with itself.” Derrida’s concept of “the effacement of the signifier” in speech as being the condition of the idea of truth,” c.f., p. 108, cit=On Deconstruction (1982). The fact that the signifier can never be completely effaced means that the meaning of symbols, whether written, spoken or thought, can never be truly arbitrary. So a pun is probably never based purely on an accidental semantic kinship of similar sounding words and phrases themselves possessing no common etymological or cultural-genealogical origin. A pun is not an isolated linguistic quirk but is an effect of a systematic phenomenon of language, which must have a basis in language as such. @$Other seeming coincidences or “degeneracies” of language and linguistic practice, if recurrent and pervasive, are not to be explained away as accidental. Besides, such a notion of the complete arbitrariness of symbols leaves no place for will within the truth project. Part of the collective negotiation toward truth is direct interaction in the form of grappling, pushing, pulling, yielding and relenting of wills rather than the transmission of data and the invoking of information. The point here is that there is always a certain amount of this collective grappling of wills upon one another which takes place within even the most routine or ordinary types of conversation, which then cannot be viewed simply as ordinary, culture-specific exchanges of information.

What is all of this aiming at you might ask? Well, it is a notion which is perhaps formally akin to but contrary in spirit to Derrida’s notion of the medium of language being less than transparent a medium for the transmission of meaning. My impulse to juxtapose and comment upon the excerpted text above was the burgeoning notion that language is just as much a reactive and amplifying medium as it is a refractive and dissipating medium. The notion of meaning amplification is certainly intriguing. It is akin to image or pattern recognition and enhancement. Meaning can be amplified, filtered, concentrated, etc. through the action of its transmission medium. (Can two independent noise streams interfere in such as manner as to enhance kwd=specified complexity?) @$ Of course all of this discussion presupposes that the author has something “in mind” which he seeks to utilize language as a partially fallible, partially serendipitous tool with which to express this something. Many years after having established a more or less fixed and successful routine of life and life style, and stable social contexts for each of the various distinct roles that one is called upon to play in one’s life, the demand upon the brain to produce new neural interconnections has long ago stabilized at a level much lower than that demand which was necessary in youth. Temporal causality versus ontological causality. (ESS) One basis for the interpretation of dreams is the idea that the relation of world and ego become inverted so that everything external is a manifestation of the self’s alter aspects. An existential claim is a claim that a category is instantiated. also true of the existence of an individual consciousness?

@$

Is this

The desire to prove to oneself that something fails to transcend, is nothing other than our concept of it. @$Transcendence is relative to a

particular set of limitations and so transcendence always becomes immanence again as deeper limitations are revealed. Logic is the ultimate limitation upon reality, spatiotemporality the penultimate. Part of what constitutes information is data. An example of this is a cipher string with far more permutations than there are coded pieces of information. This reduces confusion of two or more distinct bits/packets of information or the false appearance of information, e.g., hallucinations. @$To identify a complete set of necessary “enablers” or triggers, as opposed to causes of a phenomenon in hand does not equal a causal explanation for that phenomenon. The sum of necessary causes for some effect is only finite, which is equivalent to a sufficient cause, but only within a preexistent system/medium. Although what is asserted about various seminal thinkers of the Western philosophical tradition is incorrect because, in reality directed against a straw man of its own imagination, as an abstract theory in search of a subject matter, deconstruction seems to be a useful and instructive school of literary/cultural criticism. Anecdotal knowledge can be valid when it is knowledge by acquaintance (in the Russellian sense). Subjectivity is not in its essence comprised by any objective contents and so its structure is imposed from outside, is intersubjective and conventional. Between threshold of awareness and certainty is the subconscious hunch. Duality is never a simple single level structure but is fractal and multileveled. Does the individual’s self-knowledge transcend the subjective vs. objective dichotomy? In the case of one’s knowledge of oneself by acquaintance (in the Russellian sense), this knowledge is @$ objective while not being (almost by definition) intersubjective. Perhaps the only way that we can recover the objective = intersubjective equivalence is to achieve an understanding of the subjective self as social construct, linguistically and culturally based.

Coincidence: if some thing previously encountered in the environment suddenly connects with new information that is important, this thing suddenly arises in consciousness. Is context necessary for manifestation of objects within consciousness? @$

Clearly it is the genes themselves and not their combinations which are selected for. This is because only an infinitesimal fraction of all possible genetic combinations have ever been expressed and exposed to the action of natural selection. We have all along confused resonance for “presence.” Resonance properties are based in the differences in activity (which is ultimately decomposable in terms of a spectrum of frequencies of oscillations) rather than being based upon some unitary presence and its ongoing functioning. Presence is absolute, but resonance is merely relative. The objectivity = intersubjectivity equation is disrupted by the simple fact that the individual and his subjective individual consciousness has an objective existence! The concept of metaphor presupposes that there is some pristine purely literal context from which we metaphorically borrow. But there is not such thing as this kind of “pure context,” i.e., con-text. Every discourse is always infused with elements and structures from other discourses. Concept: to abstract from the discursive (“discourse-ive”) context within which one is presently positioned; metaphor: to abstract from another discursive context and import this abstract structure into the present discursive context. It is instructive to meditate on the connotation of the etymologically closely related words discourse and discursive. When one is within a given discourse and does not have access to any other, then one’s language is not merely denotative, one’s language becomes a tool which is purely ready to hand. We see that the term denotative is dependent for its fullest sense upon what is pointed up by the complementary term connotative. The distinction of conceptual

versus metaphorical is undermined by the fact of the nonexistence of any pure universe of discourse in which the terms of the discourse are purely denotative; each discourse from which we borrow is itself hierarchically, but only loosely hierarchically structured. (“hierarchical” in a metaphorical sense) That which has the greatest presence is that of which we have heard the most oft. Is logocentrism a necessary outgrowth of consciousness or social self-consciousness. Metonymy is kwd=reification of a part. The invention of historical figures, epochs, etc. When people or situations are bigger and more respectable than life we are deep within logocentrism. Miller, Smith, Clark, etc., last name and family name inheritance. Resonance, repetition, presence . . . Did logocentrism exist prior to the development of writing? Learning to sound out words in kindergarten. Definite versus indefinite articles. Image enhancement through memory of neural networks. The celebrity presence phenomenon and logocentrism – the stalking of famous/attractive people. Obsessions, fetishes, phobias, diseases of logocentrism, necrophilia even (in Fromm’s extended sense). Mimesis, clear and distinction conceptions . . . The basis of all of our pretensions and illusions. Will we admit that it is grace – that reality is continually conspiring with us. . . Heidegger’s distinction of present to hand versus ready to hand parallels representation vs. will. The Will to Power/Truth, Nietsche – philosopher’s hammer –destroying the idols, presumptions of culture. The perceived sense of identity and self grows with the progressive enrichment of the individual’s cultural context. The logocentric may be characterized as anything, which reduces the human being’s sense of geworfenheit. June 2011

There is the literal-minded notion of the “properly received pronunciation” of “the King’s English” and there is the notion of the inevitability of the evolution of language, e.g., “if nobody every “talked wrong”, we’d all still be speaking middle English!” Let’s not confuse process with products. I am reminded of the parent who fervently if

secretly wishes that their toddler would never grow up or the child who wishes that his pet would always remain the cute puppy or kitty that he loves. Just think of the puzzled and perhaps frustrated monsignor who encounters the young catechism student’s questions: if you die of old age, then how old are you in heaven, or worse yet, this naïve gnostic question…”how does God know that there’s not someone unknown to him who is greater than him, but who just lets God think he’s in charge?” Evolution explains change, but not stability, which is owing to the chemical and physical properties of DNA, more generally, the selforganizing properties of matter. The ratio of the number of genetic combinations capable of being expressed as proteins versus the number of genes which cannot be in this way expressed cannot be thought to be essentially related to the information content of expressed genes, but only to a quantity of a subclass of information. What is the nature of this subclass? C.f., gene regulation. Logic and science and all disciplines of knowledge which flow out of them, are heavily based upon the old ceteris paribus principle, i.e., “other things being equal,” these two or more things are equal, their identity failing only in unimportant ways. However, the ways in which identities all ultimately fail (even where only a single “entity” is concerned, c.f., temporality) are truly only “unimportant” with respect to a pragmatic purpose in view – if we try to transcend the realm of mere pragmatism, we find ourselves projecting out into the unknown and unknowable in ways that cannot possibly be given solid foundation. Regularity is a function of what we might conveniently term “the boundary conditions of scale.” Is logocentrism merely a condition of the myopia of the intellect and perception? The uncanny correspondence that seems to obtain between our perceptions of the world’s structure and behavior on the one hand and language and mathematics on the other suggests that the same

underlying matrix organizes all three. An important difference exists between dialogue between two persons and the “dialogue” that one has with oneself. How much does text rely on this self-dialogue versus interpersonal dialogue. Have we all along mistaken the Will for Consciousness? Just contemplate the apparent converse relationship of will and consciousness. Consciousness is the registering (or the capacity of this registering) of the local upon the nonlocal, the discrete upon the continuous, etc. Will is the converse of this – the registering of the nonlocal by the local, the continuous upon the discrete, etc. Consciousness may not exist as anything other than a representation of Will. If personal identity is “reducible,” then it can be broken down into a set of discrete elements/systems which by their interaction, “produce,” i.e., “pro” – “duce” (pro ducere, lat.). But interaction within a closed system possesses 1) no context and 2) back-reacts upon no transcendent ground. It is the “stimulation of time.” And the reciprocal informing of this system which “stimulates ground” which completes the circuit, closes the loop of consciousness’ circle. Egyptian symbol of consciousness was, after all, the Ourobouros. Each individual person is his or her own Brahman. This is what Atman = Brahman really means – not that there is only one consciousness or “oversoul” experiencing through each as though individual human beings are mere terminals connected to a single network. The Atman is not then merely some facet or reflection of the unitary, eternally preexistent Brahman, but is Brahman itself. Brahman transcends unity and plurality. But how is this possible, you ask? Isn’t such a notion inherently contradictory. No, it is merely paradoxical. The human person, along with its body, may be likened to a computer terminal, but

the network is that individual’s eternal consciousness. The identification of consciousness with a kind of meta-sensedatum, prevents us from understanding that consciousness is independent of what structures it because the conditions for its structuring come from within it whenever it limits itself and interfaces with other consciousnesses undergoing the same self limitation. “When one dies, where does the soul or mind go?” Nowhere is the answer for although the mind manifests itself within space and time, the mind does not itself occupy space and time. If the mind moves at all, it does so into and out of time, but without moving through space. This is where the existence and dynamics of mind seems to require that the world possess at least five distinct dimensions, but probably more as there must be more than one avenue of approach for more than merely two distinct minds so as to negotiate the structure of the spacetime continuum. If mind constitutes spacetime, individually (mental space) and collectively (physical space), then there should be some kind of intimate connection between inertiogravitation and consciousness with respect to the constituting of spacetime. April 2013 cit=“Isaac Luria propounded the doctrine of the Tzimtzum, (meaning alternatively: "Contraction/Concealment/Condensation/Concentration"), the primordial Self-Withdrawal of Divinity to "make space" for subsequent Creation. This reconciles the Infiniteness of God with finite Creation, preventing created realms from being nullified into non-existence within their source of vitality”, c.f., http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lurianic_Kabbalah#Primordial_Tzimtzum__Contraction_of_Divinity.

Investigate the phenomenon of logocentrism and buzzwords, importation of foreign phrase to express emphasized or “fancy” thoughts. Does meaning always have to be based in subjectively present contents or can it sometimes be structural or completely contextual? Epigram: Myth comprises analogies of transhistorical historicity in which timeless elements of human nature work out their temporal expression.

Consciousness is not explicable or describable in terms of abstract representations because consciousness is itself the originator and sustainer of all representations. Consciousness, rather than being a phenomenon based in formal or deterministic, causal operations, and therefore potentially possessing a complete or closed form description, is a manifestation of will and volition. What we have all this time been identifying as consciousness has been merely a misidentification of the collective impression of myriad sense data. These sense data are themselves merely artifacts of consciousness, which collectively produce a subtle meta-sensation or meta-perception, as it were, which is identified as literal consciousness. In fact this meta-perception based in collective presentation of sense data to the subject is itself not the medium of experience but is embedded and supported within this medium. Here is a classic example of the kwd=reification of metaphor into concept. It may be that concepts occupy the domain of the collective, intersubjective communications space while metaphors are conceived and utilized by individual members of this space. The actual process of kwd=reification takes place when myriad individuals become linked together into sympathetic collectives, e.g., during culturally or historically significant events in which presented speech is capable of producing a much greater resonance, producing an augmented sense of significance. Re: star trek transporter technology. It should be possible to “transport” any structure, which can be instantiated. The uniqueness of the self implies that it is neither the result of an instantiation, nor is the self-capable of itself being the subject of instantiation. If continuity is an essential “property” of the self’s identity, then the self must be constituted by a system which is necessarily open with respect to the dimension of time. It can be shown that this requirement of temporal openness itself demands the requirement of spatial openness. The phenomenon of insight suggests that the informing of some thought processes does not require consciousness. Consciousness only appears

to come into play when what is taking place at the level of the subconscious proves thematically, practically, etc. relevant to the situation of the embodied host of that consciousness or, proves to be a crucial connection of preexisting but fragmentary knowledge. But this idea does not appear to satisfactorily account for the fact of this constant background of what might be termed ordinary consciousness until it is realized that the existence of a constant and ubiquitous backdrop of ordinary consciousness is altogether a myth. The continuity of consciousness is not some fragile wisp of a thread such that, should it be disrupted, the identity of the individual precariously supported by it should be irrevocably lost. Nor is the continuity of consciousness to be likened to some kind of inconceivably tensile strong connecting cord. But the continuity of consciousness, which frames the basis of individual identity, is capable of continually being reacquired by the individual. So temporal continuity of the individual which at first appeared to underpin his identity is itself dependent upon a continuity of an altogether different kind – that of continuity with a substratum. Ray Kurzweil’s talk on C-SPAN. No preciseness of detail in copying a person’s brain will permit the duplication of his consciousness in the absence of the maintenance of crucial continuity. The problem of logocentrism has deep implications for another important problem, that of artificial intelligence. The reason that the project of formalizing the process of thought might ultimately prove unworkable is that the formal aspects of the process of thought are purely phenomenal and representational. If one’s recollection of one’s dreams can be trusted, that is, then numerous recollection of having refrained from the acting out of sexual or aggressive impulses might indicate that Freud’s hypothesis of dreams as mere subconscious acting out of repressed wish fulfillment may be an

oversimplification. Part of logocentrism lies in the structuring of moments as possessing relevance beyond their span. Can we use this projective language of eternal significance all the while remaining cognizant of living within the structured paltritude of the moment. And is this perhaps the basis of sentimentality – the sensing of the irony of projections of culturally based human significance seen against the backdrop of objective insignificance. Or is sentimentality based in realizing how one links up with the rest of humanity cross-culturally and cross-historically through the universality of basic human experiences. Like the effect of hearing a playing of the Star Spangled Banner in the presence of 50,000 other “patriotic” human beings. Creative people are able to “live down” the indignities and disappointments of life through the expression of their inner conflicts which connects them to similar conflicts in fellow sufferers. While at the same time symbolizing a healing path to their solution, resolution, or merely their closure. Such conflicts rankle the uncreative individual who must contrive inner compensatory perceptions and ideation which inevitably gives rise to neurotic acting out which mystifies their more unassuming, well-adjusted peers. epi=

“Just because you are creative doesn’t mean you have to do that for a living.” The morbid desire to be a “fly on the wall” characterizes a passive kind of necrophilia in Fromm’s sense of the necrophilous character. As progressively more advanced surveillance technology becomes widely available to the average person, uncreative, powerless, and neurotic types will be in a newly ideal position to discredit all those for whom they harbor a smoldering jealousy and resentment. Humans of normal or above average intelligence are easily bored with almost anything repetitive. The repetitiveness, easy predictability, and transparency of

acts of the narcissistic imagination, however and the fact that, after years on end, one never seems to grow weary of their endless replaying, strongly suggests that it is not the whole person in Jung’s sense, but a very small-souled, petty and mean-spirited component of the human psyche, which tirelessly luxuriates in this series of vignettes, this show in which this little but powerful fragment of the self is the central star. epi=

Blindness to the mystery of existence is intimately related to the problem of Logocentrism. It has been said that the most profound metaphysical puzzle is that of the following: “why is there something rather than nothing?” I say that a mystery far transcending this one is the more intimately private mystery of one’s personal existence – not the mystery of objective existence. The answer to the objective mystery, if you will, is “out there” although humankind or even its more gifted descendants may indeed never succeed in divining it. Though it may be any number of brilliant individuals who are born within the next thousand years, say, who shall have an equal chance, if talent alone suffices, to discover it. @$However, oneself alone may arrive at the answer to the mystery of one’s own existence! It is not by virtue of some abstract feature or relation that one possesses the identity one has. The uniqueness of one’s identity quite succeeds in ruling out such a basis for personal identity. In other words, it is not by virtue of one’s identity instantiating some general concept, category or class that one has come to be or is who one is. It is at this point that one is faced with the real and possibly disturbing implications of the uniqueness of one’s being. If the crux of one’s personal identity is truly eternal, then the basis of one’s identity would simply be a kind of continuity of some monadic substance wherein temporal continuity is only one among multiple aspects. Permanent reduction in the genetic diversity of a given endangered species is easily enough explained in terms of the relative probability of a given genetic combination, i.e., genome with respect to other probable genomes. The more a species’ gene pool contracts the greater the relative probability of the occurrence of a given genetic pattern. So if

concerned organizations are to rebuild a species, it may only do so quantitatively, but not qualitatively. A reduction in the number of individuals in a given breeding population by half results in a much greater than half reduction in the number of possible permutations of genes within the genome. Also, the probability of large fluctuations about the “genetic mean” is greatly increased since in general the magnitude of fluctuations is proportional to one over the square root of n. January 2012 This peculiar mathematical property of fluctuations seems well suited to the aims of evolution as a blind, conative dynamic endlessly exploring a rugged fitness landscape, which is itself shot through-and-through with design. January 2014

No afterlife in *this* timeline.

Random mutation combined with natural selection could only be effective in maneuvering through and along a rugged fitness landscape of potentially more highly ordered biological systems if mutation is thought to be fundamentally similar to the adjustment but chance of settings on a machine's operating system. @$

Further evidence that churches are houses of spiritual complacency: all one has to do is attend any Christian church and listen to the preacher's opening prayer. How passionate is he in the delivery of this prayer? Does the preacher look up to heaven? What are his mannerisms, gesticulations and facial expressions evident during the delivery of the prayer? Does his body language conspire to signify great humility, great love and great joy? Usually it patently does not, and this is the perfect indicator that the preacher, deep in his inner being does not really believe what he preaches; he does not really believe the wonderful promises that have been made to him and all Christians in God's word. On the other hand, if he makes a convincing display as a petitioner, humble before his Creator, wouldn’t what we know in our hearts about human hollowness and superficiality cause us to suspect facticity in the great majority of cases? 011214

My experience of another person’s perceptions, thoughts, etc. could only be perceived to be communicably different provided that the other person’s perceptions of objects, for example, is structured differently, i.e., the form is different although the “raw feels” is not perceived to be different. Any differences, which can be perceived, can be made the subject of language which is exclusively a system of differences. The definition of similarity implicitly presupposes identity of experiences. It is difficult to grasp this at first because we are bewitched by the notion of referring perception to objects. Differing perceptions of a given object/situation are rejoined at opposite ends by virtue of different individuals possessing both a common language and a common environment. As wondrous as awakening in the future after many years of sleep might at first seem, one’s greatest impression would be that of isolation and loneliness. Interactive versus representational passive learning in children. children have very little context for interpreting representations.

Small

Logocentrism is partly comprised by the kwd=reification, if you will, of technique (born of necessity) into art, that is, as something which is appreciated as an end in itself. It is self-awareness itself, which is responsible for this “kwd=reification of technique.” Pictorial representation is followed by abstract or stylized representation, which is in turn followed by arbitrary representation in the form of language/writing. Abstract versus concrete is not an exact binary opposition because however concrete experience is, it presupposes a certain amount of processing and filtering of sensory (both “internal” and “external”) data. The “concept” “arbitrary” does not quite succeed in being what it appears to be because arbitrary representations are always implemented within some medium in which the medium takes on some small but not nonexistent role in determining the meaning of the

so-called arbitrary symbols transmitted “through it.” We see that each entity is what it is in part by being infused with its other. This is particularly striking in the case of representation in which there is a closed system of complementary figure and ground. If it is true that we do not really possess genuine concepts, then whenever a concept is referred to by its name, we should, in recognition of this fundamental limitation of all our concepts, place the concept name within quotation marks. The lack of clarity and distinctness of all concepts means that the binary opposition of use versus mention must breakdown, and the Cartesian epistemology along with it. An open system should be infinite not only in quantity but also in quality. The unity of an open system must be a transcendental unity – a unity simultaneously of and within the infinite. A basic principle generally exhibited by the evolutionary process is the freedom of parameters that are left unbound by the dictates of natural selection. Is it conceivable for mathematical entities to be the products of engineering? The existence of physical media structured and organized according to mathematical principles/relationships may be explained in terms of eternally preexistent physical media/dynamics in combination with various type of selection mechanism, selection. But such evolutionary mechanisms would not be available to account for mathematical order such that, if mathematical/logical order could be shown to be in some important way contingent rather than necessary, then this order would itself have to be viewed as artificial. What we have here is what Heidegger might have termed a shift of the ready-to-hand to the present-to-hand. Closed form mathematical relationships are mere descriptions, which correspond to open form feedback structures within the quantum vacuum. Triggering reminders are tuning parameters of morphic resonance. “But we won’t over tighten the ligament so he won’t get his mobility back.” This is an example of a radically ambiguous sentence – radical

in the sense that the alternative interpretations are contraries. Morphic resonance with the latent experience of progressively more dissimilar entities/minds will reveal more abstract features of shared experience. As quickly enough becomes apparent when someone mishears or misunderstands oneself. Is there a type of “mis-reaching” or “misunderstand” of material for which there is no possible check, i.e., the subjective components of the contents of ones consciousness, which are taken to be equally contained in our communications to listeners/readers? Is it meaningful to postulate such a component of the content of consciousness, i.e., subjectivity/ Think of all particles being excitations of the vacuum according to an analogy with thoughts, perceptions, feelings, and other mental structures being excitations of the gray matter within our brains. Society and culture amplifies the already extant, but modest physical and psychological differences between the sexes. Amplification always increases the magnitude of noise along with signal, but also introduces additional noise. Is there a kind of amplification in which not only additional noise is introduced by also additional signal? Some of the additional noise introduced would inevitably be extraneous information signals, i.e., signals from other transmitters. Noise, we might say, all comes from the same place, whereas information signals come from distinct transmitters. This points up the question of whether there is any nonarbitrary basis for distinguishing what is called “noise” from what is called “signal.” Might noise arise from the incoherent interference of a number of distinct information signals. What then arises from their coherent interference? Here we see the necessary existential reference of an unfilled covey hole of a “tabular system,” e.g., blank box in the periodic table of elements, “missing” top quark of quantum chromodynamic

theory, etc. The ground of existence does not exist, but has being. It has form but not substance. The ground of being does not itself possess being. It has neither form nor substance. But this gets problematic through the necessary complications resulting from differentiating these concepts and distinctions for both the unique, individual and subjective from the rational, collective and intersubjective. The relation represented by “aboutness” cannot be a perfect one, but necessarily involves a projection. Aboutness understood as a real relation not involving projection, and hence, a certain degree of illusion, is quite paradoxically, the meaningful reference to a thing, a “correspondence” with it which must touch the object without touching it. This is to extract a definition of “aboutness” through the consistent observation of the term’s use. What sort of necessary confusion are we landed in when we contemplate the question, “what is the term “aboutness” about?” Do we have a general problem of discontinuity of meaning if we imagine that abstract terms can be treated as substantives whenever their meaning and function become themselves the subject of philosophical inquiry? Do individual persons function as “poles of reality” just as do the poles of a function in the complex (Argand) plane, where the solutions of the complex polynomial function approach points along an asymptote? Can certain words in a language function in this way asymptotically, with the poles of meaning carefully hidden within the fabric of discourse? Would this be a case of meaning functioning according to a projection and not in terms of correspondence with essences? C.f., works of Xavier Zubiri. The activity of thought may be placed in an order upon a spectrum or axis according to the degree to which this activity disrupts its own, constitutive ground. The notion of ordinary physical objects, as

opposed to ultrahigh energy subatomic particles, perhaps occupies one end of this spectrum, the end at which there exists the least possible disruption. While on the opposite end lies metaphysical or psychological conceptual insight, as opposed to abstract analysis where the potential for disruption is perhaps at its greatest. Some activities of thought will interact strongly with it, but without disrupting it in any way – this is a kind of resonance of the activity of thought with its ground. And these resonance properties are different in cases where collective thought (a notion inadmissible in Randian thought) is concerned. Wittgenstein’s revelation to us that meaning is determined through use in accordance with various discourse-dependent language games might appear to undercut our ability to independently philosophize. The question arises whether or not assertion loses some of its force when it is understood as taking place solely within discourse-dependent language games. The concept of the discourse-dependence of propositional assertion is an acknowledgement of the perhaps metaphorical (connotative) nature of thought that is of necessity contextually bound. A common discourse is presupposed by any meaningfully progressive activity of sociopolitical cooperation. What would in the context of free market economic theory be termed collusion. Whereas it is the breakdown of a lingua franca of common discourse within the sociopolitical arena which leads to the breaking off of mutual negotiations and the falling back onto naked competition of opposed powers. Commonality of discourse is simply an agreement, either consciously articulated or implicit, in the way terms are to be defined. It is also constituted by the scope of reference of various commonly held categories and the methods utilized in implementing them. And the collective adherence to a means of arbitration even when its consequences are seemingly inequitable , i.e., principles, but lacking these, susceptibility to particular canons of rhetoric also, in part, constitute it. That the various epiphenomena of language such as rhyming, meter

(cadence), punning, alliteration, etc., do not always manifest themselves exclusively as such suggests not the hidden irrationality of language, but its hyperrationality. There is a deepening of meaning which takes place suddenly when, noting the deeper abstract meanings of words through having contemplated the unity of their disparate acceptations, heretofore unnoticed or thought altogether unrelated, one glimpses the application of a single concept in two substantively distinct universes of discourse. We forget that words refer to thoughts, if they refer at all, rather than to “things.” Thoughts, on the other hand, do not refer to or correspond with anything at all, but rather cohere. There are two kinds of “tracking” of a solution: via a dynamical mathematical-like relationship, via a grasping of the solution which tenaciously holds onto it as it attempts to flee understanding. In the first case there is correspondence between the description of the dynamical system and the system itself; in the second case there is coherence of the feedback of the system and that of the mind seeking to “comprehend it.” The ladder of excrescent difference lies in the invention and discovery of ideas. There should be a verbal noun that is midway on the spectrum of meaning that lies between invention and discovery. Scaffolding of thought. Every adrenaline rush, which comes with the revelation of insight, intimates a previously unsuspected source of creative power. It is the intimately personal insight of self discovery that underlies the zeal for intellectual activity, is it, not the desire for communication? We can make a parallel distinction to that of real versus virtual particles with regard to real versus virtual thoughts. What allows this is the quantum vacuum’s role as not only a reservoir of energy but also of information. Aquinas: that which is subject to division possesses potentiality – the decomposition of the Psi in terms of an incompatible observable, giving rise to an uncertainty of this observable and so temporal fluctuations in

this observable. Infinite regress of the finite containing an integral description of itself and things are only completely explicable in terms of an infinite context – but multiple infinite embedding contexts are available. What makes the difference is which of these infinite contexts actually embed the “thing” in question. Forgetfulness, being easily distracted, poor sense of direction, etc. – these are some of the symptoms of being in a dream state, or at least a state of incomplete wakefulness. Some of these symptoms of consciousness deficit or inadequate thought control are based upon an idealization of consciousness, which are in turn based upon an implicit notion of what perfect consciousness and perfect thought control might be like. Perhaps it can be shown that these idealizations of consciousness and will presuppose precise determination, simultaneously, of incompatible predicates. Does the independence of the spin quantum number from Lorentz transformations imply that there is no substance interaction, i.e., in the sense of producing dynamical effects, between spin and “flat spacetime.” A philosophical conundrum in mathematics is created because of the dichotomy in the English language represented by the dual opposition, invention versus discovery. Perhaps there is another language in which such a distinction does not exist, but wherein there is simply some word or other which possesses a meaning midway between or inclusive of both of these notions. A similar arbitrary ( in the sense of its languageboundedness) dual distinction is represented by the opposition, data versus information. What we have been saying is that reality is not arboreal but rhizomatic in its organization; it is a multiplicity of potential unities.

One possibility, which does not appear to have been entertained because it is unthinkable within the presently reigning scientific paradigm, is the following. At some level of physical reality, perhaps at its very subtlest and deepest, within the core of each individual person’s Being operates a dynamic and, yes, unique, set of physical laws. These individual physical laws, according to which this and only this particular person’s dynamic being operates, must be of an altogether distinct order form the conventionally based, intersubjective laws of classical and even quantum physics operates. What is the general nature of effects resulting from the filtering or interaction of unique entities within a formalizable system? One might say that the Universe is a kind of institution of the collective of divine persons, which solves the problem of their isolation, but at the cost of their freedom. The free will of the individual, the direct evidence for which is only glimpsed by the individual himself, is the surest testimony to the fact that the individual is a coherent, open system and is beyond any possible description. This individual is its own primum mobile. The free will of the individual bespeaks his infinitude. Freedom and originality are the characteristics of mind; automaticity is the defining characteristic of body. The operation of the free will of individuals produces a back-reaction within the quantum vacuum, which produces nonlocal effects upon this vacuum that results in local effects upon prepared quantum systems (describable by a particular wavefunction, Psi). When the brain makes a transition to one global energy level to another through a virtual transition, neural synapses act like Josephson junctions across which neural impulses quantum mechanically tunnel. Another way to see the possibility of quantum tunneling within the brain’s neural

network might be via consideration of the jumping from one classical formal logico-deductive system to another when this transition is not mediated by some metalogical system embedding the initial and final formal systems. The brain may be viewed in this way as a collection of switches and routing circuits for the quantum vacuum energy field out of which it is continually being recreated (along with all other matter). When the brain thinks, it simply connects utterly novel circuits within the vacuum field, as well as inhibiting others, which disrupts the otherwise unified pattern of information processing within this vacuum, causing the vacuum to “recalculate a new unified dynamic state.” Existence and nonexistence are not truly dual opposite (binary) categories as both categories may have being as such in common, e.g., mathematical – one speaks of a theorem “existing” or “not existing”. The question arises in this connection, however, as to whether Being and Nothingness form with one another a binary opposition. The topological “fetish of substance”. Continuity is of two types: the continuity of a thing with itself through time (continuity I) and the continuity of a thing with the substrate out of which it was constituted and is continuously sustained (continuity II). It perhaps seems a forgone conclusion that continuity of the first type necessarily depends upon that of the second type. Change seems to presuppose a subject of change and so continuity I is important for temporality, but, as noted many times earlier, a closed system possesses structure, perhaps, but no function; it does not interact with anything outside itself. All possible interactions, which a given object may have with other entities, i.e., the “outside,” are prefigured by the interaction it continually has with the object’s embedding substrate, which constitutes and sustains its existence. April 2011 What takes place within a closed (stand-alone) system cannot make reference to anything within a domain, ideal or real, lying beyond itself and so everything which happens inside the system is determined by happenings within the system. What happens with the system is contextfree and hence is not “about anything”. Such as system lacks what is

termed intentionality. externalism/

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/content-

There can be no overall coherence of reality and coherence takes place within a given moment. Each moment has a characteristic half-life. Continuous shifting of the microparadigm of everydayness, which serves as the underlying ground of each moment, causes the moment to fall behind in its attempt to keep up with this underlying change. The moment must maintain itself by virtue of the same sort of activity, or, interactivity, which relates it to its ground out of which it was originally constituted. The moment can only keep up with the transformation of its ground by abandoning the preservation of its distinct identity. Coherence is based upon filtration of informing signals from ground. There are two kinds of passing away therefore: dissolution and obsolescence. And these two types of passing away are in constant opposition with one another. This is what accounts for the transience of the moment. There is a tension between seeing more and more the hollowness of rhetoric and glimpsing insights into its significance, which transcends everydayness. The individual participant in the discourse can contribute certain small innovations in discourse, in the form of new rhetorical devices. Radical revolutions in a discourse are by definition not possible as they utterly disrupt the context of discourse so that invention and innovation are no longer taking place within the discourse. Discourse evolves historically and collectively as technology and society undergo their mutual influence. Language contains conceptual structures, which no individual person placed there. Language exhibits the thought of the collective consciousness. Nothing is coincidental which the mind can seize upon as a missing puzzle piece of significance. We must realize that all along what we have been calling reality has just been its manifestation. 3000 AD

Whether one is a believing Christian or a confirmed atheist, one has to admit that any thorough examination of accounts of the life of Jesus does not reveal, under any degree of scrutiny, the least suggestion that Jesus was not a person possessing the greatest humility, integrity, and love for his fellow humans. If the truth cannot be known, then what is to serve as truth’s “stand-in” or representative? Performativity: abandoning representation, e.g., the discovery of general laws, and seeking practices, procedures that “work.” Necrophilic representations of knowledge are only possible through dissection and disruption of the object. “Anthropology” participatory knowledge only possible through a disruption of the subject. The considerable underlying influence in the aesthetics operative in the appeal of scientific theories, philosophical tenets, religious doctrines, etc., needs to be explored more fully. Some foreign words, e.g., “gemeutlich,” “schmuck,” etc. sound more like what they are intended to mean to an English speaking person than do their corresponding English translations. This observation seems to go against Saussure’s idea of the connection of meaning and signifier being completely arbitrary. What can be said about systems in which categories are generated permutationally, combinationally, but in which “null categories” appear? Null categories are categories in which significance of the categories is arbitrary with respect to the system of denoted meanings, but which seems to complete the system while more or less maintaining the system’s self-consistency. Numerous examples of this can be drawn from the fields of chemistry, biology and particle physics. “We should see the sign as arbitrary, that is its relation with the concept signified, or the thing that is its referent, is accidental,” c.f., Guidebook

to Derrida on Deconstruction. Because Being cannot be merely “a being,” if follows that Being is not a unity, a finished thing. Thought to some significant extent always appears out of context with respect to its embedding consciousness. Though always requires additional processing, i.e., “reprocessing,” to take hold of its destined meaning. Thought is always tentative, not merely a representation, but always partly a move to galvanize the will. All have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. Are each of us here together because each has committed the sin defining and characteristic of its being. Cult usually interpreted and reified epiphenomena of hormonally mediated genetically programmed responses to internal and external stimuli. Are charitable acts manifestations of the charitable spirit (spirit of charity) or, is the notion/concept of charity an abstraction from myriad similar actions. How are we to understand the play of difference amongst the subjective experiences of distinct individuals. Can we interpret these differences along the lines of those within a single individual. Filtering of signals/signs, their amplification, generalization into abstract categories, and then their kwd=reification. The clarity of a communication is determined by the level of insightfulness of the listener. Words are only elements of a hint intended to produce a hunch in the recipient. The objection that a proposition or argument is based on a “fuzzy concept” is not to effectively assert that this concept functions “inadequately.” We know the future, but our lips are sealed concerning all of its affairs except those which are still indeterminate. Jesus’ sacrifice was both a symbolic and a metaphysical un-doing of the original sin of Man, originating in turn with Lucifer’s proud,

vainglorious rebellion against God. The height of intellectual suggestibility is that ideas which would have never occurred to us quickly appear inevitable after their advent. Adaptation of stimuli, for example, reasons which don’t necessarily have anything to do with information processing. Degeneracy of data and energy with respect to information: Since wavefunctions are an artifact of closed systems, due to the necessity of specifying their initial and boundary conditions, Psi cannot be identified with information, unless Psi is an infinite superposition of a continuity of eigenfunctions. Whatever is responsible for an individual’s consciousness is also responsible for all of that individual’s choices and actions. What does the rampant increase in the number of persons possessing prescriptions for antidepressants and anti-anxiety medication suggest? Dawning greater awareness of self which is handled in two basic and distinctly different ways depending upon the temperament of the person as being either inner- or outer-directed. Perceptron Convergence Theorem: The perceptron converges after a finite number of presentations of stimulus-response pairs because the dimensionality of the finite dimensional vector spaces of the solutions (solution space) is no greater than the collective dimensionality of the sum total of stimulus-response pairs presented to the perceptron. Convergence of iterative solution of transcendental functions: First expand the transcendental functions into polynomial representations. Perceptron projects a series expansion based upon an iteratively developed rule for calculating the coefficients of the polynomial terms. The real perceptron vector, a projection based upon the finite set of stimulus-response pair representations, must approach the solution vector closely enough for convergence to “set in.” Use the story of how Aristotle’s chapter, Metaphysics, transformed into the concept by which that term is known in modern times. This story

should serve to illustrate the insidious self-organizing properties of Logocentrism. What appears to motivate all these people with WebPages on the Internet is not merely the expression of what they feel is unique about themselves, e.g., acting nobly, “unto death,”, i.e., “just for the record,” cracking jokes to which only oneself is privy (self stimulation/amplification of one’s incommunicable network of private, “you had to be there” associations, but in order to actually communicate to “the other” all of this. The Other is in reality the parental figure. The figure-ground duality of skepticism versus faith, truth vs. relativism, holism vs. reductionism, liberal vs. conservative, nature vs. nurture, original understanding vs. legal positivism, logocentrism vs. postmodernism, monist vs. pluralist, capitalist vs. socialist, etc. It is perhaps easier to follow the author of a radical doctrine if one feels that, rather than being his arbitrary creation, he is but its discoverer. This way the adherent or devotee of the doctrine can imagine that both he and “the guru” are participating in a revelation and its dissemination which is of greater significance than either. A Constitution should be viewed as a kind of brake upon rampant social and political evolution. It is not meant to be a document, which provides a once for all promulgation of limits/structure. The contingency of environmental conditions applied in the form of natural selection to random mutations in the human genome is belied by the individual’s sense of his own coherence and inevitability he vitally feels that his existence possesses. The action of will is how to account for the stability and persistence of systems and structures devoid of external foundation. Inchoate origination versus the uncovering of Platonic forms. How novelty is generalized through permutation and combination of elements of an open system. Does the openness of the system demand

that “its elements” be informational conduits rather than bits of data? The elements of an open system can never completely belong to that system but participate at the same time “in other systems.” This brings up the question of how does one distinguish two or more open systems when, each by virtue of being open, is not self identical. However free we like to consider ourselves with regard to our emotional, intuitive, and intellectual faculties, etc., there is despite this the dim recognition that we are all bound within the confines of the epoch of history in which we reside. The latest technological developments and the playing out of revolutionary social and cultural implications, these we certainly will not have a good grasp of, particularly as they emerge toward the declining years of our lives. Any still later developments are beyond the vanishing horizon of our finite sojourn on this planet. The history of philosophy is a testament to mankind’s greatest efforts to think his way out of the wet paper bag that has kept his mind in darkness. There is a growing sense and expectancy that the fibers of this bag are beginning to separate. Man may well regret getting what he for so long has apparently been seeking. Bakhtin’s concept of ideas as living entities is alluded to in his Problems of Dostoevsky’s Poetics. Metaphor constitutes the dialogic essence of ideas. Here is the notion of essence not based in the intrinsic nature of a self-identical entity. It is possible for the course of development of the individual to be altered by circumstance because myriad and in fact unlimited distinct possible unifications of the self are always open to it. This is perhaps the basis of the freedom of the will. Operations of a generality greater than that consciously intended by a text’s author are always revealed upon reflection of the author upon the operations by which the text has been constructed/is being constructed (used). The author may thenceforth proceed to produce additional text

in which such higher level operations are written about (mentioned). So there appears to be an upwardly spiraling dialectic of use and mention relating the text to the author’s reflections upon his state of mind during the text’s construction. There does not appear to be any natural termination point in this upward spiral of text/commentary – use/mention. For language to possess the capacity of functioning in the deconstructive role in which Derrida intends to utilize it, language must possess application beyond system and beyond the realm of the empirically knowable. Language must allow the possibility of metaphysics if it is to function as a deconstructive tool. Space is an outside without an inside and Time is an inside without an outside. Space and Time require determinate and indeterminate topologies, respectively. Acting out an internal genetic program embedded in culture and modulated by immediate circumstances, acting upon a determinate set of data inputs. Need this process be informed by anything so nebulous in its conception as consciousness? Convergence and coherence, a pulling toward a center which is not secretly an imbalance between opposing pushing forces seems to demand action at a distance and suggests the action of a kind of “urge toward a center.” Nonlocal quantum connectivity should suffice to produce such effects in systems of particles and fields. Encountering a word in quotes causes us to pause and reflect upon the possible broader and deeper meanings intended by the author of the text, meanings which are somehow encoded within the underlying thrust of novelty which might be invoked by the text as a whole. The quotation marks are a request to the reader to suspend their normal reflexes of interpretation. The indeterminacy of the text quickly grows out of bounds as one places more and more words of the text within quotation marks. The text is open-ended against unforeseen developments of new

metaphorical ground. But could such novel interpretations of the text which may be applied to it in light of a shift in ground have been expressed in a different textual formulation prior to any shift having occurred. The possibility of this would imply that cultural and social change are epiphenomenal and have no independent informing influence upon the indeterminate matrix from which the system of differences embodied in the text are drawn. It would still more imply that cultural and social structures are nothing more than implicit but nonetheless determinate semiotic structures. The collective culture as dynamic feedback structures of the interplay of “cultures of one.” This interplay metastablizes itself after the fashion of the emergence of stable dynamic structures of cellular automata. Is the stability of the identifications of meaning grounded in the idiomatic conceptions of meaning within the collectivity of counterpoised “cultures of one.” I must describe the implications for a doctrine of what might be called “collective idealism” of the events taking place in a dream I recently had. I was in an unfamiliar house into which entered an attractive young woman. This woman apparently had some business she was attending to in this house. I suddenly become aware of the sound of a clock-radio type of alarm. I’m searching all over the house for the source of this alarm, but my head is not very clear as I search through a kind of junk room filled with myriad somewhat antiquated looking electronic devices, complete with tangled electrical cords. Any one of the devices could have been the source of the annoying alarm. I’m anxious to turn off this alarm so that I can then set about chatting up the woman, so that I can, of course, hopefully get her into bed. But there was a distinct absence of the usual physical laws operating within this dream, i.e., e.g., conservation laws, causality, etc. But what is really lacking her is the logic of the dreamer’s own mind. Had I had greater presence of mind, I could have easily identified “the source” of the alarm (which, of course, is really my alarm clock!), shut it off and proceed on to more interesting scenes. You can’t hear what the people are saying as you pass around the corner, because you don’t really try to listen to what they are saying. You can’t really find what you’re looking

for because you’re not really looking systematically or diligently enough, etc. All this points up the possibility for a viable alternative explanation for the relationship of persons and of persons to the world “in which they live.” In dreams we disconnect from the collective (vox populi) and practice the “charm of making” solo. Every nemesis has a nemesis of its own. How powerful are the effects of sexual selection relative to those of natural selection. When cultural standards and norms of what is beautiful or attractive mutate/shift. The pattern of sexual selection may radically shift. Identity supplementation through use of identity accessory add-ons. From a conversation with Jennie: sexual selection becomes more important the more mobile a society becomes after clan, family, and community barriers have broken down. Are individuals’ genetic compatibility discovered/mediated through exchange of chemical pheromone messages? Compatibility in marriage means not “having to work to sustain the marriage.” Maturity is reached earlier in less complex/ advanced societies and in these societies individual personality differences cannot be developed as freely or idiosyncratically as they can be in more advanced and affluent cultures. Our judgements of others, especially when articulated, are always prophecies of judgements that will come to be made of us. The only way to break the bond of Karma is to sufficiently disrupt the continuity of the self, say, through a humbling conversion experience. Interconvertibility of distinct phenomenological media. Is the notion of substance implied here? What bearing does topology have on the problems of substance? The process by which metaphors are chosen to represent, convey, enable the insight of a given poetic motion, and the manner in which words are chosen to articulate the metaphor (as well as what it represents). This process must be examined and observations concerning human impressionability, suggestibility would be brought to bear on our understanding of this metaphor-creation process. Also, the

El Greco fallacy must play an important role in this discussion. Brokers versus purveyors of ideas . . . Intersubjectivity of resonant structures/filters, c.f., triangle-square inversion, i.e., El Greco paradox. Death as a spiritual separation from God. So what would being deprived of the informing interaction of the individual and Divine souls be like? Chaotic and dreamlike? Would there be devolution of causality? What is it that we take for granted about our world which might easily have been different and which might fascinate, perplex and frighten beings from other planets or dimensions. Each person other than oneself comes from another dimension. Descartes’ seductive idea concerning the existence of God was the question epi=“whence comes the idea of God?,” if there is nothing to which this idea corresponds in reality? epi=

A critic is most vehemently critical when faced with those telltale earmarks of absent talent, which he exhibited in his own abandoned work. Because representation and description presupposes consciousness, the discovery of the explanation for consciousness will actually be an invention on the part of each individual person as he develops a new consciousness from a pre-existing one. We must distinguish between the problem of explaining the origin of the individual consciousness from the much broader problem of explaining the origin of consciousness as such. This distinction between consciousness and its various manifestations points up a breach between the dual categories, individual and collective, infrasubjective and intersubjective. C.f., Well A, on the impossibility of utilizing induction to develop intersubjective

laws of consciousness. New interpersonal languages are constructed through a collective, dialectical process in which no information is ever transmitted from one person to another. Are issues of currency, familiarity, dissemination, etc., really separate from those concerned with objective truth? The truth of the collective as constituted by a circular argument which is only persuasive to those who, as Kuhn says, “step into the circle.” The circle may only be complete after passing through multiple levels and/or contexts. Life and Mind are examples of things in themselves, although these are only known through their manifestations, which are always mere representations. Creation is the production of a rational order flowing out of an irrational ground. If the text has a kind of vital essence as though possessing a will (or mind of its own), then the deconstructive process can move forever along an infinite downward spiral. How is the Abyss any different from the place we now occupy? Both are infinitely deep. It is just that we use the metaphor of the imagery of a deep chasm or hole without realizing that the infinite depth thusly symbolized is only along a single determinate dimension. Where we are now is just as deep as any abyss, but itself contains many more dimensions for its infinite depth! But if the text is actually only a chimerical construct, then should there be an end in sight for its deconstruction? Philosophers had acquired a stock of metaphors which they had learned through imitation to put to use unreflectingly but in accordance with a number of tacitly established conventions. Deconstruction calls into question these borrowed metaphors and their conventions of application and so exposes the naked and indelicate backside of philosophy as mere opinion rhetorically expressed.

Binary oppositions spoken of in Derrida’s theory are transcended in the operation of quantum computers and of the mind itself. Rather than feeling alarmed and confused by mixed emotions and impulses, I interpret the phenomenon favorably as the intermittent crossing over to a set of distinctions cross-cutting the old – or I’m already past this point and am projection onto the old sets of dual categories some other set cutting across the old one.

Rather than dismissing truth as subjective, shall we say that it subsists at the level of the personal. But there is always an unpredictable reaction resulting from the push to application (of a given truth) to deeper levels of contact and interaction with alterity, both individual and collective. New truth is always revealed through a transformation, shifting of ground ( after the manner of paradigm shifts) through the influence, of suppressed concretion, i.e., that which we already possessed (this remark is particularly relevant in connection with attempts to “explain” consciousness) within a seamless whole (but inaccessible). But these awkward, unimportant details of concretion were not suppressed in a fashion as systematically as they burgeon forth in resurrected form! Behind the crumbling edifice of a paradigm in transition. And so something altogether new is gained by the erecting of paradigms, construction of theories, and their progressively deeper and more systematic application to that ground which originally gave birth to the currently reigning paradigm. The attempt to “explain consciousness” comes from a dissatisfaction of already being in possession of its (consciousness’) secret, in the participatory sense of will, and so from a desire to recreate consciousness within the realm of representation. But representation always involves a choice, which throws us back upon the faculty of the will. The attempt to find an innate representation of consciousness, apart from consciousness’ already being a representation

of itself, is a fundamentally misguided one. The arbitrary ground of metaphoricity and overdetermination of the physical world in relation to the “unreasonable effectiveness” of mathematics, logic, theoretical basic science, etc. The Hegelian Edifice of Postmodernism. A humorous deconstruction of Deconstruction in the spirit of Alan Sokal’s quantum gravity sociology paper. The Phenomenology of the Mysterious. The Necrophile. Astrology: the power of a great and ancient metaphor. What postmodernism is versus what postmodernism says about itself. It is one thing to draw metaphors from pre-existing contexts. It is quite another to create a new metaphorical ground – here is where the secret of the “arbitrariness of meaning” and of logocentrism is to be discovered. It is actually the arbitrariness of the act of preparing the new metaphorical ground that underlies the notion of “the arbitrariness of meaning.” This arbitrariness of new meanings is very much dependent upon the meaning of preestablished symbols being indeterminate in the dynamic sense of greater determination of the symbols along one direction can always be accompanied by a falling into the indeterminate along other directions, which can only be determined at a still later time. This kind of arbitrariness of meaning is closely related to Jacques Monod’s explanation for the arbitrariness of the meaning of the base pairs of the genetic code. In this situation, meaning is always by convolution with signals not already defined/given. The concept of operational modification versus the unconsciousness of automaticity has relevance here. Also the brute force connection between sensation and the “vibration of nerve fibers”. But isn’t the invention of a metaphor also at a deeper level to draw from an outside context? Is each individual consciousness itself an ultimate metaphor (meaning)? But mustn’t all the material for the metaphor of

self be drawn from the physical context of the body and its sensory faculties? Is sensation really perception, in part, because of its necessity of possessing modality? Suggestibility, impressionability, marketing, advertising, sociology of knowledge, connection of fundamental scientific research to military/industrial complex, intellectual theft of graduate student’s ideas, why students are initially lead to pursue the basic sciences, philosophy, etc., the desire to please the parent, the slavishness in the human soul (Fromm), “true believer” syndrome, conforming to ideals, images, etc. Platonism: there is a more true experience of what it is to be oneself than one is able to have at present. Postmodernism: My experience of being who I am is indeed God’s experience of being me. Epigram: Melody makes the mind suggestible for the Poet’s metaphor. Jesus as the son of Man and as the son of God. Did Satan have a good reason to rebel? Elohim as the word for a plural God. “Are ye not gods?” John the Baptist as the reincarnation of Elias (Elijah). Elijah never suffered physical death, but was assumed into heaven. “Tell nd them that it is “I am” who sent you.” Jesus as the 2 Adam. “All have fallen short of the Glory of God.” “Let there be light!” God spoke reality into existence. “In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God. . . “ In the beginning the world was formless and void. God’s spirit moved upon the waters of “the Deep.” Chaos is the father of Kronos, c.f., the relationship between /\E and temporality. The fate of the soul is open-ended, but the spirit must always return to the Father whom made it. Although the yin and yang symbol is interpreted as a liberating symbol, it actually represents how duality is itself a manifestation of “closedness.” Local causal relationships mediated by nonlocal causal correlations.

So long as a prophecy is not forgotten, it is destined to be “proven true,” but rarely in a manner or along the lines anticipated. What is the relationship foreknowledge/omniscience?

between

prayer,

free

will,

Divine

Degeneracy overlapping projections with potential for extra dimensionality. Are the curled up dimensions of string theory related to quantum degeneracy? God puteth in their hearts, God will harden their hearts, etc. Is this unfair predestination of persons unto condemnation? Explain how it is not unfair, say, through applying Plato’s theory of forms to the concept of personal identity. We don’t realize our uniqueness because we are constantly surrounded by our fellows. How is the mystery of our own existence on this planet any less significant than that of aliens on other planets? Is personal identity a question of topology? Any arbitrary thought, word, or action back-reacts upon the person bringing it forth, c.f., “vibration of nerve fibers.” But the brain is here embedded in an open-ended context and so there can be no reversibility, reproducibility, symmetry, causality, etc. of this back-reaction, but all of these general features are projections, including the appearance of a determinate self. Language as epiphenomenon with powers, e.g., astrology, tarot reading, etc. Any symbolic system which is both self-consistent and of sufficient complexity, relative to the existing paradigms, will encounter its own projections “within nature.”

Truth which is transcendental in the sense that we cannot make it objective because we are too involved with it versus remote, indifferent platonic truth, i.e., on way flow of information. Dialogical versus universal truth. Truth as the dialogue of disputing Muses. The Sophists of ancient Greece were noted for being able to make the worse side of an argument appear to be the better one. Of this they were exceedingly proud. One indeterminate ground connects to another through elaboration and development of an abstract symbolic system which, when sufficiently fleshed out back-reacts upon the ground from which it was originally abstracted via the finest details originally suppressed in order to form the foundational abstract categories of the formal, symbolic system. Forms derived from indeterminate ground destabilizes it. Poetic expressions bypass the discursive, analytical mind which was filtered out via an evolution of the complexity and tight cohesion of the filtered structures. Interaction of distinct spectra of nonlocally connected quantum energy fluctuations to produce locally connected structures of superpositions. Any sufficiently knowledgeable probing of the matrix of physical law would reveal the truth about reality as simulation/representation. The same situation would obtain from an individual’s skillful probing of his own gray matter with an electrode.

Nucleation of context as “reverse” of contextual determination. Paradox of temporality in cellular automata theory. Time dilation points to the existence of conservation laws, e.g., energy, information, etc. How is correlation inferior to causality as a scientific explanation of physical processes? Coordination and interaction of distinct temporalities prespatially to produce spatiality, i.e., forms and their dynamic interplay and transformation.

Triggering nature’s internal programs, themselves operating by magic, but the procedures by which they are activated and controlled are objective and scientifically describable or knowable. Dynamics versus kinematics of initial and boundary conditions. I wrote the bibliography prior to first drafting the book. Fluctuation spectra as individual minds. Temporality as the realm of form and metaphor. Metaphor as the medium of communication. Different conscious motives and reasons pertaining to the seeming requirements of circumstance (expedience) but which have an underlying unity in the psychological needs/drives within the individual. Molecular Biology: discovering the laws governing the enabling and control of implementation of “magical” genetic programs. The neural networks of “nonentities” connected to the cyber nexus, which will supplant the Internet in the future, will just be absorbed into the hardware of this vast network and provide execution/implementation for the purposes of other entities on this future network. What possible quantum-based litmus test exists for the presence of consciousness? Subconscious thought as thought that is enfolded or implicate (in Bohm’s sense) with respect to a particular current language or symbol system. The star trek myth is too pervasive and resonant to not influence radically the cultural and social evolution of the future. In the case of the Hans Moravec scenario, once all of the biological components of the person’s brain have been replaced with those made of silicon, there would then seem to be no natural or absolute limit to the functional expansion of the speed and memory capacity, say, of the silicon brain which is presently the implementation of the person’s individual consciousness. July 2011 Does the so-called decoherence limit act as a boundary between not only the quantum and classical worlds,

but also between conscious and subconscious domains of functioning of the human brain? June 2013 Or perhaps even between distinct consciousness’s due to “natural” partitions in the quantum vacuum spectral field, c.f., anthropic principle applied to the cosmological constant problem (any given observer can only measure the density of his vacuum and so his measured vacuum energy density is that required for an approximately “flat” global spacetime.)

control experiment reveals solvation-induced decoherence”, c.f., below: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19416881

“Quantum

“Solvation involves different types of intermolecular interactions: hydrogen bonding, ion-dipole, and dipole-dipole attractions or van der Waals forces. The hydrogen bonding, ion-dipole, and dipole-dipole interactions occur only in polar solvents. Ion-ion interactions occur only in ionic solvents. The solvation process will be thermodynamically favored only if the overall Gibbs energy of the solution is decreased, compared to the Gibbs energy of the separated solvent and solid (or gas or liquid). This means that the change in enthalpy minus the change in entropy (multiplied by the absolute temperature) is a negative value, or that the Gibbs free energy of the system decreases. The conductivity of a solution depends on the solvation of its ions. Hydration also affects electronic and vibrational properties of biomolecules.”

Knowledge of the future would have to be nonlocally encoded. Casting down Lucifer: when the stream tries to rise to the level of its source. Just as in the disintegration of the dream protagonist’s world when he identifies himself with the dreamer himself. Full consciousness results in the dissolution of form. Forms and their interplay is sustained by the energy difference between full consciousness and the Maya or dream consciousness. Making distinctions likened to blind groping. Using the faculty of reason to explain the origin of reason or explain away the author of reason. Can over determination simulate two-way determination between subjective and objective reality? Why do bad theories work?

Information has never entered the brain through the senses. “Tip of the tongue” phenomenon – accessing information without symbols. Is there no such thing as illusion – which cannot somehow later be revised /reinterpreted to be a reality? Replacing the brain, neuron by neuron, with quantum transistors, say, while the person remains conscious throughout the procedure, was proposed by Hans Moravek, in his book, entitled, Mind Children. Supposedly, by remaining conscious during the entire procedure of the substitution of quantum computer for neural biological components permits maintenance of the person’s thread of personal identity, say, through his conscious maintenance of nonlocally connected correlations of his quantum brain states. Of course, these nonlocal connections could not be maintained through any causal process, i.e., could not be maintained mechanically, e.g., though application of some kind of computer program or formally computable procedure. Certainly such a transformation of a person’s brain from biological to inorganic could not be effected entirely “from outside,” i.e., while the person is asleep, anaesthetized, or otherwise unconscious. To Searle, robots cannot be conscious, just as simulated thunderstorms can never make anyone wet.” Consider the possibility that everything is simulation. Is this a meaningful or coherent possibility? What could it possibly be like for “everything” to be a simulation, as opposed to “real?” Self-plagiarizing as maintaining the façade of soul presence. Social modes of interaction as mutual tuning of n + 1 overdetermined, degenerate interpretative/associative networks. Eigenstate of the unbound vacuum is a kind of “quantum mechanical metaphor;” without being bound, the vacuum can possess no determinate modes. The desire to be God manifests itself in the desire to assume the role of the Other. Otherness in “ is always greener”

phenomenon. Romanticizing the “coziness” of the small existence and confusing a desire to visit with a desire to live in a place/situation. Otherness may represent the ultimate forgetfulness of the Self. Transcendence as desire to escape the bondage of the Self. Escape from the persona versus escape from the Self.

The endeavor of writing as “having something to say” is perhaps pursued by the novice, would-be, or dilettante writer in that spirit of faith as exhibited in such children’s stories as The Velveteen Rabbit and Pinocchio. The endeavor starts out unclear, misguided, with more desire to write than important or original subject matter to write about, but gradually, with enormous persistence in the face of grave self-doubt, one’s writing comes into being. The creature is our earthbound self, fashioned by chance and competition for survival. This part of one’s being certainly possesses no eternal aspect and must go down to ruin with the death and decay of the body. And one cannot think of any good reason why this part of the self is deserving of anything more than a brief play upon this Earth. The creature possesses false transcendence. Quantum physics says, “there’s an ordinary world out there!” Karmic asymmetry: give versus receive and lose versus take.

Loans and Grants: Mathew Leskow: 1-877-askleskow or 1-877-2755375

Karen Monteleone

phone: 504-345-1583 email: Kwmst9+pitt.edu

The Bible is particularly vulnerable as a text to deconstructive interpretations, especially in terms of a center/periphery inversion type of interpretation. And this seems intentionally so due to the density metaphor such as irony, parable, ambiguity and the presence of widely interspersed cryptic verses which threaten to subvert any casual, prima facie reading of this text. Gnosticism represents an ancient example of a deconstructive reading of the Bible. Individual freedom is always enabled and facilitated within some social – technological structuring which at the same time necessarily places constraints upon the unrecognized modes of individual acting and being which are idiosyncratic with respect to this structure. At the same time new modes of defining the self are engendered which are largely unforeseen prior to the advent of the new technological infrastructure. Quaint: an artifact of an engendering context no longer in force. The common phrase, “anything is possible” is to be understood as, not that any possible form already exists (or subsists) within some Platonic realm, merely waiting to be uncovered, but that the unindividuated ground can be made to manifest any form which can at first be imagined either individually or collectively. Epigenesis versus preformation. An intellectual groupie, a mockingbird among intellectuals. A married mother of two whom is secretly a single mother of three. It is possible to have a determinate amount of data, but it is not possible to have a determinate amount of information. This distinction lies with the fact that data are artifacts of a closed system, while information, of an open system.

The death of the present moment is simultaneous with the birth of the next. It is this fact which leads us to speak of the stream of conscious experience. Because the flow of this “stream” is ineluctably forward, reversible operations or transformations taking place in the conscious brain, though necessary, perhaps, to the enabling of conscious experience, cannot of themselves be collectively sufficient to its positive production. An antiparticle can be consistently described as a particle travelling backwards in time. The process of the creation of virtual particle/antiparticle pairs is a reversible process, according to quantum mechanics. We might imagine more complex virtual structures, i.e., composite particles, such as simple molecules, being reversibly created out of the vacuum (along with their “anti-molecules”) in that they are immediately destroyed again (return to the quantum) within a exceedingly brief period of time specified by the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. Perhaps virtual bosons are exchanged between both real and virtual fermions in a completely indiscriminate fashion. August 1999

Of course, strictly speaking, this type of creation/annihilation is only possible if the virtual molecule/anti-molecule pair collectively constitute a spin zero “particle.” (It may be possible to understand “spin 0” as being spin about the particle’s local time axis and “spin 1” being spin about an axis oriented in some way in the 3-dimensional space to which the local time axis is orthogonal). Such tiny systems could be consistently and exhaustively described with quantum theory by some finite set of quantum numbers, being in this way indistinguishable from any other system defined by the same quantum numerical set. These quantum numbers, as such, index observables, which are conserved physical quantities. But we know that at some point reversibility is lost and this must take place when the structure can no longer be produced from out of the vacuum “in a single go,” but must

be “cobbled together” from a number of such vacuum-engendered particles which are to exist in some kind of bound structure maintained through exchanges of momentum between all of those particles (which emerged from the vacuum in a single step). This might well be due to there being no definable “anti-entity” with which the “entity” can annihilate so as to return the pair to the quantum vacuum from which they had originated. We may suppose that it is here that physical processes describable in terms of nonconserved quantities come into play. Also, it is here that some of the annihilation energy resulting from combination of an entity and its “pseudo-anti-entity” is thermalized, and this, even when the entity and anti-entity are each in a pure, unmixed quantum state to begin with. Such systems, possessing no anti-entity, would consequently possess irreversibility and hence a definable entropy. Is it at this point that the phenomena of inertia and gravitation emerge or become significant? Do irreversible structures participate in more than one distinct vacuum state? Or do they just possess some kind of independence from a single vacuum state, preventing the vacuum from “anticipating” an anti-structure? It is interesting to note that irreversibility creeps into those systems that cannot be maintained by the same processes by which they were originally engendered. It is at this very same stage where physical processes within the system are no longer directly, but only indirectly supported by quantum vacuum processes. Does this constitute a criterion for what are novel structures supported by the vacuum energy field, i.e., structures which are truly emergent with respect to the vacuum supporting their subsistence? We do not expect nonlocal energy distributions to possess inertia or to be sources of gravitational fields. Inertia and gravitation are phenomena based in the distribution and dynamics of the distribution of momentum and energy within four dimensional spacetime. An individual vacuum fluctuation possesses only an uncertain momentum energy which therefore possesses no determinate composition of momentum energy. This is based on the hypothesis, derived from statements of David Bohm in his work, Quantum Theory, that all causal relationships between the expectation values of physical quantities are constituted out of

correlations of fluctuations in the values of these physical quantities. In other words, it is only coherent networks of interrelated momentum energy fluctuations that exhibit the back-reaction of inertia, because it is only within such coherent fluctuation networks that The construction of “squeezed states” in which the momentum uncertainty along a particular axis is decreased at the expense of increases in this uncertainty along other orthogonal axes supplies tangible proof that the spacetime components in quantum mechanical momentum-energy uncertainty form with one another a conserved four vector. If this is true, then it should be possible to construct a squeezed state in which the energy uncertainty of a system is increased due the construction of squeezed states in which a component of the 3momentum uncertainty is decreased. Through a Lorenz transformation the expectation values of all components of 3-momentum can be adjusted to zero so that the quantum uncertainties in the components of 3-momentum are wholly constituted by the respective momentum fluctuation terms. The question arises as to whether the timelike component of the 4-momentum can likewise be “transformed away” through such a simple operation as a Lorenz transformation? In the absence of accelerated motion or gravitational fields, the velocity of light is a universal constant. To transform away all of a mass’ timelike momentum would require that one utilize a frame of reference which is itself moving at the speed of light within some 3-hypersurface. There is a kind of symmetry between the spacelike and timelike components of an object’s momentum: no component of a massive object’s spacelike velocity may reach the speed of light and, the object’s timelike velocity can never reach zero. Now from previous discussion we are aware that no massive body actually possesses a timelike momentum such that its velocity through time is actually 100% of the speed of light (in vacuum). The symmetry underlying momentum-energy would be broken, if we allowed what is

permitted in free space, namely a Lorenz transformation wherein an object is given a component of 3-velocity which, though still less than the velocity of light in free space, is nonetheless greater than the timelike velocity of the object. The structure of spacetime within the 3hypersurface surrounding the object must have been altered so as to prevent the acceleration of an object to velocities within this part of the hypersurface which are greater than the timelike velocity of co-located objects at rest relative to the chosen coordinate system. The appearance of tidal forces responsible for the initial acceleration of objects released in a gravitational field is easily explained in terms of conservation of four momentum in conjunction with the spatially varying local velocity of light. A hollow sphere filled with electromagnetic radiation, i.e., photons, possesses an additional mass equal to the total energy of the photons divided by the speed of light squared, solely due to the impulsive forces and accelerations experienced by the photons as they bounce around inside the sphere. Of course, from the DeBroglie relation, p = h/, and the red shifting of photons moving in the direction of the sphere’s motion and the blue shifting of photons moving in the direction contrary to this motion, we can easily deduce that when the sphere is uniformly accelerated, there will result an increasing differential of impulsive momenta developing between the red and blue shifted photons. In other words, the instantaneous change in this momentum differential with respect to time will correspond to a force, F = d(/\p)/dt, which will oppose the acceleration of the photon-filled sphere. This force divided by the acceleration of the hollow sphere will, of course, yield the effective mass of the photons. Note that it is only because the photons change direction through interaction with (impacting against) the hollow sphere that the photons collectively acquire an effective mass. October 2011 This reminds us of our recurring suspicions that “inertial mass” is owing, at least in half part, to the internal binding forces of matter, which contribute to the “rigidity” of massive objects. Inertia is owing to an innate constriction in the bandwidth available for conveying the “instructions” for how

nonlocally connected quantum vacuum fields should change in response to the application of “impressed forces”. This bandwidth constriction is always in effect whenever an observer initiates a causal chain through freely willed action as such actions cannot be included in any global wavefunction description of the system to which the action is applied and is always absent when gravitational fields are not in play. This points up a likely intimate connection between the distinctions, consciousness vs. freely willed agency and inertia vs. gravitation.

Reversibility, gravitation, and inertia.

If information, as opposed to data, is always an artifact of some subjective context, then it is not by virtue of “informing” in this sense to which one owes one’s individuality and identity. All communication between minds is to engage in metaphor. This is a large part of the meaning of intersubjectivity. Metaphor is the importing of one literal context into another one in which the contents borrowed from the imported context can be seen in greater generality. This constitutes the primary mechanism underlying the amplification of meaning. Kant’s transcendental unity of apperception cannot be a mere representation on the part of a collective. The fundamental paradox of ultimate Reality is that its nature is neither that of a multiplicity nor that of a unity, unity and multiplicity being merely modes of its manifestation. The underlying process by which the indeterminate determines itself through the manifesting of form cannot itself be determined objectively, but only retroactively as part of a still later act of determination.

Conservation laws do not necessarily interfere with the act of informing of physical processes they govern, provided that a critical synchronization of the changes in the components relative to one another which together constitute the conserved quantity. The reference frame in which the relative changes in the components are synchronized in the exactly correct manner so as to maintain conservation, must be unique. The dynamical of the brain’s functioning is not to be sought within the brain itself but in the modulation of the brain’s embedding contextual medium in its self-interaction. Local interactions of neurons in the brain determine alterations to the boundary conditions to the nonlocally-connected vacuum field with which neurons and neuron modules are interacting. Those who are disillusioned frequently seek to feed off the naivete of those who remain carefree. Individualism will become more truly expressed, as the social/cultural support for its expression will be within the cyberculture community. Individualism will no longer be so obviously tied to conformity to local groups. An individualist will not appear to possess any visible means of social support and all of his significant social activities will be in the form of retreats, outing, planned hang-outs with other individuals met and courted, if you will, entirely within online communities. Rise of the “isolated” counter-culturalist. Goods and services will also no longer be purchased at locally available shops and stores, as these local facilities will only cater to the mainstream local community. For those who still live and socialize within their immediate environ, the Internet will continue to be seen/used merely as a school, work tool and entertainment medium mostly geared for use by younger household members. A shift will take place from being a member of one’s local community

and anonymous online to just the reverse of this, namely, to being a member of one or many different online communities and an anonymous dweller within a largely unknown local community. The new, cyber technology will engender new social and cultural entities and relations, enable novel economic and political structures while at the same time generating many new legal, social, ethical, and logistical problems that will necessitate the creation of new institutions not yet imagined. The ego is the spacetime counterpart to the Self, itself lying beyond space and time. The ego is forever banned from insight into the socalled mechanism by which it was constituted and through which it is sustained within existence. Only a mind which transcends ego can possibly grasp the means by which the ego is constituted. The most which can be reasonably referred to by the label, “nothing” , is quite literally that from which phenomenal things are manifested generally in a moment in which no manifestations are present, that is, in which no phenomena are given. This ground of phenomenal manifestation is nothing other then what the Hindus or other mystics have traditionally referred to as “pure consciousness”, i.e., “consciousness without an object.” Somewhat paradoxically, to intend by the term, “nothing” a literally absolute absence or nothingness is to take this abstraction and to “reify” it! The function of all functions cannot itself be the argument of any function that it comprises. So does this imply that the function of all functions is not itself a determinate function. The token-type distinction does not apply to individual persons in the sense that each individual consciousness cannot be a token of some general type, which we might refer to as consciousness per se, or as such. This is because consciousness is presupposed by the understanding (in the Kantian sense) and the understanding is

presupposed by application of the “categories”. This is all to say that the process by which abstract categories are brought into being, generally speaking, which is thought or thinking, cannot possess consciousness (as a general concept) as one of its objects of thought. This is to say, moreover, that there is no category of consciousness as such. This seems to imply that presumably distinct individual consciousnesses are not each particular instantiations of consciousness in general. So what then makes them each and all exemplars of consciousness unless they be one by partaking of the very same substance. But then what if the substance of each individual consciousness is distinct and yet not an instantiation of consciousness as such (there being no such general category)? Mind transcends a state description. This is because it involves the unity of an indeterminate which is inherently paradoxical. Because temporality requires an open system, spacetime can only be a local approximation and can possess no objective existence. For spacetime to possess an objective existence, it would have to be an object among other objects within itself. This notion is certainly nonsensical. There can be no consistent and complete phenomenological description of mind since mind is presupposed by all phenomena. As far as a “nonphenomenological” description of mind is concerned, it is hard to conceive of phenomena being reducible to something simpler or prephenomenal. Apparently, phenomena are abstractions which are “reducible” to processes more complex than themselves. Still less would it be conceivable how phenomena are a manifestation of a realm more subtle and more complex than one which could be given a phenomenological description. The entertaining of so-called clear and distinct ideas is always the shortcircuiting of a process that was at that moment still ongoing. It is as though thinking is always the caching in fleeting glimpses of something

larger and more complex than that to which it is expediently adapted. But we cannot justly term these “fleeting glimpses” partial thoughts unless we are secretly supposing that there might exist some grander insight (such as might have been entertained by some more brilliant and godlike incarnation of oneself) a small portion of which protruded into one’s mental space, too small to accommodate the whole. But thought only exists by remaining connected to the dynamic imaginative ground from which it is conceived, this ground being itself open-ended. So thought only becomes determinate through its adaptation to an environment, through its being implemented. Determination is the result of the context back-reacting upon the interacting kernel. So nothing in itself as a finished “thing” can be an actual complete determination. There can only be complete determination with respect to a dynamical category, perhaps, which is no more determinate than that category. There is on this view no such thing as pure thought possessing no object or intention. For to the extent that thought loses grasp of its object, to this extent does it evaporate into the void of mindlessness. Endless activity is understandable because of the transcendence of all possible unity combined with the motive towards unity. This reminds us of the necessary connection between energy uncertainty and temporality. The holographic model or paradigm has dominated our recent understanding of how the mind functions. One view informed by this paradigm is that if a thought is vague, it is merely because it has not yet been connected to its proper context. The way this is done is presumably to remove from it all extraneous context – to filter out all other thoughts with which it is confounded. This is the idea of thought as pure insight or perception. But are the confounding, noisy thoughts themselves not also pure – just themselves confounded with other “noisy thoughts.” Why does this notion of having thoughts as stemming from a mechanism of pure filtering not have a chance of explaining anything of importance about the functioning of thought? And what makes the difference between noise and signal, in this case, if not merely the

intention of the thinker?! Consciousness as a phenomenon associated with the continual and continuous updating of the brain’s memory links. Consciousness may rather be the cause and not the effect of this process, probably subneural, which dynamically staves off what web designers commonly refer to as “link rot”. It is common for specialists such as psychologists, anesthesiologists, and even certain members of the recreational drug culture, as well as some mystics and philosophers, to refer to the possibility or existence of not merely altered, but decreased/increased levels of individual consciousness. The question arises for some philosophers of mind whether any consistent and literal meaning may be applied to notions of any kind of shift in conscious state, if this state is considered not as a representation within consciousness – for a shift of this type would only be a shift in consciousness in a metaphorical or more particularly, elliptical sense – but as somehow a shift in consciousness as a whole, that is, as a “global shift in consciousness. Hypothesis: when  is in any eigenstate of the Hamiltonian, a superposition state of  with respect to purely time-varying eigenfunctions fully accounts for the uncertainty in the lifetime. I was just trying to say that, (x,t) = (0)(x) x exp(iwt) for  whenever  is in an eigenstate of H. A Theory of Everything would be able to determine the true Hamiltonian, H, for any system, including for “the whole Universe”. Such a theory would render any energy fluctuation term in H, H(fluc), a mere phenomenological artifact of our previous ignorance of the correct refinement of quantum theory, A “TDE” would convert the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle into a purely epistemological principle. Such a system would possess no fundamental fluctuations because it would

possess no indeterminate “outside” with which it could be in the process of dynamically exchanging energy. In such a situation, the “power input” to the Universe as a whole would be identically 0. It is hard to conceive of how anything could ever happen within such a “zero power input” device. In short, It is hard to conceive how a Universe with zero power input could be rightfully said to possess any real temporality, beside endlessly repeating patterns of interference between a closed set of time-independent eigenfunctions. Conscious mental “states” must be functions of the temporal evolution of the brain and cannot be merely functions of the brain’s state-quantum or classical. Since the temporal evolution of the brain as a quantum mechanical system is dependent upon at least a small energy uncertainty based, in turn, upon spontaneous energy fluctuations in the vacuum, it follows that the brain cannot be captured in a closed system description. And on account of the associated time uncertainty of the uncertain energy with which the brain interacts, vacuum energy fluctuations originating at “different times” are interacting. But here the time order of events cannot be established according to the methods set forth by Einstein because these methods involve the use of light beams for the measurement of space and time displacements, and the fluctuations separated by time intervals less than the time uncertainty of the system cannot possibly be measured in this manner. This is because the time uncertainty is defined in terms of an energy uncertainty composed of vacuum energy fluctuations which may be nonlocally connected and may be considered to be simultaneous with respect to any conventional method for the measurement of time intervals. Suppose that time order is generally underpinned by such “instantaneous” nonlocal interactions. This might guarantee their simultaneity, each with respect to the other. No time measurement based upon causal mechanisms could possibly establish that one or another of the vacuum energy fluctuations contributing to the system energy uncertainty was prior in time to the other. Similarly, system momentum uncertainty is mediated via the collective action of myriad vacuum momentum fluctuations which

themselves establish the quantum positional uncertainty within the system. Might we suppose that quantum energy fluctuations may occupy the same time but not the same spatial location, while similar momentum fluctuations may occupy the same spatial location, but may not be simultaneous with one another? For if two given momentum fluctuations were nearly mutually simultaneous, this would imply the existence of a two component quantum system itself possessing maximal energy uncertainty (at the expense of the energy of the two fluctuations themselves)? Perhaps a parallel argument could be posed against two energy fluctuations occupying the same spatial location: momentum uncertainty would be maximized at the expense of the momentum of the two fluctuations? There must be other modes of determination besides the historical as history itself is never determined with finality. There can be no final interpretation of the meaning of human existence. Reversibility is implied by the independence of the probabilities of eigenvalues which is in turn due to orthonormality of eigenfunctions. Is there any dependence of boundary conditions on the energy in this type of idealized system? Metaphor: consciousness as “viewfinder”. Logocentrism – viewfinder consciousness. Coming into being and passing away are two different phenomenal streams. Figure/ground structure implies that there is not literal view finding function to mind – no searchlight metaphor works here. The operation of metaphor is metaphor. Consciousness does not exist in any of the superposed parallel worlds predicted by Hugh Everett’s interpretation of the quantum measurement problem. This is because consciousness is probably comprised by the interaction of these otherwise “parallel” worlds. It is interesting to note that each of the worlds thusly superposed to for an Everett-style

superposition is itself a classical world. Clearly intentionality cannot be possessed by any “thing”. The polyemanationist doctrine may be arrived at through the positing of merely two simple postulates. One, reality is too complex to be objectively unified, and two, personal identity, in the broadest sense of individual consciousness, is an unanalyzable, irreducible concept. These two postulates are not really so independent of one another, and it may be possible to subsume them under a single, broader one. If, along with Kant, we consider the objective to be merely that which can be a proper object of knowledge, then the postulate of the irreducibility of individual consciousness means that a unified consciousness, or at least an underlying unity to all individual consciousness qua consciousness, is not possible so that there can be no object of knowledge for such a universal consciousness. This is all to say that the postulate of the irreducibility of personal consciousness implies, a la Kant, that no unified object of knowledge exists, and that, therefore, reality itself is not unified. By tying the cash value of concepts to possible or potential experience, the concept of unity (of reality) has not cash value if there is not hypothetical universal consciousness which can have reality itself (as a whole) as an object of its knowledge. To wit, if there is not any objective unity of consciousness so that individual consciousnesses are reducible/analyzable, then no “God’s eye view” of reality is possible. Given the omniscience of God, this would imply a non-unified reality. In this case, the cash value of the concept of objectivity is that less restrictive concept of intersubjectivity. But as one suspects, something’s cash value does not necessarily exhaust that thing’s value in other respects. The subjective becomes ontologically prior to the intersubjective, itself an ongoing construct from the endless negotiation between subjectivity’s. It is here that we see that perhaps it also follows that a less than unified objective reality in turn implies the irreducibility of personal identity ( in the sense of individual consciousness). But perhaps only within the scope of Kant’s Transcendental Idealism are our

two postulates truly interdefinable. September 2011 By definition, or so it appears, the subjective and the intersubjective are disjoint categories. However, the problem referred to elsewhere concerning one, the unity of consciousness and two, the possibility of a “concept of consciousness” as a general category, i.e., of some most general property of experience suggests that these two categories are not really disjoint. And this is because, in the absence of a general concept of consciousness, which unifies all exemplars of consciousness, both actual and merely possible, the intersubjective falls short, perhaps considerably, of the scope of what we term “objective”. The objective on our view transcends the intersubjective, i.e., all that which individual minds could possibly agree upon among themselves while avoiding contradiction. If the requirement is that this conventional agreement must be in theoretical terms, then perhaps there is some application here of Gödel’s Incompleteness Theorem or some generalization thereof. The sticking point underlying these speculations is that notion of the incorrigibility of subjective conscious experience. If the individual’s consciousness is never actually experienced by him as an individual subjective experience, for example, is never noticed by him because it is always present (and so can never be contrasted with the case of its being absent, that is during unconsciousness of which one has no experience, and by definition), then he has no concept of consciousness and is not in a position to form such a concept. This is somewhat along the lines of Hume’s complaint that he could never observe his self, but only various particular experiences of his presumptive self. So perhaps there can only be a concept of consciousness if my individual consciousness is actually an objective feature of all of my wakeful and self-aware experiences. September

2013

http://www.dissertationtopic.net/doc/471955 ""Concept of consciousness" in the above and other particular senses and acceptations of the phrase are mere metaphors. To form a bona fide general concept of something requires abstraction from multiple instances or exemplars. Since each mind only knows its own subjective consciousness, there is only a single instance on which to draw. So the individual doesn't

possess a concept of consciousness except in the form of an ineffable intuition for which there is no rational vouchsafe. (The "intersubjective subjective" is a contradiction in terms) The mystery here is: how is the degeneracy split, i.e., that of the ontological/epistemological?" Or recast this way: how is the degeneracy split, namely that of consciousness being a one or of consciousness being a many? Experientially, these two cases are indistinguishable in light of subjective consciousness’ “incorrigibility principle” or Bishop Berkeley’s Esse est Percipi (to be is to be perceived) principle. A concept or category of consciousness is forever out of reach of both the individual and the collective – out of the reach of the individual because he can only know consciousness from his own case, although there must be multiple instances of a class of entity available from which to abstract in order to form a concept of category, out of the reach of the collective since the notion of intersubjective subjectivity is a contradiction in terms. Common sense tells us that other minds indeed exist, equal and alongside our own within a world held in common. And since so such concept can be logically constructed or insightfully intuited, the belief that each individual consciousness, that of oneself and one’s peers, for example follows rationally from the belief that each individual consciousness is an instantiation of some transcendental concept of consciousness. The situation is rather analogous to the case where a person is only able to visually experience but a single color, say red, which is the philosopher of mind’s favorite. Could such a person form a general concept of color when he is only able to work from a single sample? Only a person capable of experiencing multiple colors could possess a concept of color. Merely the potential for making an observation is enough to collapse the wavefunction, but only because observers are actually possible within such a universe in which wavefunctions “live”. This is to sharpen the Anthropic Cosmological Principle to its finest cutting edge. “It is sometimes supposed, by those who do allow that consciousness is a reality not caught by any of the doctrines we have considered, that none the less nothing enlightening can be said of it. It is a kind of given, something of which we do have

direct acquaintance, but it is impossible to give any analysis of it. It is sometimes supposed, more extremely, that direct acquaintance or introspection is so uncertain or fallible that not merely no analysis but nothing of value can be got by means of it. We are in possession of no concept of consciousness at all”, c.f., Mind and Brain, A Theory of Determinism (1988), Honderich. http://books.google.com/books?id=FO4jhilLP5kC HYPERLINK "http://books.google.com/books? id=FO4jhilLP5kC&pg=PA77&dq= %22no+concept+of+consciousness %22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=3MdGUsGrD8ji2gWr_4GYCw&ved=0C C0Q6AEwAA"& HYPERLINK "http://books.google.com/books? id=FO4jhilLP5kC&pg=PA77&dq= %22no+concept+of+consciousness %22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=3MdGUsGrD8ji2gWr_4GYCw&ved=0C C0Q6AEwAA"pg=PA77 HYPERLINK "http://books.google.com/books? id=FO4jhilLP5kC&pg=PA77&dq= %22no+concept+of+consciousness %22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=3MdGUsGrD8ji2gWr_4GYCw&ved=0C C0Q6AEwAA"& HYPERLINK "http://books.google.com/books? id=FO4jhilLP5kC&pg=PA77&dq= %22no+concept+of+consciousness %22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=3MdGUsGrD8ji2gWr_4GYCw&ved=0C C0Q6AEwAA"dq=%22no+concept+of+consciousness%22 HYPERLINK "http://books.google.com/books? id=FO4jhilLP5kC&pg=PA77&dq= %22no+concept+of+consciousness %22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=3MdGUsGrD8ji2gWr_4GYCw&ved=0C C0Q6AEwAA"& HYPERLINK "http://books.google.com/books? id=FO4jhilLP5kC&pg=PA77&dq= %22no+concept+of+consciousness %22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=3MdGUsGrD8ji2gWr_4GYCw&ved=0C C0Q6AEwAA"hl=en HYPERLINK "http://books.google.com/books?

id=FO4jhilLP5kC&pg=PA77&dq= %22no+concept+of+consciousness %22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=3MdGUsGrD8ji2gWr_4GYCw&ved=0C C0Q6AEwAA"& HYPERLINK "http://books.google.com/books? id=FO4jhilLP5kC&pg=PA77&dq= %22no+concept+of+consciousness %22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=3MdGUsGrD8ji2gWr_4GYCw&ved=0C C0Q6AEwAA"sa=X HYPERLINK "http://books.google.com/books? id=FO4jhilLP5kC&pg=PA77&dq= %22no+concept+of+consciousness %22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=3MdGUsGrD8ji2gWr_4GYCw&ved=0C C0Q6AEwAA"& HYPERLINK "http://books.google.com/books? id=FO4jhilLP5kC&pg=PA77&dq= %22no+concept+of+consciousness %22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=3MdGUsGrD8ji2gWr_4GYCw&ved=0C C0Q6AEwAA"ei=3Md HYPERLINK "http://books.google.com/books? id=FO4jhilLP5kC&pg=PA77&dq= %22no+concept+of+consciousness %22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=3MdGUsGrD8ji2gWr_4GYCw&ved=0C C0Q6AEwAA"GUsGrD8ji2gWr_4GYCw HYPERLINK "http://books.google.com/books? id=FO4jhilLP5kC&pg=PA77&dq= %22no+concept+of+consciousness %22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=3MdGUsGrD8ji2gWr_4GYCw&ved=0C C0Q6AEwAA"& HYPERLINK "http://books.google.com/books? id=FO4jhilLP5kC&pg=PA77&dq= %22no+concept+of+consciousness %22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=3MdGUsGrD8ji2gWr_4GYCw&ved=0C C0Q6AEwAA"ved=0CC0Q6AEwAA#v=onepage HYPERLINK "http://books.google.com/books? id=FO4jhilLP5kC&pg=PA77&dq= %22no+concept+of+consciousness %22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=3MdGUsGrD8ji2gWr_4GYCw&ved=0C

C0Q6AEwAA"& HYPERLINK "http://books.google.com/books? id=FO4jhilLP5kC&pg=PA77&dq= %22no+concept+of+consciousness %22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=3MdGUsGrD8ji2gWr_4GYCw&ved=0C C0Q6AEwAA"q=%22no%20concept%20of%20consciousness %22 HYPERLINK "http://books.google.com/books? id=FO4jhilLP5kC&pg=PA77&dq= %22no+concept+of+consciousness %22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=3MdGUsGrD8ji2gWr_4GYCw&ved=0C C0Q6AEwAA"& HYPERLINK "http://books.google.com/books? id=FO4jhilLP5kC&pg=PA77&dq= %22no+concept+of+consciousness %22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=3MdGUsGrD8ji2gWr_4GYCw&ved=0C C0Q6AEwAA"f=false Consciousness exists, but we can form no concept of it as the intersubjective cannot grasp it. Consequently, objectivity transcends intersubjectivity. Although each being participating in the negotiated objectivity of spatiotemporal reality possesses infinite resources, this objective realm nevertheless transcends each being’s individual capacity for apprehending this open-ended totality. The negotiated objective realm constitutes a higher order of infinity or limitlessness/indeterminacy than that of any individual infinite being. This negotiated, objective (intersubjective) realm, though not an object of knowledge for any possible consciousness, is nevertheless dynamically unified through the continued mutual free participation. Each individual infinite being has given up the ground of its identical being and joined itself, in reduced finite form, to the new indeterminate ground of being which collectively negotiated and maintained. It is interesting that the intersubjective aspects of the ego are not merely

those which are shared by all egos as such. This points up the distinction between the representational and participatory paradigms of what constitutes knowledge. A pure representation somehow succeeds in corresponding with its object without, as it were, touching it. Correspondences are in this way pure, absolute, and context-free. 2010 But if representation is an act of reference such that a closed system of representation is necessarily ruled out, that is an unlimited grounding context is required by any such act, then . . . Someone who has only ever “seen red” cannot appreciate “red” the way someone who can perceive the entire visible spectrum. If Berkeley’s principle of esse est percipi applies to the nature of consciousness such that my individual consciousness is the most general property or quality of my subjective experience, then it follows that an experience in “my consciousness” only serves as mine if the experience is structured by the neural functioning of my brain. This brings up the problem of how we determine what constitutes my brain, my experience, my consciousness. Even though every individual may have the same consciousness this does not mean that the experience of other individuals could be known to me. July 2011 So if there is in some sense a of consciousness analogous to the visible light spectrum, then a being capable of experiencing the consciousness of many different (including “hypothetical”) persons would be able to have a fully appreciation of “what it’s like” to be me than indeed I can. This would be a case of the medium of experience of one person being at once the subject of experience for another. This points up the possibility of a medium within a medium of experience. Here “raw feels” is not a simple or well formulated notion, nor is “what it feels like to be an x”, since there is the possibility of w, y, z, etc. having their own experience of x-ness. Would distinct individual consciousnesses given the implied metaphysics of mind here be just different dynamic modes of functioning of a single, unitary consciousness? How are forms supposed to inhere in their respective substances if indeed there is a sharp or categorical division between form and substance as such?

It is only through collective action of independent agents that Reality is unified. This is to say that reality is not objectively unified in any absolute way which has a representations, but reality is unified by virtue of the brute fact of its having a means of origination and sustenance. Reality can only “exist” if it is a product, is embedded within a context, that is, if a transcendent realm is given. There is no meaning or sense to the would be concept, “unity of the transcendent”. This is because transcendence implies, or presupposes, a loss, lack, or nonapplicability of individuality and individuation. In other words, the transcendent is not one nor is it a finite number. There is no reference without participation with a context. And this is why no interpretation can ever be final or absolute, but is always openended and on-going. When one contemplates the infinity of infinite beings which collectively constitute objective reality as intersubjectivity and at once realizes that the concept of individuality is meaningless outside of spatiotemporality, it is at this moment that one glimpses God. This God transcends identity, that is, the duality of existence versus nonexistence, c.f., September 2011 Nozick’s Philosophical Investigations, footnote, p. 125: “I am told by Sidney Morgenbesser that in a novel by Peter DeVries a minister is asked by a troubled parishioner whether God exists, and replies “God is so perfect he doesn’t need to exist”. One cannot relate anecdotes of Morgenbesser’s wit without mentioning the following classic: during an invited talk at a lecture hall of students on the philosophy of language at Columbia University in the 1950's, Oxford Don, J. L. Austin noted importantly that, "while a double negative may function as a positive and does so in many different languages, never have I in my lengthy career of intensive study of the world's languages, noted or heard cited a single instance of a double positive used as a negative." From the back of the lecture hall, piped up a nasally young Sydney Morgenbesser, muttering dismissively in his characteristic Borscht Belt accent . . ''Yeah, yeah.''

Much metaphysical confusion stems from naively treating the concepts of Being and Existence interchangeably. The concept of Being is the only concept which cannot be intersubjectively defined; it is not negotiated. We see that there is a reality beyond agreement between persons. The critics of logocentrism try to assert that Man has no concept of Being. But can such an assertion be a coherent one? Is the most that can be asserted about, attributed to, Being merely Existence? Are we to understand by Being a context-free existent? We may say that Being descends and Existence rises. The conscious ego is the artifact of their meeting. The conspiracy of the temporal and the Eternal is Man. The representations of the collective constrains the will of the individual. Each simultaneously delimits and extends the reach of the other. Unique entities, if they can be compared to one another at all, this can only be done through analogy. This reminds us of Aristotle’s comment that the unity of Being is analogical. So if an entity possesses Being, it is only through what is truly unique, that is to say, irreducible and irreproducible, not to mention irreversible, which characterizes the entity. This is akin to our earlier assertion that an entity’s existence is but a metaphor, perhaps the broadest, for that entity’s Being. And so comparing two Beings is exhausted by a comparison of metaphors. But the type of metaphor with which we are concerned is peculiar in the sense that we do not know the original context from which the borrowing is taken in each case. October 2012

"We do not know who we are; we do not know what we are; we do not know where this is. It is the same for all of us. Mankind does not

know anything." There is a strong innate human tendency to think about time and duration, that is, temporality, through the use of a spatializing metaphor. When thinking of origins and origination, secretly and subconsciously it is supposed that all things which originate, even aboriginally, must have lain in wait, latent or hidden, somewhere in the immanent domain of creation, if only in a dispersed or distributed form, always having possessed the potential to converge and congeal, and this potential merely having patiently waited its turn to be enabled by the propitious trick of the play of conditions and circumstances, to make itself manifest. But manifestation is always connected with a “where” though originating lies with a “when” and it is the appearance of the ground of some novel event or thought which constitutes its arising ‘in Time”. The possible and the necessary are indeed one, it is merely that the possible is never absolutely given but is itself undergoing development and change. Were the necessary fixed by immutable laws of logic and nature the contingent would . . . . . . The vanishing, perspectivistic point and highest convergence of thinking is consciousness as an open, unbounded system of would-be relatedness. This consciousness possesses no finality, either in what it would intend or represent. The fact of the plurality of consciousness, rather than its possession of determinate and predetermined modes, is a transcendent given. April 2011

A commonly held notion by philosophers of mind, that is, of those who acknowledge the existence of consciousness, is that it is the structure of self-consciousness that makes for individual differences in consciousness and that prior to the development of a self/other concept and with it self-consciousness there is no individual identity uniquely associated with that consciousness, c.f., Sartre’s Being and Nothingness. The implication of this is that in its substance consciousness is universal though perhaps infinitely diverse in its admissible forms qua ego’s.

Concepts are only suggested to us through metaphors guiding thought’s exploration, and intuition is the insight into the connection whereby metaphors, only derivable from experience and its contingency, point to the givenness of concepts, seemingly prefiguring experience. Truth lies in the agreement amongst a plurality of transcendences. The imagery of dreams and the rhyme exhibited in the peculiar unfolding of dream events, is not trying to tell anything significant to the projective self that is participating in the dreamscape. For everything which takes place within dreams is either a manifest threat or a beckoning. To the immersed participant of the dream, everything is to be taken quite literally. Dreams, the substance of which is metaphor, in the hindsight of wakeful consciousness, are for the dream projection of the self, reactions to situations in media res, and constitute pure experience in which there is no distinction between thought, speech, intention and act. In the dream there is no metaphorical reality and a symbolic order is in it wholly absent. And it is for this reason that the realm of the dream is not stable and well-behaved and in which the merest arising notion violently ripples through its continuum. It is the out-crystallization of the various faculties of the mind that permits the existence of consciousness as the residuum of what is common to them all. So we see now that it only in that which the self takes to be literally at hand and happening that constitutes dreaming. @$To the extent that thought is not at once action does it possess reality and constitute freedom. Thought which does not disturb the conditions of its own bringing forth determines itself. Metaphor is characterized by what we might term “as thoughness”. @# But as-thoughness may posit itself without a prior context in terms of which a pre-existing order shall be exhibited within some altogether new context. For we are speaking here of an underlying aboriginal ordering

principle in accordance with which metaphor, typically manifesting itself as a borrowing and importation of structure, either informing or describing, a transpiring within an alternative context, but which does not essentially constitute a borrowing. Viral contamination may explain the token appearance of life at some particular place and time, but not its aboriginal emergence “as such”. Myth is an original and originating metaphor which exhibits the deeper order and drawing out its meaning through the personification and objectification of principles within a context enhancing the dynamics of their operation. All order, including that of the natural one, is institutional and conventional. Much of the perceived absolute value of an object, belief, practice, life style, etc., consists in the notable absence of any serious competitors. Due to the mobility, both virtual and real, of the individual, as well as that of the landscape of his local environment, valuation has become precarious and unstable. God’s mercy derives from the personal aspect of Deity. Divine justice from its impersonal aspect. Examples of the impersonal aspect, taken from biblical stories are the following: the passing over of Jewish households by the angel of death due to the simple presence of a manifest sign. Death of 1st born of every species, not just of human beings. Jesus’ perception of power draining from his being when the woman desirous of being healed, made contact with his garment. Unbelievers or lukewarm believers do not believe that a personal God could condemn any person to eternal damnation. Consider the punishment of succeeding generations for the transgressions of their forefathers. (Epigenetic changes have been observed to persist for approximately seven generations.) There are three modes of deity: the personal, impersonal, and that which mediates between the two. Jesus tried to reestablish the role of the mediator between these two otherwise irreconcilable aspects of the divine.

That life is composed of continual death and rebirth is established by simply observing the passage of time for the individual. When one is in temporality one is never identical with oneself. @$

In my relation to the other I possess four selves: my self, my idea of my self, the other’s idea of me, my concept of the other’s idea of me. But, of course, my concept of the other’s idea of myself is mediated by my concept of the self of the other, rather than his or her concept. So we see that my relation to the other is no simple, dyadic one. We normally think of impulses, thoughts, and emotions provoking and modulating the behavior which is the mode of their expression. But the acting out of various behaviors likewise will produce a number of internal, psychological states which otherwise would have provided such bodily action to take place as tokens of their expression. In some cases, these inner states, thusly provoked, are ancient, instinctual states which no longer spontaneously occur in modern humans. Ecstatic dance is a notable example of this. The manifestation of that which is unique, truly novel, does not fit at first into a pre-existing category, but may be adapted to fit later. Only mind is capable of engendering new forms. An entity possessing personhood is too complex to possess an identity. Identity is an attribute solely of abstract entities. And what is the meaning of an entity possessing identity as one of its attributes? If in an attempt to accelerate by mechanical means a perfectly spherical mass leads not to a change in the location of this body’s center of mass in the direction along which we would attempt to make it move, but instead, to a supefluid-like streaming of its composite material around the hand and between the fingers which together would urge it forward, then despite this action having lead to a redistribution of the body’s mass, no energy may be supposed to have been expended (is there a question of degeneracy here?) throughout the course of this operations.

Such a strange object may be said to possess not inertia. It is hopefully obvious from what has been considered thus far that, were it but for the absence of all internal binding forces within this “mass”, at least some small acceleration of the body’s center of mass would have been effected in the direction along which one’s hand was attempting to urge it. We note the absence, in the case considered above, of all compression forces in the direction of the body’s would-be acceleration. The oppositedirected tension for is likewise zero, as the matter distribution was still prior to our attempting to move it. Moreover, all shear forces within the mass were similarly zero. Now it is but a simple and reversible linear transformation of spacetime coordinates connecting the representation of a matter distribution as possessing pressure, energy density and stress (relating to the presence of shear forces within the body) to another representation of this distribution as one possessing only energy density and pressure but without any stress due to shear forces. In other words, locally at least, shear forces can always be transformed away through an appropriate choice of spacetime coordinates. But it is clear that a mere change in coordinate system will have no effect whatever upon any actual physics – this is merely a somewhat informal restatement of the principle of general relativity. So any mass distribution not possessing off-diagonal terms in its energy tensor in one system of coordinates, may be represented within some new coordinate, may be represented within some new coordinate system as having an energy tensor possessing such off-diagonal terms (stress terms) and owing to the existence of shear forces within the body. Now it is the binding forces within a body which are responsible for that body possessing forces of compression, tension, and shear. The question which faces us now is this: might a body possess an energy tensor with only a term with this being true for all possible transformations of the spacetime coordinates? Is there some component of the energy tensor which cannot be, locally at least, transformed away? Now a transformation of the spacetime coordinates can always be found which allows us to locally transform

away a body’s gravitational field. What are we to make of the Gibb’s phenomenon in the case of waves of the probability distribution of quantum states? Might we expect extremely counter-intuitive behavior by quantum systems at the spacetime boundaries of their system wavefunctions? There is no absolute existence. Things always exist by subsisting within some context in which they are embedded through being drawn from and sustained by that context. This is by virtue of original constitution and reconstitution. The advantage of being one’s own therapist is that counsel received from oneself do not engage the faculty of human suggestibility which the perhaps imposing authority of the therapist typically evokes. Objectivity possesses abstractness and conventionality. Nothing make us feel our peer so inferior as when we glimpse how unambitious are his fantasies. For quantum tunneling, /\x >= /\x(0) and/or (both?) /\E >= /\E(0).

Although it is a statement of the obvious, psychological states, or their contents, only become conscious when they cannot be contained within the unconscious mind, when they cannot be processed in terms of patters of impulses, or reducible concatenations of such patters already stored in local memory. Using a computing analogy, when programs are not available in memory of the stand-alone system, a metaprogram is activated which commences searching for the necessary codes out in the network to which the stand-alone terminal has now become connected. In other terms, when the local system does not resonate with a frequency transform of a set of external inputs, the resonant structure of the local system must be altered through being resonantly tuned. The system cannot, however, tune or synchronize itself; if it could have done this, it would have already possessed these resonances “on file” within itself (locally). So tuning of the resonant structure of the stand-alone system must be accomplished from outside itself through interaction with some larger, embedding, resonant energy field. As au=David Deutsch remarked in chapter 1 of his book, The Fabric of Reality, The deeper an explanation is, the more remote from immediate experience are the entities to which it must refer.” Consciousness is the deepest explanation to which we might turn in order to explain that phenomenon most remote from experience paradoxically, which is consciousness itself. But here we may be speaking of consciousness in two disparate senses. Not only is perception filtered so as to underscore recently acquired themes, but attention and memory are also selectively channeled in service to the themes now having the greatest currency. If the subconscious is merely one planning step ahead of the conscious mind, then the manner in which the goals and aims of the conscious mind are achieved will be modulated in such a way that these conscious aims are satisfied with unintended side consequences, forming with one another a coherent pattern, the meaning of which can perhaps be divined at a later time when one’s self knowledge has developed further. Who is this being within me, engaged in a constant clamor for my attention? The answer must be. . . it is I and only I.

But if there can be no finally completed work, if only in part, then can there be no progress? Closure takes place through an open-ended process. “Our concept of perfection is flawed.” Neurotic compensatory acting out is based as is all neurotic behavior upon the magical thinking which we believe is more appropriate to the way of life of primitive man. The acting out is for restoring some kind of balance within the individual’s psyche, but produces unintended consequences in society. In conversation, this type of compensation is more common: one tries to offset the unintended impact of one’s previous words and the conflict between one’s representation of self and what one knows of one’s actual self are now simply externalized in the contrast of contrary statements in the memory of the person to whom one makes the offsetting statements. Where one is not free to prevaricate concerning the facts of a case, one is always free to interpret one’s own motives, provided one has grasped the necessary multi-valency, and hence, indeterminacy, of the motivation of all behavior. The ideal relationship history is when one’s friend is unsuccessful for a time, one lends them support until they become successful, the person is grateful and vice versa. Concerning success I am reminded of a bumper sticker I saw once on an early model subcompact which read, “The more you know, the less you need.” So one must become successful in one of three ways, or in admixtures of these three: one must become successful in business, one must become successful in the affairs of the mind and spirit, or one must become successful in the raising of a family, in admixtures or, ideally, in all three.

@$

The paradox of the deconstructive endeavor: structure is always utilized to deconstruct the structure. Deconstruction is not the destroying of the Tower of Babel, but merely an attempt to build it higher than before. Deconstruction is not the attempt of the stream to rise higher than its source. It is the attempt to assert that the stream is always already higher than its source. Does consciousness have trans-human potential? Is consciousness by its very nature transcendental? Anytime the perceptual filters are discontinuously adjusted, a conscious thought is engendered. A compromise is frequently negotiated by couples in which one partner is noticeably more attractive/ wealthy, etc. than the other whereby the more attractive partner is granted greater liberties in the marriage while the less attractive partner remains monogamous and either denies or reinterprets the infidelity of the more attractive partner. It is only nonzero expectation values of momentum-energy which may possess gravitational mass/inertial mass equivalency. The expectation values may always be derived from a combination of fluctuation terms and uncertainties. The fluctuation term for the energy may be wholly attributed to the vacuum whereas its uncertainty in its energy to the effect of the fluctuation energy upon our energy-measuring apparatus – what perfect calibration cannot eradicate (in principle). Mass-energy is a result of an imbalance in these two energy terms. In this way particles are seen to be not flux-stabilities in themselves, but structured alterations in the flux-stabilities as a result of the influence, penultimately of our energy-measuring devices-ultimately per von Neumann – upon the influence of not the individual mind per se but the consciousness fundamental in nature, which is structured through the complex system of boundary conditions upon the quantum vacuum field being measured (in essence) constituted through the operation of the observer’s brain, since the existence of the brain as a mass-energy system, would

otherwise presuppose, if identified with the observer’s individual consciousness, the existence of that which its observations are potentially constituting.

There mere possibility of observation results in the reduction of the state vector. If a great enough interlocking feedback between such possibilities comes about which then alters the statistics of the matter and energy (including the embedding vacuum energy field), which results in a great enough contraction/collapse in the density rate of these state vector reductions through the conversion of disjoint states into correlated mixtures, producing an overall coherent state, then a barrier will spontaneously be created between internal and external, i.e., a rudimentary real, as opposed to merely hypothetical, possible observer will be engendered. Conspiracy between perception and logic/mathematics in which the intentional object is inferred and then perceived. Degeneracy, pseudodegeneracy, one graviton limit, irreversibility, etc.

If all topological transformations of spacetime at the quantum level may be reducible to successive or collective symmetric and antisymmetric topological transformations grounded in virtual boson and fermion particle exchanges, then spacetime topology would be determined by vacuum quantum statistics. So this spacetime topology, about which general relativity is undecided, would be determined by the quantum statistics of the quantum vacuum. On this view, gravitation and inertia would necessitate “preloaded” quantum vacuum boundary conditions. So gravitation, in particular, could no longer be treated as possessing its own, unique and universal quantum field, but would be particular in that gravitational fields would simply be vacuum fields + particular boundary conditions supplied for this vacuum.

Of course, the zero-point energy field is responsible for inertia since matter remains at rest, i.e., continues travelling at near the speed of light along the time axis, due to its energy being continually replenished from out of the vacuum energy. How does communication between two human brains (through the normal medium of a natural language) affect, if at all, the mode of interaction of each respective brain with the quantum mechanical vacuum in which each is embedded? And should there be some notable difference between merely the passing of data “signals” between two mechanical neural networks versus the exchange of actual informationbased symbols? Is every creation of the human mind really of necessity two-edged? Must our creations function as insidious co-creators with us their inventors? Can there be no such thing as pure manifestation, perhaps because there can be no unobserved demonstration? Does some bad effects stem from every otherwise “good” action? And is the converse true as well, does some good stem from every otherwise evilly intended action? Is this simply a variant of the yin/yang principle applied within the moral sphere? If only we could compose our thoughts with the instant immediacy with which we grasp the conceptions of others. Our working a recognition vocabularies are probably an order of magnitude different in size, e.g., 10,000 words versus, say, 100,000 or 200,000 words. Is suggestibility a human or merely a general neural network characteristic? Is all feedback merely an amplification of a feedback which already exists, but which is too small to normally be observed? This might indeed follow if it were to turn out that all local (classical physical) interactions are actually mediated by nonlocal quantum interactions. When we say that words can only really “refer” to something beyond themselves as a linguistic token if they succeed in some fashion to

actually “touch” something beyond their incidental physical instantiation (as sound), then we are supposing that language in principle cannot be a closed system-based phenomenon. To say that an open system is unified is to say that the system is really closed (but only with respect to the particular “unity parameter” concerned). The world wide web and internet will someday become so extensive and integrated that you will be able to type any arbitrary sequence of words into a search engine and call up website links (or whatever the equivalent by then) containing somewhere within them that precise description. This is a kind of break even point. Still later, many more than one “link” in the network will be called forth by any descriptive phrase. At this point one will have to make a distinction which will only be able to be made if one interacts with the network. All vector quantities are conserved. If a vector quantity does not appear to be conserved, this is only because the vector is merely a component of some higher dimensional vector quantity. For instance, although neither time nor space are conserved physical quantities, and therefore neither conserved nor quantized quantities, they are collectively when combined together into a spacetime four-vector. The velocity of light is the velocity of time. Velocity through space is always at the expense of velocity through time and vice versa. The parameter by which this exchange of motion (between space and time directions) is mediated, such that the law of (probability) conservation is upheld, is that of mass. The particular manifestation of probability conservation, which is relevant here, is that of four momentum conservation. A question which is relevant here is whether fourmomentum fluctuations are conserved. If such fluctuations are conserved, then given the conservation of the expectation values of four momentum, it would immediately follow that the Heisenberg uncertainties in each component of the three momentum and in the energy themselves conjointly form a four vector of Heisenberg uncertainty in four momentum. In such a situation we expect a

generalized and relativistic statement of the Heisenberg Uncertainty Relation of the following form. The dot product of the four momentum uncertainty vector with the spacetime uncertainty vector must be greater than or equal to 2h/pi, i.e., >= 4h/2pi. In the absence of “bound energy,” i.e., free space (where “no gravitational field” is present), this dot product would be between the four momentum fluctuations of the quantum vacuum and the “fluctuations of the spacetime interval.” There is obviously a connection between quantum mechanical three momentum fluctuations and energy fluctuations, i.e., timelike component of the four momentum fluctuations, which tends in the right direction due to the property of bosons and fermions obeying “opposite Pauli principles.” We are perhaps implying a kind of double-counting by speaking of fluctuations of both the four momentum and the spacetime interval. It may be that there is no physical meaning in the concept of spacetime interval fluctuations for such fluctuations would also be present within any spacetime measuring apparatus/devices which we might attempt to measure them. We cannot directly “grapple with” the space and time variables, but only indirectly, through the manipulation/use of momentum/energy. So how is the manipulation of momentum energy systems, e.g., matter, by other momentum energy systems, i.e., people, not an example of the latter systems (people) pulling themselves up by their own bootstraps. Relevant considerations here are the ghost in the machine paradigm, free will and determinism, collapse of the wavefunction, contrast of local and nonlocal interactions, etc. We may think of the induction of wavefunction collapse in a quantum system through the performance of certain measurements upon that system as in some sense the “short-circuiting” of the system in question. This may explain the effects noted of EEG measurements upon performance controlled by the parts of the brain being measured.

The rise of the internet and the concurrent decline in television viewership is proof that most people prefer lower bandwidth communications and more channels along with interactivity than they do high bandwidth within a relatively paltry number of channels with programming determined by outside agencies, i.e., no interactivity. It is true that most intelligent people live within a world of absolutes, as this type of world requires the least amount of metaphysical philosophical effort to support it. In fact, one might term the world of the everyday middle class person as a state of living and being in perpetual metaphysical free fall. An example of the underside of the elaborate and apparently seamless tapestry which is the human mind might be the inevitable connection between laughter and tickling. Another might be the tendency of many people to sneeze upon emerging from indoors and suddenly into bright daylight. Another is the tendency for a limb to become numb, i.e., to “fall asleep” if one assumes an unaccustomed pose for too long a time. A similar example from the familiar world of the personal computer might be the tendency within microsoft operating systems for an hour glass to be evoked by any action which taxes the computers limited processor speed – even those actions not specifically taken into account in the design of that particular warning feature. The only way that nonlocality can be consistent with special relativity would be if the instantaneous determination of spins (for oppositely “spun” particles) were instantaneous not just in the experimenter’s frame of reference, i.e., laboratory frame, but in all possible reference frames! There is a fine line existing between optimal sensitivity to the informing influence of quantum vacuum energy fluctuations and optimal independence from said fluctuations. Without dismissing Astrology out of hand, let us ask the question, “ why

does this esoteric science appear to possess some power all its own for organizing our knowledge, particularly personality types (spatial) and the dynamics of their life’s paths (temporal)? Taking the lead from Sheldrake, perhaps, we might hypothesize that the basis for Astrology’s uncanny effectiveness may lie with the sheer mass of creative thought by which its principles were developed and creatively applied over the past four millennia. This would only be possible if there exists a great deal which remains underdetermined about reality. Still more is reality a radically open system. But this implies an unlimited amount of underdetermination for reality. So how can reality possess any stability of structure and process, given this unlimited openness? Apparently there must be some kind of “buffering” between different “levels” of reality, which amounts in essence to some kind of baffle obtaining between chaos and order which nonetheless permits both informing and back-reaction to take place between them. Scalar waves are purely informational rather than force-mediating. Scalar waves have effects upon an otherwise closed dynamic system which cannot be reproduced within a true, isolated system, if only because of the mutual othogonality of scalar and vector waves. The action of the will is not generally speaking in conflict with the mechanism of operation or the principle of this mechanism of any process by which its dictates might be carried out. Moreover, the operation(s) underlying the action of the will are completely free from the influence of and unconstrained by (by definition) the details of all these particular executive mechanisms. It is this general “negative” characteristic of will which suggests that its operation lies in its informing function and the intimate relationship of consciousness and will is thus further pointed up. It is probable that all of the would be executive operations/functions utilized by will to implement its directives act locally, within the framework of mechanistic causality, while will itself possesses a nonlocal nature which is apiece with the integral nature of consciousness. Coherence may take two forms here: where boundary conditions to the local dynamism are present,

reverberative, where boundary conditions are entirely absent, this coherence is aperiodic in nature. The introduction/insertion of boundary conditions into a dynamism where such constraints are heretofore absent requires an informing of process, which is necessarily nonlocal. This is because the existence of a particular topology and metric to spacetime is itself a set of boundary conditions upon some dynamism and is probably the most general kind of boundary condition or constraint imaginable. Also a change in boundary conditions which cannot be deterministically evolved from a previous set must have been introduced “by hand.” Somehow the Self is not commonly thought to be an authority worthy of heed and authority is more comfortably located in the other. The greater the distance between oneself and one’s authority, the more weight will that authority’s pronouncements carry. God is a handy illustration of this principle. The “aha experience” comes about whenever an act of creativity is such that, simultaneously with it, one glimpse some essential part of its very mechanism. Each new generation ignores the admonitions of the previous one. The old mistakes are repeated in slightly new variations, despite the radically altered appearances presented by the cutting edgemost manifestations. Youth confuses style with substance and this essentially accounts for why it does not pay better heed to the lessons based in the life experiences of elders. There is an inherent difficulty in converting nonlocally based intuition and insight into procedural rule based locally coded knowledge. The analogy is not with that of mere coding/decoding, but with addressing, uploading, downloading, installing, configuring, initializing, running, feeding-back, updating, etc. We never entirely get over the desperate need to receive the positive

parental “stroke.” It is rarely if ever investigated whether there are indeed any significant behavioral differences between the races, and still less has there been much if any research devoted to a possible evolutionary explanation for such differences. Such difference have been perceived by many for generations, but have seldom if ever been commented upon within polite society or within professional or scientific publications. It is fairly easy to imagine how profound differences in geography, for example, in which the various races evolved, perhaps quite distinct from that of their more distant common ancestors, may have played a role in establishing those sometimes notable differences. A ready example might be how wide-open tundra, steppe, savanna, etc. places less premium upon quick reaction time and more emphasis upon the ability to formulate a plan that requires more than a few moments thinking versus the requirements that the cramped quarters of a densely vegetated jungle or bush environment , inhabited by ferocious predators possessing lightning fast reflexes, might demand not so much in the way of reflection and foresight as it would abilities similar to those possessed by the predators. Note here that within the wide open environments the enemy most natural to man would be man himself. The present astrophysical observations indicating a general acceleration of the cosmological expansion would seem to imply that a hyperspherical potential does, indeed, exist. This potential possesses a gradient along the local time axes at every point within spacetime. Might gravitational potentials ultimately derive from the local hyperspherical potential through the peculiar interaction of massive particles, or more generally, energy in bound form, i.e., binding energy, with this potential? The balance maintained between the current density of 3-momentum fluctuations/exchanges and the current density of energy fluctuations/exchanges accounts for the trend of cosmological expansion

in its 2nd time derivative. So if the expansion rate of the universe is accelerating (within observable 3 dimensions), then there must be a shift in the momentum-energy distribution of the vacuum such that the density of its 3-momentum exchanges is decreasing (bodies are becoming less massive) and the density of its energy increasing. The dynamics of the cosmological expansion, whether it is overall accelerating or decelerating, is attributed to the relative strengths of the cosmological constant (the vacuum energy density) and the gravitational energy of the universe. The sort of “force” that changes the distribution of momentum-energy without altering the magnitude of the four momentum is one with a four force magnitude of 0.

If we are not jealous, then perhaps at turns amazed and the wistful when seeing our own unrealized potential expressed through the actions of a younger person. What explains much of people’s seemingly arbitrary and irrational behavior is the influence of fetish thinking. Fetish thinking is merely a symptom of a mind that is desperately grasping at meaning. The reducing valve theory of mind breaks down the natural distinction between thought and perception, memory and imagination.

Any string can be interpreted so as to appear to contain a message. Any configuration of sounds, color patches, etc. can be related to through perception so as to possess coherence and unity as an aesthetic object. Thought originates in a parallel distributed parameter manner, but must

be communicated in a serial or sequential translation. Seeking an explanation for transcendence is analogous with dimly recollecting childhood or infantile experiences and does not explain the transcendent quality of these early experiences themselves. In the light of greater knowledge and experience, any text of sufficient complexity may be open to ever more novel metaphorical interpretations. The text modulates experience at a certain metaphorical level of interpretation to shape the forging of new associations and meanings. German Ding versus Bedingt: What are connotations so obvious in one language that they are not even consciously realized are in another language non-existent in relation to the relatively superficial idea denoted by words in two languages. The connection of denotation and connotation may be otherwize arrived at through laborious metaphysical argument and logic in the latter language and only realized through instructive insight in the former. Reality is in the subjective differences which are abstracted from. Consciousness might be thought of as the “ether of the mind,” while the ether of spacetime may be thought of as the “consciousness of the Universe.” There is the formation of concepts which, is suggested by data and there is the converse process of the interpretation of data in the light of concepts. Because data admit of an unlimited number of distinct, though perhaps always related, (where a single mind is the interpreter, at least) no particular thought is necessarily implied by any particular set of contextfree data.

Data may be abstracted from information and information yield from the interpretation of data. There is, however, a distinction to be made with regard to information so that interpretation of data which reveals the intended information and those interpretations of data that do not. But this distinction presupposes that the conscious intention is always the ultimate arbiter of interpretation, and this is not always the case. Any conscious being only knows about its previously intended messages through an act of self-interpretation. We, therefore, may say that the meaning of data is merely that one which expediently fits larger meanings, and the revisionistic attribution of them, are always open in light of some as yet undiscovered unifying, meaning-enhancing metaphor.

Phil 4941 Notes from August 1992 We learn about our own mind as well as the minds of others through (superficially) the same manner – that is, through experience. It is not possible to know everything about the mental state that one is in although this does not necessarily mean that is it possible for one to be mistaken about the true character of the mental state one is in. There is a certain indefiniteness to phenomena which is associated only with their boundedness to temporality. And not with their indefiniteness at a particular instant. In quantum mechanics a system experiences temporal evolution due to the indefiniteness of the wavefunction describing the system and such an indefinite wave function can only be gotten by solving the Schrodinger wave equation when utilizing a Hamiltonian possessing a perturbation term, itself not sharply defined. Mind seems to be formed by the process by which it acquires the tools with which it might attempt to describe itself to itself. That component of mind,

should it existe at all, which transcend language, which his to say, all means of description. This component of mind need not be consistent in character, structure, etc. across the variety of minded individuals. But here face, yet again, the problem of mind being greater than any possible definition of itself. A possible answer here is just that part of the knowledge which one has about mind one acquires from one’s own case. We should perhaps say that these components of mind lying beyond its definition are not ineffable, only that what different mean by the same words applied to the description of their own minds differ in ways not detectable. But it is always possible that there is some overlap between the manner in which we know about the mental states of others and the manner in which we know about our own mental states. In this way, having a valid means by which to have some knowledge about the mental states of others need not militate against the privileged access which we have of our own mental states, if only because it is only the privileged access we have of our perceptions of the behavior of others which gives us this partial knowledge of their mental states. It might be the case that what is essential to identifying mental states lies not in behavior per se but with other correlated mental states occurring later in time or recollected from memory. “Moreover, since . . . rely on.” This simply doesn’t follow at all, but relies on dualistic assumptions, I believe. Does actual knowledge need to be mediated knowledge? “A satisfactory . . . of behavior.” But not necessarily just those ties between the minds of others and their behavior. We must distinguish between taking behavior into account in a primary from merely a secondary way. This is precisely the sort of approach which I propose to take.

Some confusion of terminology here which obscures the question at hand. It is clear that we can’t get anywhere in Philosophy of Mind if we can’t give thorough definitions of mental and physical, internal and external, etc. Matter is simply mind in one of its infinite variety of approximations of itself by itself. What we call mind is simply reality in its unapproximated unabstracted indissoluble unity. We remove consciousness from experience, fragment this experience into parts and then, we are surprised when we can’t snap these parts back together to produce the indissoluble whole or unity from which these parts were originally abstracted. Descartes, Hume, Kant, Locke, et al., are drawn heavily from and debated with in the Philosophy of Mind. What makes a sensation mine rather than yours? Maybe there is only one consciousness, reduced and channeled by the individual brain so that there is only one person with an indefinite number of different, disconnected sets of integrated experiences. Experience presupposes integration, however. Kant: the self that constructs the world – the transcendental ego. The self we construct is the empirical ego. Read 1A, and p. 169 of Smart down to p. 188. Gödel’s results concerning truth and provability are perhaps not so surprising when one considers that there undoubtedly is a continuity by which one book may be transformed into another through the mere continual substitution of words, but intuitively, there does not seem to be a continuous transformation of the ideas of one book into those of another which could possibly parallel that based on the mere substitution of words.

“I”, “now”, “here”, are examples of egocentric particulars. The boundary lines of that described by egocentric particulars are somewhat elastic. That I refers to the one who utters is a linguistic convention which seems to presuppose the existence of one and only one self. “I do not exist” poses a conflict between the act of asserting and the content of the assertion. Descartes holds that thought is transparent to itself, but Spinoza thought that @$to be aware of a thought is to invoke another thought. Hume seemed to have similar ideas. The correspondence idea that the thought refers to itself without the need for the “I” as a mediator. Thought requires a thinker. (not necessarily) According to Quine, if a means cannot be found to replace terms with alternative formulations then we are committed to the existence of that referred to by these terms. Hume uses such words as “I”, “my”, “myself”, etc., in order to state his argument denying the existence of the self. Contiguity in time, space, and necessary connection of cause and effect. It is perhaps reasonable but not necessarily the case that all physical processes are susceptible to scientific explanation. It is perhaps precisely where physical processes cease to be explicable scientifically that the relative discontinuity between the mental and the physical is to be found: it is at that level at which the individual components in terms of which explanation proceeds cease to behave as independently existing entities. The difficulty in saying what it means for something to be quantum

mechanical, relativistic, ergodic, etc. in no way may be taken as strong reason for believing that reality is classical, spatiotemporally absolute, deterministic, respectively. One is then blaming one’s inability to form a definition upon the incoherence, lack of self-consistency, etc. of the concept to which the word attempts to refer. When we encounter physical processes which seem to determine themselves by a quantity of information greater than that prescribed amount which we are able to possess about this process, then we may be secure in supposing that this process possesses an integrity and wholeness which may only be truly described as “mental.” What might be considered to be mental characteristics? Vagueness or ambiguity Nondeterministic Non-spatial Temporal Lower levels recapitulate higher Teleological Simultaneously interconnected Self-representing Self-referential or recursive The reason why all of the Kantian categories seem to apply at the level of observation at which classical physics operates and why each of the categories seems to be violated, one by one, at the level where classical physics leaves off, and where quantum physics takes up, is that mind cannot give a unified description of its own knowledge of itself (mediated) and constitutes an unmediated knowledge of mind of itself. Therefore, the process by which mind knows what it takes to be the external world must be essentially complementary to the way in which mind realizes (knows) itself – without mediation. 1-800-638-1200 Free Money to Change Your Life

The experientially based details which were removed from the categorical description when the category was originally “abstracted” are partially reconstituted when these abstract symbols are allowed to interact and combine. But if the process of abstraction is not itself a reversible process, then this “reconstitution” cannot really recoup the original ground from which the combined descriptive/denotative elements were originally abstracted. And so a new ground is prepared in response to the back reaction of combined symbols upon the ground that they originally stemmed from as isolated abstract symbols (elements). Those of us who have routinely performed tasks on a computer terminal that is connected to a network have noticed that on some occasions the response at our terminal to requests for information, calculations, etc. take place at a normally rapid pace, whereas on other days or times during the day, these commands are executed with a frustratingly painful slowness, if they are performed at all, that is. This may be understood in terms of the conservation of “floating point” operations or “flops” which must be rationed between large multiplicities of different machines. If the vacuum energy does not itself gravitate, then should we expect all of the general relativistic effects, such as mass increase, length contraction, time dilation, etc., to also apply to this vacuum, just as it normally does to real particles and fields? In a very real sense, the unexceptional man must find himself a “virgin” to marry, if he is to be satisfied that he has chosen the best possible mate for himself. “Virgin” in the sense that the woman is unaware that with respect to some important trait/feature of males, she “could do better.” The manner in which the self initially grapples with the newly imposed spatiotemporal limitation is arbitrary, but becomes less so over time. To the extent that one’s response is not arbitrary, one’s response is determined through alterity which has become incorporated, virus-like,

into the self’s own structure. The human nervous system is constituted in such a way that repetition of a message or communication intensifies and deepens, pulling progressively more elements from a penumbra of still more indirectly related notions. It is the building up of a resonance which spreads throughout the mind’s associative resources, a revitalization of the latent memory links, allowing the activation of progressively larger and complex memory circuits, producing experiences more complex than those associated with the subcircuits of memory originally laid down by lived experience. This is the very opposite of the automaticity seen in mentally retarded humans or in primates. All of the genes which can be found in a complete human genome can be found in simpler combinations within the other species of life sharing the planet with man. In this sense, the human may be, in a very real sense, thought of as a chimerical being. Since by far most of the genetic combinations have never been tried over the course of evolution on this planet, many of these combinations being favorable relative to the present environment, and many more, by far, relative to hypothetical environments, most of which may never be realized in the history of the universe, there must be some principle of the engendering of order which is at once broader and deeper than that posed by standard Darwinian natural selection. If we view evolution as being purely adaptive, then abstract categories of fitness which we presently hold may not have any absolute significance. Intelligence which is defined as the capacity for adaptation to environmental change within the single lifetime of an individual of a species, is itself an adaptation to a particular environment. @$This is perhaps a very disturbing notion, for it means that environments may be possible in which intelligence is not selected for. I find my unaccustomed surroundings just as strange as do you find yours – even though each of us is irreconcilably alien with respect to the other.

Making merely a cameo appearance in this life. Views life as merely an orientation for something really serious. The restrictions upon the possible posed by our conceptual framework cannot be violated without at once some substantive and significant shift in the meaning of its categories. This perhaps helps account for why human beings are so psychologically adaptable. Why sin is a necessary function of losing the connection to the transcendental self. Is sin merely a function of uncertainty and ignorance? Uncertainty of utilitarian payoff/payback ~ ignorance of the interests of other persons/one’s own (ultimate transcendental) interests? – that is, ignorance of how the other person’s interests are secretly consonant with one’s own deeper interests? What transcendental beings truly possess in common is possessed in common only in a metaphorical, specifically, an analogical sense. This common property is otherness, or alterity. Alterity is the only category which need possess neither a formal unity, nor a common point of reference, nor any definable continuity. And it is therefore from this that the other categories subsist, either through conventional agreement, or through a participatory, direct mutual grappling. That which is the nature of the other/alter self is, indeed unknowable to one. However, one’s otherness that one detects within oneself – this, does one truly possess in common with other transcendent beings – for they too, like oneself, possess an irreconcilable alterity within themselves. So we are now inquiring whether the alterity of the other is itself alter with respect to one’s own alterity. Alterity is, of its very formless (essence-less) essence, transcendental, which is to say, divine. This brings us to the question of the alterity posed by social groups or collectives. Could the unity possessed by alterity as such be the transcendental unity spoken of by Kant? This unity cannot be derived but is absolute. If such a unity is in some sense living, then we must say that here we have found the most fitting concept of God. Clearly such a concept would possess

abstractness, none greater than which can be conceived. This alterity we also possess in common with other selves and on which we can all agree in common. We are each of us, in similar ways, limited by, and at odds with, the various collectivities of which we form sometimes but a small if not insignificant part. This is alterity, which we share with one another by virtue of the otherness that each of us poses with respect to the collectives in whom we participate, in both action and representation. Much speculative argument within philosophy consists in the seizing upon some commonly held or valued culturally or linguistically based assumption as a fulcrum point for the thesis being demonstrated. One must motivate one’s selection of a particular question as being a worthy subject for discussion and debate. One’s psyche does not usually mature in the precise direction of one’s choosing so as to closely approximate one’s ideal self. The implications for postmodern theory posed by the quantum superposition principle. From a contradiction, all propositions follow. From a superposition, 2N quantum states follow. One feels one’s otherness most keenly when in the presence of “the one.” Art cane be a reflection or an influence, or both. @$

Because of the dynamic back-reaction of language upon the poet/author, he cannot really assert what he intends or perhaps even intend what he asserts. Since both tautologies and contradictory utterances lead to some “sensical” (not nonsensical) reaction in the listener/reader, communication never takes place within any particular theoretical/logical system. Our nervous systems respond, millisecond by millisecond to sensory inputs, however, the mind itself, only experiences temporally integrated structures and responds to them.

Insights embody a more general concept than the contexts in which they originally are conceived and to which they are applied. Nature is awaiting the opportunity to cooperate with us in the realization of projects not yet imagined. That which is responsible for organization/structure as such itself possesses no defined/definable pattern of organization. Does this suggest that within the indeterminate ground from which all order originates that there is not objective distinction between actual and potential? Speaking reality into existence, e.g., “Let there be light!,” versus speaking existence into reality, e.g., “I now pronounce you man and wife.” The civilization had to rebuild: different theories would inevitably lead to the discovery of very different entities. The stability of extended objects is supported by Goldstone modes, c.f., H. Umezawa and H. Matsumoto, M. Tachiki, Thermo Field Dynamics and Condensed States, Oxford, 1982. Inertia may be described in terms of excitation and reconstruction of Goldstone modes. C.f., Valdone’s thermodynamice gravity theory. The paradox of information processing and the open-endedness of internality. Topological change is transcendental because of the necessary discontinuity of substance involved. The creativity gains wisdom, the entity gains compassion. Each has what the other organically lacks. A symbiosis which should grow tighter as the symbiant goes through his life cycle. There is no reason to believe that each human person does not equally represent the choice of God to become Man. The special distinction represented by the case of Jesus is that He somehow did not lose the connection to his infinite self through the process of becoming limited in space and time. Perhaps original sin is the only difference between Jesus and the rest of us:

having been born of a virgin, Jesus does not receive the male sex-linked blot (Original Sin) originally incorporated into the “junk components” of the human genome. Sin is indeed represented in the Genesis story as having a viral, contaminating character. Existence rises as Being descends. Each human is a largely unsuccessful attempt to make a Jesus. Open-ended symbols and representation. Conventional agreement established with the development of language or during communication. The mystery of Logos. Hameroff’s work on the mechanism of general anaesthesia supports Huxley’s theory of the brain as the reducing valve of the mind. Ecclesiastes – the Spirit returns to God always; the soul returns only if judged to be without sin. It may turn out that Aristotle’s theory of the Soul as being “the form of the body” may not be too far afield. September 2011 Along these lines, the body may be conceived of as “the scaffolding of the soul” or the “soul’s womb”, which is akin to a template or mold, which is broken and cast off once the substance within it has achieved its intended mature form. A similar analogy is the New Age conception of the Earth as a “school for souls”. The temporal nature of selfconstruction cannot be avoided (an “intelligent” being cannot be created “in one go”) because “creation” via Hegel’s “negation of the negation” falls eternally short of the true goal of the divine, namely that of engendering beings who are “altogether new” and hence possessing the potential for freedom and self-determination. The indeterminate and temporality in other words are inseparable, c.f., quantum energy uncertainty as the sole mediator of changes in the energy states of a quantum mechanical system, c.f., Michael A. Morrison, Understanding Quantum Mechanics. The irreversibility of temporality is in essence the nontrivial aspect of temporal change. October 2012 What is the likely metaphorical relationship between causal supervenience and object oriented programming? The paradox of information processing and the open-endedness of

internality. Topological change is transcendental because of the necessary discontinuity of substance involved. Matter has the effect of transforming the super symmetric hyper potential nonisotropic distribution of components of the hyperspherical potential. Quantum tunneling rate competes with the pair creation rate. Even though “I am God” says Jesus, “ I will submit to Man.” It was the failure to submit to and be lower than Man which lead to Lucifer’s choice to lead a rebellion in heavan. Each believer must be able to submit to the Will of God though he has the sinking and arrogant suspicion that he is himself a God. Multiple incommensurable grounds of Being. As you contemplate tossing those memories in the dust bin you are given a start – you realize that she’s doing this too. Most people are misunderstood/feel that they are misunderstood because they do not understand themselves (possess a rigid enough identity concept). These individuals react to the infringement of favorable potential identity features and character traits. Ontological plurality: but the Muses do dispute among themselves. Permutation and combination across contexts: the power of genetic recombination. The problems of coherence and infinite regress in Everett’s interpretation of quantum measurement problem. Eternal return without repetition of events: eternally upward arching spiral. The Gods are so very interested in the struggles and exploits of “mere mortals” not because they are bored up on Mt. Olympus, but because we represent handicapped versions of themselves. “Character” versions, if you will. Two myths point up the crystallization of meaning as it develops organically, dialectically and nondeterministically within open-ended contexts: The Velveteen Rabbit and Pinocchio. A dialectical development occurs without its ground being advantaged by all of its significant steps being prefigured as negations awaiting a process of “negating the negation.” Such a development is not constituted by the

mere enabling of latent order by evolving contingent conditions. Mental phenomena make difference to the person whose mental states they constitute, and so cannot be mere epiphenomena. Metaphysical work is performed by the individual as a result of his experience in the world. Use here the analogy of the SETI at home project. What is called sanity is relative to the openness and diversity of the society. No discrete, closed system contains information about itself, possesses no integral description of itself. And so any open system must in a sense possess a kind of unconsciousness. How should the system distinguish contents which emerge from this “unconsciousness” from those contents originating from a “genuine exterior?” And can there be a true distinction of inner vs. outer for such an open system? Moreover, is there any distinction to be made between that which is informed from that which does the informing? Information, therefore is not inert, but dynamic, not a substantive, but an ongoing action of informing. How are we to interpret memory in light of this fact? A plurality of these open spaces reminds us of Leibniz’ monads. Given this plurality, that each member is “open” but not to any of the others, without some mediation being provided wholly from outside all, which implies the collectivity of the sum of each becoming limited in some way. But there is not way to define that which is exterior to all since a totality is here implied which is as yet unwarranted. And it certainly does not follow that that which is exterior to each of two must therefore be exterior to both. So how does each become limited by something transcending it without this something `transcending “both”? The answer here is if this something transcending each is nonetheless interior to both. In this way the interiority lies with the fusing and mutual limiting of each.

Because there are metalevels of the self/other relation, how does this complicate our understanding of language? The self as other is itself the

artifact of, mediated through, language. Even arbitrary sequences of words call forth meaningful concepts. Logically, a tautology does not provide any information. A tautology such as “when you notice a change, you notice a change,” does, however, succeed in conveying something, if only because the listener is in a state of change during the very brief time that it takes for him to hear the statement of the tautologous proposition. Not only does the central nervous system respond to “linguistic auditory inputs” at the level of unified phoneme complexes, i.e., integral words and phrases, but also to each individual vibration composing individual phonemes. Time cannot be directly integrated, that is, through the collective action of temporal functions. Time integration must be effected in the frequency domain. So the human mind derives information from tautologies as well as making sense of literal contradictions. This suggests that language is essentially translogical. This is because secretly the human mind functions in terms of three- and higher-valued logics, but must perform a reduction to a two-valued logic when finally articulating the results/conclusions of its higher-valued logical operations. The critic is the failed craftsman whose central motive was once creation but which has become that of the destruction ( or deconstruction) of the works of others more fortunate and talented. The critic must unmask the creative artist as a poseur and dilettante. There is no meaning in a life consumed with endlessly circulating currents of activity, never ultimately feeding back to ground or, shall we say, to otherness, i.e., alterity. Cantor’s diagonal argument and conditional convergence of infinite series. Infinite systems do not have a definable mode structure. This finite mode structure is perhaps only possible in a provisional sense, but

can never be predetermined. NonEuclidean Arithmetic. Infinite subseries become context sensitive when rearranged as though they are mere finite series. When the number of equivalence class relations becomes infinite, the induction may fail. Infinitude necessarily introduces a topological structure. Euclidean geometry may be thought of as geometry devoid of topological structure in the sense of having a “null” topological structure. These considerations lead us to pose the question: “what is non-Euclidean arithmetic?

There is some arbitrariness in every thought, action, etc. But arbitrariness cannot be measured or quantified; it is, rather, indeterminate. There must be independent confirmation at each step in a chain of reasoning. Causal chains must always potentially accommodate unforeseen interference from outside. Is consciousness always intentional? Certainly thoughts must always have an open-ended context, i.e., reference to something outside of themselves. But this outside reference could be to something indeterminate and therefore not an intentional object. Metaphor and metacategory, abstract category of abstractions. Irreducibility of the individual consciousnesses implies that each is a substance. So how can there be different substances if distinct substances cannot differ in terms of any discernible properties? What differs between distinct “feeling substances” transcends property, quality, or, for that matter, any formal conceptions. What allows substances to be distinct then while each being “exemplars” of substance as such? Discontinuity in the sense of topological separateness may

ground the distinction of substances but if we cannot then turn to qualia or property in terms of which to take them all as exemplars of substance as such then how are we to ground the substantial nature of substances qua substances? All experience begins in the form of insight, as a metaphorical representation of aspects of being. Two representations of God – as the wholly other or as the ground of the Being of the self, or, perhaps, of selfhood as such. The essence of all insights into Being is suchness. Only the unique possesses “real existence”. Explore the relationships of Being, Real Existence, Existence, and Subsistence. Since we must always define “sanity” in terms of psychological stability, an important question here is internal or external stability. External stability relates to how close one is to the “center of the mainstream.” Continuing the metaphor, since the velocity of current is greatest within the center of the stream, there is a tendency for flotsam on the periphery of the stream to drift toward this center of greatest downstream velocity. This is a kind of stability, but it is stability due to the operation of external forces. Would the empirical nature of logic and mathematics imply temporality for mathematical entities of a particular class or unclassifiable type. This is the question of the “existence” of universals. Culture as a broadcast signal. Example: the African American perspective. Conceptual structures as similar to “training wheels”. Do perceptual structure have their principle value as pedagogical devices? Or still more generally, their purpose lies with fitting open-ended insight to a closed analytical form for application and implementation. To work entirely within a given conceptual framework/structure is to constrain one’s creative and free thought within the confines of another’s mechanism for applying the merely practical component of his thought to the external world. Or this conceptual framework simply constitutes a

kind of structure for the triggering of independent insight in a disciple, not for merely the reproduction of the author’s original insight. Unity of classical and quantum mechanics. Contradiction of acausality. Defy the logic of “got a life” versus “got no life”. “My human” instead of “I” as the first person singular part of speech. How would such a linguistic innovation affect society, culture, religion, etc.? The supernatural as embodiment, e.g., telepathy, telekinesis, clairvoyance, premonition, etc, as applied to the actions of one’s own body. There are certainly times when we cannot predict what we will do in a certain situation or which of two simple alternative courses of action we might decide to take within the immediate future such as whether to return to one’s home now that evening is upon one or to remain an extra day as a welcomed visitor in the household of a friend. Contingency is interwoven into every act of determination of the will. How are we to live with this brute fact of human existence? Like a Tourette’s Syndrome victim, we are engaging in continual revisionism the purpose of which is to create the appearance of a seamless and whole identity. This is a brand of Sartre’s Bad Faith. But perhaps there is no natural and distinct boundary existing between the process of the motivation of one’s behavior and the seemingly ad hoc rationalization of this behavior after its commission. Aristotle supposed that the soul was simply the “form” of the body (c.f., Sheldrake). What would distinguish soul from body if the soul is a closed system, except for its interaction with the body, itself also a closed system? There can be no real distinction between two closed systems that interact only among themselves. Is the brain capable of “tuning” into more than one individual consciousness? An affirmative answer would seem to suggest that the brain is not the essential basis for individual consciousness, but merely a conduit for its creativity to enter the world of space and time. Can there be hysteresis in the vacuum energy field due to its interaction with the

brain’s microtubule network? Wouldn’t such a hysteresis account for a kind of “phantom effect” upon this vacuum state? The argument can be made that if the system cannot respond to the vacuum’s fluctuations, then neither can the vacuum respond to the functioning of the system. Of course, the response of the vacuum to the system is not in any sense the response of the vacuum as a whole. What is meant by “response of the vacuum” is an alteration in the pattern of the vacuum’s selfinteraction. 1-(800)- 644-7733 for Nationwide locations of Borders Books stores. Is the brain too complex for its processes to be unified, in either a volitional or a representational sense? The world is so vast and complex that it can manifest itself as being unified consonant with the preferences of any individual inhabiting it. Intuitively related to the question of personal identity. Constitution as the basis of stability. Is probability conserved in the dispersion equation? Psi’s are Minkowski spacetime solutions to Dirac’s equation. So gravity is considered as a mere perturbation of Minkowski spacetime. So this theory only applies to the weak-field limit and is a linearized gravity theory. The metric remains Minkowskian, only spatiotemporal variations in polarizability can be represented consistently as a (merely phenomenological) variation in this metric on the Minkowski manifold. Are all Psi polarizable? Particle-wave duality. The wavefunction for a photon (particle) is just its electromagnetic wave description. But what about a Psi which describes some macroscopic system? You keep a lot of icons on your desktop because you can’t remember the hierarchical address of a file. Clutter of conscious mind is a function of decreased accessibility of memory. Is information about how to access memory itself stored in memory? DNA is embedded in a

morphic resonant field and is therefore context sensitive and so context dependent. Coherent versus incoherent interacting fluctuations. Thought control manifests itself as telepathy, i.e., intention, but not thought is “readable” to the telepath given the existence of a substantive connection between him and his subject. Intention has to do with impending execution of instructions and is mediated by local interactions. Thought has to do with the informing of intention, the providing for its content, and is mediated via the nonlocal interactions. There is a far greater number of organizations and associations than there are individuals to become members within them. This notion relates to the context of divided loyalties and multiple and inconsistent social identities. Multiple consciousnesses are coextensive with multiple (objective?) realities? Psychic power is the “glue” which holds together the mind andcoheres it. Paradox: That which possesses an identity cannot be reproduced. There is no nature, only technology. Respiration of creation, which breathes the energy of the quantum vacuum. That’s the only way you get anywhere, baby, you go on a “head trip”. Theories establish relationships between codes and their elements, but not how the codes are originated, codes are not originated from other codes, that is. Reality is conventional. Personal identity is irreducible, and reality is too complex to be unified. Natural law is derived from a composite of myriad freely-willed intentions/actions. Since, according to our doctrine of reality being conventional and constituted out of the transcendental collective, the classical physical behavior leaves off and the quantum behavior takes over at the stage at which the consensus of transcendent beings breaks down, it follows that the free will of one of these transcendent beings must be constituted through processes transcending

operation of natural law. Existence rises and Being descends. Where they meet is in the phenomenon of Man. As coherence of a dynamic structure increase, the role of quantum fluctuations in it decreases. No clear distinction obtains between the literal and the metaphorical. Even the damned soul’s spirit returns to the Creator that made it. The phenomena of initial incarnation and reincarnation are substantively distinct occurrences. We must distinguish an open system from what is merely a subsystem open to a larger, closed system. No medium is available to carry the influence of one transcendent being upon another. This is true simply by the definition of the transcendent as unlimited or absolute. Human beings only appear to be separate and isolated from one another. Their subconsciousnesses are connected and in constant interaction. This was a basic tenet of the Edgar Casey theosophical doctrine. “I” am the way, the truth and the life. Anyone who can say “I” is God. Universal salvation for all “I’s”? Making of distinctions as the channeling of insight, e.g., “Oh this must be what is called X”, or “This is all but Y”. The result of the back reaction of erstwhile unreflectively used language. Acquiring an appreciation for the “old classics”. Truth must be multivalent. Which means that it must also be univalent. Because consciousness is not unified, the ultimate underpinning of one’s position shades into the nonverbal and nonformalizable. So the deepest truth is established through negotiation. Meditation upon the figure of the spiral. Leaving a plane without

exploring its entire surface. Redundancy of fractal representations. Endless territory to explore within a fractal domain, with endless variety of nothing truly novel. If the thesis of the unity of the self is false, then what new interpretation must we make concerning the role of an individual consciousness? It may well be the case that, within the realm of Will, as opposed to Representation, the “self” is composed of a plurality of more or less independent centers of volition. Because we understand the intention of the speaker even when he breaks ”the rules”, this shows the independence of language from thought, that is, its role as an implement for the execution of a command. Although the yin/yang symbol is interpreted as representing liberation from duality, this symbol actually represents how duality is itself a manifestation of closedness. Local causal relationships are mediated by nonlocal causal correlations, c.f., Quantum Theory (1951) by David Bohm. Passive perception relates to the correspondence theory of truth. What may be termed pro-activity in human perceivers is constituted by aggressive pattern recognition involving projection. Lyrical speech is highly elliptical but suggestive and evocative. In the infinite state, every possibility is present and realized. Externality for some being implies the existence of an encapsulating boundary, limiting this being’s extent. Pure internality is unbounded and infinite. The internality of finite, embodied beings which is mutually irreconcilable or incommensurable amongst them, suggests the plurality of pure intentionality. It is as though, in the absence of mirrors to interact with, the vacuum fluctuations have “nothing to push against”. The parallel mirror

configuration suppresses the density of momentum fluctuations normal to the mirror planes. This results in a decrease in the plane-normal component of the momentum uncertainty and hence induces the mirrors along the plane-normal axis connecting their plane centers. This change in /\X (normal) is independent of the masses of the mirrors. Apparently the x,y,z components of momenta are related to the timelike component of momentum, but not to each other, at least not in flat spacetime, that is. The arbitrariness and conventionality of meaning: we can only grasp essences through either insight or through the making of distinctions. What about when insight consists merely in the discovery or invention of a distinction? Because we are constrained by approximately one billion years of evolution to not contemplate the positive aspects of death and nonexistence, there exists a species-wide internal barrier within the potentiality of humanistic thought. Data are codes giving one access to information. Data relate to 3-vector components while information relates to a 4-vector component. When something is a component of a four vector is so of necessity. However, 3-vector components may also be 4-vector components. When the more primitive and childlike components of the human psyche are repressed below consciousness, there accumulates a push on the part of these repressed elements to express themselves, usually through some abrupt breaking through of the conscious mind’s defenses, which are supported by conventional, societally-defined reality. EPR in curved spacetime and “dispersion” of probability distribution eigenfunctions. No distinction obtains between asking and telling. Though, speech, and action are distinct for free agents, but not for automata. Let us investigate the distinction between “dissemination” and “truth”.

Sensory images as barriers representing the grounding-out (shortcircuiting, if you will) of thought. Since thought does not “originate” with sensory perception (although it perhaps conditions sensory perception), the halting of thought with the sensory perception occasioning it, may itself be a kind of short circuit. The people who were spared a fatal plunge by virtue of the last minute rebuilding of the support structure under the town bridge may perhaps not be thought to constitute a determinate set of persons of determinable identity. These would merely be representations within the self that one already has knowledge of and so no actual informing may be supposed to have taken place. Communication is not possible between infinite or transcendent beings, in other words. As soon as we become aware of a new kind of sin, sure enough, soon thereafter we discover this same blot upon our own souls. God did not intend for humans to just play along with Him and so there is no predetermined set of rules by which life is to be pursued. Consciousness, originating metaphor, crystallization, anatomy, etc. Change and transformation reveal the impersonal. It is the revelation about the changes that we see those close to us undergoing which produces a state of dismay that we might simplistically imagine is mere hypocrisy or inconsistency of character. Music, art, literature, etc. are kernels around which greater meaning of life’s sense of existence can crystallize. Why Astrology is useful. Incipient appearance of insights are always only half-crystallized.

Complete description and temporality are mutually exclusive. There can be no finality of meaning. multivalent, open, radically ambiguous.

Meaning is organic,

The overcoming of dissonance of multiple contexts. Representationally, consciousness is a plurality. But in a participatory sense, it is unified. Transmission of data within a system versus the informing of the activity of this system. Temporality, decay, and Death all possess the same source. The true nature of prophecy as collective self determination glimpsed and articulated by some harbinger. What is the anatomy of a bad philosophy? That which is not growing is in the process of decay. It takes about 20 years of twiddling with the knobs to pull in the insight. The concept of “negative coherence”. An example of which is sending a group email message: although the email addresses of all is available to each, no one in the group knows what the relationship of the other people are to the person sending the message, and so each refrains from posting a reply to any of the others which makes reference to the original addresser. The back-reaction of metaphorical thought to produce a revised and fictional account of the context from which the symbols are being borrowed.

When postmodern thinkers and other critics of logocentrism assert that philosophers have no concept of being, are they making an assertion like, “philosophers have no concept of “krundlebleetz”, where the word in quotes is wholly undefined? Of course not, what these critics are really saying is any number of things like, what is called Being is secretly merely a synonym for a more pedestrian term like thinghood or existence so that what is actually being denied or “deconstructed” is a distinction and perhaps what is being intended by the assertion of no concept of Being is that there is no positive definition of the concept after the fashion of the statement, “not this, not that”, in the words of Svetaketu’s father who later tells Svetaketu, by the way, “tat tvam asi”, i.e., “thou art that”. In this way the post modernist critic is saying that Being is the example par excellence of “je’n se qua” – “I know not what”. July 2011 Deconstruction then is ideally the program of removing the linguistic and terminological camouflage so as to reveal that two allegedly distinct and importantly related concepts are really only different metaphors for the same thing and so really only synonymous, i.e., that their seemingly distinctive contexts are ultimately the same. The “importantly relatedness” of the two concepts consists only in their having possessed all along a common source that had been artificially obscured by language and tradition. But the metaphysician may counter that concepts are always derivative in the sense of being abstract and everything is derived from Being so Being itself is not derived from anything foreign to itself. Rather than asserting that we have no concept of Being as distinct from that of mere existence, shall we say instead that what is called “existence” is the metaphor possessing the greatest comprehension of Being. But does a metaphor necessarily point to the subsistence, if you will, of a corresponding concept? Perhaps poetic conception (truth) is a case of metaphor for which there is no concept. Poetic truth of some saying or aphorism means that things transpire or behave “as though the saying were literally true”, without it actually being so. In a domain of pure simulation, as-thoughness and as-ifness have to be given much greater care and consideration than otherwise.

No, we can certainly have concepts or notion so of things which do not “exist” as such, examples of which are, faith, beauty, goodness, etc. So we might say that these qualities do not exist as such except in a conventional, poetic or pragmatic sense. Only representations or phenomena are temporal, the origin of which exists outside of time (each time stream) and collectively these origins constitute the common intersubjective spacetime of all these phenomenal selves. The function of will and necessity are incompatible. The only way God could purchase us is through his blood. This was the Judaism to Christianity paradigm shift. God had to give up his freedom so that Man could be granted his. Consciousness must be a language-dependent social construct. For otherwise, the distinction between self and not-self, or other, would be merely theoretical, symbolic, and arbitrary. Thought and perception are the result of a partitioning of a single mental act. We necessarily participate in all of our representations and the objective is always, in part, kwd=reification perpetrated by the self. Imperfect unification creates structure and change. All objects are resonant which implies the interaction of modes. Harmonic modes interact to produce stable forms while anharmonic modes produce deterministic change in forms only approximately stable. But within an open system, there can be no preestablished modal structure. It is now seen why possibility, contingency and necessity are modal concepts. A closed system is itself an object possessing some stability and hence a modal structure of sorts. But the interfering modes are in this case interacting open systems unified internally rather than externally. Consciousness is characterized by a continual change in its connection

to itself and so does not occupy any topological manifold – still less does it occupy, therefore, any space, but is essentially internal and not through any given boundaries, for this would constitute a merely contingent internality. Although there are many exemplars of Being, there is no general concept of it, derived through extrapolation from the characteristics of these exemplars. For this would suggest that Being were an accident along with other predicates modifying particular individuals. Perhaps the notion of the external relatedness of Beings, otherwise unmediated ( than through the kind of space we are presupposing) is contradictory or at least an incoherent notion. Here is the notion of the internal relatedness of individuals constituting a plurality wherein no space is given because not yet constituted through this internal relatedness. So we are implying that plurality and multiplicity are concepts independent of the concept of space. The distinction between Being and Existence is exactly analogous to that of information and data. Can there be any temporal relatedness of two or more consciousnesses? What is presupposed in the notion of the possible plurality of consciousness? The reality experienced by conscious entities is a social construct, not on the part of these entities themselves, but on the part of a collective composed of transcendental beings. Each consciousness is an open system of relations and so each has access and is embedded in a distinct indeterminate ground from which it derives its individual temporality. Certainly there can be no external relatedness on the part of distinct temporalities as time is, according to Kant, inner sense. Platonic Forms and Suchness. Similarity presupposes identity (possible through continuous modification) First Impressions.

Frustration and repression lead to neurosis. Human beings are naturally borderline personality disordered, but this tendency is normally channeled and limited through clan/tribal social interactions. Borderline Personality Disorder is an example, as probably many psychiatric disorders may well prove to be, a native mode of psychic functioning which arises when the individual is forced to operate outside the design parameters of his psyche which are essentially social in nature. This reminds us somewhat of R.D. Laing’s assertion that insanity was a sane response to insane living conditions. These design parameters were fashioned by old, long-standing environmental requirements via natural selection. Bose condensation of He-4 is an example of the behavior of nature at a fundamental level subject to boundary conditions heretofore nonexistent. Philosophies composed of ever-extended metaphors. The results of speculative reason must always be reinterpreted in the light of experience. Logic-chopping reason versus over-extended metaphors. Sorting relates to data-processing, whereas the defining of sortals relates to “information processing”. We are always the gods of our own comfort zone. Much which passes for the failure of law is really only the failure of its application. There can be no doubt that science, particularly the social sciences, are adulterated by political concerns and agendas. Such considerations form a large part of the sociology of knowledge. Within this fluctuating spacetime is somewhat of an inconsistent phraseology as the spacetime metric does not specify a unique spacetime topology.

Schrodinger’s Cat Paradox: long chain superpositions may not be possible if objects further up the chain possess greater energy uncertainty than the link immediately preceding. Unitary evolution does not apply to macroscopic objects. Spacetimes cannot superpose because of ill-defined boundary conditions. No spacetime-free superpositions are admissible, in other words. “Live” and “Dead” cat do not constitute, however, different states of the same system. But isn’t that what is really required in order for a superposition to exist? There are two forms of insanity: one which we might term craziness which is the incoherent form and the other, madness, the coherent form. It is now fairly common for persons requiring delicate and dangerous brain surgery to be lowered in core body temperature to about 40 degrees Fahrenheit for 45 to 90 minutes during the surgical procedure and afterwards gradually reheated to normal body temperature. During the surgery, when the body’s core temperature is just a few degrees above freezing, heartbeat, respiration, and brain-wave activity are totally absent. For such individuals to survive, it must be that the basis for the continuity of personal identity lies with physical processes beneath the cellular level. This strongly suggests that individual personal identity, as such, was never shaped, or its precursors, if any, in dynamic interaction with, natural selection. The individual person possesses a tripartite organization to his being which mirrors that of the Godhead: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Each one of us is an incarnation of Divinity. You might say that each human person is an unsuccessful attempt to “make a Jesus”. However, Jesus was the only example of his incarnation in which the link between the immanent and transcendent was not wholly severed.

There are two basic components making up the dynamics of the human being. We might understand these components in terms of the metaphors of the radio/TV tuner and its dynamics, that of its electronic hardware, and the electromagnetic medium containing the signals capable of being amplified and transduced into radio and TV “images”. A receiver run in reverse is a transmitter. A motor run in reverse is a generator. These are metaphors of information and energy which, if not carefully used, lead us to the notion of action and information being conserved quantities, subject to a reversible dynamics and continuity equation. When momentum is not conserved, we are dealing with action. When energy is not conserved, we are treating of information. The corresponding pseudo-nonconserved quantities here are “force” and “power”. Meditation on the beating of one’s own heart. As we recollect back to progressively earlier years of childhood, we stumble upon a dwindling number of recollections as we tun back those early years. Yet isn’t experience supposed to be the more memorable, the newer its content, and the more impressionable the mind which is its subject? The futility of memory is as much a function of the power of attention as it is of our power of recollection. Vivid dreams as powerful and imaginative reconstitutions of complex patterns of memory traces laid down during REM sleep. Dreams are usually only vividly remembered if something awakens us while still in the grip of their illusion. Does the power of recollections, whether of dreams of early childhood experiences, have less to do with the power of these experiences as they originally occurred or with our power of recollection as much as it has to do with how well our present state of mind harmonizes or resonates with the earlier occurring energy patterns within the brain?

But people are marking our words when we least suspect it. We may have provided the one, small but crucial element that was missing in their attempts to grapple with some disturbing question or doubt burdening their souls. Just as the cultures scattered across the globe may almost literally be characterized as still living in the 19 th, 18, 17th Centuries, middle ages, etc., we may similarly characterize the various cultural strands within the advanced industrialized societies of the West as industrial, modern, postmodern, etc. Bad Philosophy: Heidegger and Gilbert Ryle are two ready examples whose philosophizing seems largely based in a skilled and perhaps even a little cynical and playful exploitation of the latent structures of thought locked within the linguistic heritages of Greek, German, and English. Mining latent structures of thought that are embedded in language. Hyper extension of metaphorical relationships. Pushing the envelope through bold and daring contrariness, e.g., skepticism, idealism, nihilism, pessimism, etc. Excessive coining of new terminology, particularly through linguistic borrowings, e.g., from the French, Greek, etc. Excessive literary allusion. Mining or “ripping off” the metaphysics of various religions doctrines, e.g., Schopenhauer. Speaking endlessly about what was shown, what will be shown by arguments under discussion.

Assuming that poetic truth and metaphysical truth are really synonymous. We might wonder why, if two systems of therapy are based upon contradictory premises about human perception and motivation, how it is that both therapies have about equal success in application to the treatment of neurotic and mentally disturbed patients? One, they are successful for different types of people and different types of psychological disturbance. Also, although the two therapies may possess many individual assertions of fact that contradict each other, the two therapies as whole systems do not actually contradict one another. Meshing of intentionality requires organization from above. The loss of limitation of building-block elements in organization/evolution from below which is simultaneous with the organization from above through increasing limitation of ground from which the “elements” were originally abstracted. Our recognition vocabulary is very much larger than is our working vocabulary and words start out as only recognized and then through use of these words the recognition of persons in ones social context causes individual and collective behavior which fixes the meaning of the words in the person’s working vocabulary. In the days of Herbert Hoover, government controls were of the society by the government, whereas today the government controls are more of the nature of controls of the government and society together as an integrated system. Mysterians. C. Wright Mills There is always a degree of freedom in the crystallization of meaning. Anthropological and evolutionary theories of diversity. Sociology of

knowledge. Totalization is not workable because of the entanglement of superficially distinct levels of description. Epistemology and Ontology are not completely distinct disciplines. Kantianism. Jesus: It’s not the whole that need a physician, but the sick. (Even thought the “whole” are really the most pathological, e.g., Pharisees) Who’s right and who’s wrong? Any standards beyond agreement? Something non-conventional about how agreements are reached (as such). Bright ideas hatched in isolated think tanks, affects conditions, but not in any “tangible” way. All communication through representations are actually interactive/participatory in nature. In a linear world, order of magnitude differences are extremely large, but in a world possessing chaos. . .. Consciousness from a deep well through a narrow tunnel. . . . If your constituents are so lowly, Mr. Politician, how then can your position as their representative be so lofty? Language determines thought. We say more what we are able to say than what we want to say. An example of this is attempting conversation in a second language in which one is not entirely fluent with an intelligent native of that language. What is signified by the phrase, “the back-kwd=reification of meaning”? Seeing influences of an inbred population versus seeing fragments of subliminal racial/ethnic influences.

A choice alters the statistics. But changing the statistics alters choice, as well. Excited by glimpses of alterity within the self – this is not arrogance of bad faith when the other objectifies or sees himself reified in your presence. That which applies to the description of phenomena cannot substantively explicated the processes underlying phenomena qua phenomena (as such). Duality may be conceived of in two fundamentally distinct ways. As opposite extremes of a single spectrum, or as orthogonal axes embedded in a manifold. Statistics of people “letting themselves go” and endlessly copying a page of text. What is the underlying common principle here? “Sour grapes” as a refusal to acknowledge contingency’s interweaving into the fabric of one’s developing biography. Although the behavior of the individual within his historical context is not literally determined, it is nevertheless determined in an analogical sense. At least this is how we attempt to subdue the threat of radical contingency which threatens to undermine the integrity of the ego and, hence, its sovereignty. Intelligence is itself an adaptation. No general concept of intelligence is on account of this possible. But is this really a coherent possibility? A tissue of private associations bearing the superficial resemblance to an objective reference, and which we believe we share with our fellow humans. Intersubjectivity functions so well as a kind of “cash value” of objectivity that the logic and mechanism of equating the two, i.e., intersubjectivity = objectivity must surely hold serious implications for the concept of universal or transcendental mind, not merely as a concept

derived from abstract thought, c.f., the general concept of how abstract thought is generated cannot itself be an abstract thought in terms of some product/output of a temporally based, physical process of abstraction. So intelligence is not merely a capacity to adapt to change. The prefix “post” refers to a pervasive apostasy within modern culture. What would you say is the problem in a situation of this type? Conscious and unconscious modes of determination are distinct. Conscious and unconscious modes of determination are distinct. Figure and representation implies disconnectedness, ground and participation, a connectedness. Only part of that which is truly alive protrudes into spacetime. Gravity, consciousness, free will, determinism, . . . The Self is infused with a great amount of otherness: involuntary thoughts, impulses, emotional reactions, etc. Contingency seems to escape the distinction between self and other. Postmodernity, posthistorical, postindustrial, post mortem. The concept of universal wavefunction is inconsistent with relativity theory. X(Psi(x,t)) = X; T(Psi(x,t)) = T. No such thing as an object at rest is treated within relativity theory. This is also a perhaps more essential truth of the quantum theory. Only if time is understood as a rate rather than a dimension like an extra spatial dimension can the idea of a spatiotemporal variations in

spacetime, i.e., gravity waves, be rendered self-consistent or coherent. The appearance of infinite quantities, such as mass, length, time, density, etc., points to the breaddown of the relativistic description of reality under extreme boundary conditions. The paradox of determination consists in this: it is simultaneously under- and overdetermination. Inertia may perhaps be explained in a more unified manner as stemming from resistance to changes in 4-angular momentum. Madness and Genius are probably both characterized by the self-same feeling of prepossession in the epiphany of an emergent but inevitableseeming notion. We’ve all heard the expression of “great minds thinking alike”. The question as to whether great theories are discovered of invented appears dependent upon the amount of beauty and elegance possessed by the theory under consideration: the theory of general relativity, for instance, appears to many theoretical physicists to have been a great discovery, the so-called standard model of particle physics, to have been a great theoretical invention or construct. Another important factor in deciding this issue with respect to a particular theory: was the theory largely the creation of a single person within a relatively short span, or was it largely a collaborative effort taking place over an extended period. What is the nature of supervenience, more particularly, causal supervenience. One perhaps only needs to have studied the “great philosophers” in order to possess a wealth of material from which to draw for merely illustrative purposes, as well as, perhaps, to lend more authority to one’s own thought, i.e., scholarship. Those who are adept in the use of metaphor are continually

misunderstood by the more literal-minded. In conversation the us of an extended metaphor may lead other persons in the discussion to seize upon the literal content of the metaphor or illustration, misinterpreting the thrust or point of the discussion as being about something referred to literally in the context of the metaphor. Unassumingness versus head-tripping as a basic mode of being. Canonical forms, permutations, combinations, etc., as applying to “expectations values”. Investigate some possible deeper reasons for having applied the term, “expectation value” to the value . Why people feel the need to indulge in name-dropping. Consciousness as the Wordless, the Indescribable, the Unnamable. All metaphor as secretly pointing to something literal. . . . Coherence as the essence of a gravitating body possessing inertia. There is no causal relationship obtaining between abstract entities. Abstract entities may be kinematically related, but not dynamically related. Any system whose behavior can be predicted according to a formula of linear relationships must be a closed, atemporal system. Postmodern exposition of the principles of astrology. Is Astrology effective for general system-theoretic reasons, or are there reasons for its effectiveness which are peculiar to itself? Astrology is not effective due to any objective identities obtaining between changing abstract, zodiacal relationships of the heavenly bodies to evolving relationships within the many spheres of one’s subjective existence, such as to ones social relationships. Rather Astrology becomes effective in its individual practice through a two step process of the identification, as opposed to

identity, of these zodiacal relationships to aspects of one’s predicament (by the astrologer) which are only adapted to one’s unique situation by the individual himself if one possesses sufficient creativity and imagination in not so much the recognition of parallels as the determining of subjective elements after a fashion which exhibits such parallels with respect to the astrological interpretive structures. Interpretation as inter pre tation. Etymological analysis is capable of pointing up the linguistic infrastructural metaphor-ical basis of the literal. To term something “metaphor” is not necessarily to denigrate its explanatory value. The transcendent lying at the core of the immanent in the negotiation for objectivity. Language is the body of the mind, intuition, its soul. The knock one does not hear is the knock which awakens, the knock one hears is for the awakening of others. “No Thing” is the ground which is prior to all “things” and so is “everything” in the sense of being the origin of all things. One must become “no thing” in order to achieve union with the ground from which all dual opposite forms arise (“things”). To “transcend” means to become “no thing”. “Ground” is transcendent in this specific sense, i.e., it is “no thing” itself. Plurality presupposes “thinghood” which, in turn, demands conditions, limitations, which is to say, boundaries. From which it follows that there can only be one “no thing” or ground of existence. But there is no limit upon the number of grounds of Being, as Being transcends Existence. Following Plato, we say that Existence constitutes the limitation of Being. If Reality is indeed One, then It is not so in any formal or abstract sense because Ground is itself generally prior to formal categories or abstractions. The Ground is to be identified with (not “identical” to) the

Middle which is forever excluded by reason and formal logic. Two random fluctuations patterns, each individually containing no information, but in which the two fluctuation patters are correlated by virtue of both belonging to the same quantum system described by a single state function, . Information does not add because  = 1 + 2 and P = * = ||**2 = 1*1 + 2*2 + 21*2. Data can be combined additively. Information cannot be so combined. Correlations arise through the cross term, 1*2. Data are abstracted from the density functions, ||**2, and information is abstracted from the wavefunctions, (I). Fluctuations which appear local, may always contain contributions from nonlocal correlations. For example, = = = + + . The last term may be the nonlocal correlation of momentum functions. Information cannot become intersubjective, i.e., objective, until they have been reduced to data. Intersubjectivity seems necessary to objectivity because |**2| is always or , interaction and self-interaction. Infinity has structure: form and formlessness are in it united. All observables may be decomposed into the creation and annihilation operators of the 2nd quantization formalism of quantum mechanics. Mathematics seems to be more than a mere language in the sense of an arbitrary system of description. “But what, asks Wheeler, breathes fire into the equations”: how to determine when “now” is? When convergence of infinite sums is dependent upon the order in which subsums are organized, the infinite sum possess an intrinsic

topology. Mathematics is the language of the inconceivable. Amplitudes are like waves, but unlike them, the do not carry any energy nor do they require any medium in which to travel. Essay Proposals: “Passive/aggressive behaviors in those who have little or no power in the “big arenas” of life”, “Ego-preserving ideation”, “Alien-ness of the human form – whence came such ideas?”, “Carl Sagan’s hypothesis” (“Pseudosagan hypothesis”), “Origins and meaning of small coincidences”, “ The reminder theory of ‘pseudo-significance’” One lifetime, however long, is not enough time to exhibit even a fraction of the abilities and develop the potential of an individual human mind. The case-value of concepts and their open-ended evolution. Axiom 3: The alterity of the other is radical. Subjunctivity of metaphor in postmodern criticism Any energy input from “outside” must manifest itself as radical novelty, otherwise, suspect an “inside job”. It is the action of the free will of the observer, not his individual consciousness per se which induces collapse of the system wavefunction. The brain’s modal structure is not merely for the execution of freely willed acts. Is the mind the interface between two transcendent beings? You know you are in denial when you look for multiple confirmations of

a fact which should be obvious. Living humbly, unassumingly, and without illusions. Ask yourself if you could do it. Processing information: what about “exformation”, “unformation”? Built-in adaptability to increased meaning – of experience, September 2011 c.f., the rationality of the genetic code, DNA. Rationality as spanning and connecting all possibilities, not merely those that fit into or conform to any particular system. This is a notion of rationality that transcends logic because perhaps the logic of rationality is simpler than that of Peano arithmetic. Reproducible phenomena are local phenomena; irreproducible or original phenomena are nonlocally based. No modal structure for the infinite though, according to Cantor, there is indeed a hierarchical structure. The true nature and limitations of representations. . . The situation is more complex than dynamism and boundary conditions upon this dynamism. She allowed her stalker to link his website to her own webpage. Things trigger associations which cause us to search those things for additional features possessed by the earlier objects with which we are associating. Representing “where you are from” is a kind of showing off. Evolution of language constitutes the processing of experience at the collective level, Septermber 2011 a redrawing of concept-maps. Because language necessarily determines thought, partially at least, no one language is perfectly translatable into another. The “rollover effect”, which signals the language learner’s having gained fluency in a second language is evidence of this: the language learner develops habits of

thought within the second language in the contually reapplied heat of conversation in which he changes what he wants to say, but lacks the proper expressions for, in order to say something similar or merely related just to keep the conversation going, utilizing the second language expressions he presently commands. By the time the language learner becomes able to effortlessly keep up in conversations with natives, these many new habits of his associating ideas expressed within the new language, forged during his struggles to gain fluency have by this time grown into a large accumulated mass of associations, which forever more affect not only the speakers word and phrase selection, but also his selection of ideas and concepts. February 2013

Consider the preface from au=Michel Serres’ book of essays entitled, “The Parasite”: “Michel Serres, the polymath, presents his translator with an extremely arduous task. A difficult style, multilingual puns, a wealth of knowledge and references-all combine to make the text not at all easy to elucidate. Two words merit brief mention in this preface. The first is the title, parasite. In French, the word has three meanings: a biological parasite, a social parasite, and static. The English parasite corresponds only to the first two meanings in French [italics mine]. Thus the reader should always be aware of this additional resonance in the French that is not translatable into English. The second word is hote, which corresponds to both host and guest in English. I have used guest and host in English where one of the two meanings was implied more than the other, but the other word is always implicitly present [italics mine]. At times, I have used the two together to reinforce the double meaning.” As remarked in the Wikipedia entry on Michel Serres (on the date of this writing), “Serres earned a reputation as a spell-binding lecturer and as the author of remarkably beautiful and enigmatic prose so reliant on the sonorities of French that it is considered practically untranslatable.” When changing of private language representations are not merely translation, we have information processing at the level of the individual, as opposed to the collective.

The equation of a sufficient condition for something’s coming into being is logically equated with some determinate sum of necessary conditions. This formula only applies to closed or formal systems. This is because open systems always possess “that which is conditioned,” the residuum left after all necessary conditions being removed. Deterministic causality has to do with the kinematics of relationships between conditions, with the “that which is conditioned” assumed to be utterly inert and indifferent to the passage of time. Yet it is the very substance of all conditions in which temporality consists. Are we to suppose that direction and “rate” of time’s passage is conditional. There is always, in part, a drawing from the cultural linguistic heritage and partly arbitrary coinage involved in the naming of similarities and differences noted in new experiences by collectives. Metaphor is involved in the organic growth of the meaning of relationships as the drawing of similarities between things based in sometimes radically different contexts points up greater meaning for the transplanted relationships. The orientation toward this increase in meaning can be of two distinct types, depending upon the basic character of the knower/observer: the increase can either be interpreted as an unfolding of preexisting latent meaning and relatedness, or as a creation of genuinely novel meaning, made to dovetail with earlier experience, but not through a merely revisionistic interpretation. Synonymic transformations are the transformations of associative networks as current best estimates of relatedness. The example of “people looking like their cars” or their dogs is similar to the phenomenon of married couples growing to resemble one another after many years together.

I would describe my psychic abilities, still underdeveloped. Why we cannot control and systematically develop these abilities may relate to the “root locus of control problem.” The stream cannot rise higher than its source, but may attain to the level of its source, but the expectation value of its energy must be zero – although instantaneous fluctuations of energy may nonetheless be present within such a stream. What is the relationship between popular song and narcissistic fantasies. “We do not accept these challenges now so that future generations will face lesser ones. But in order to permit them to meet still greater ones.” Because one life is not enough for either moral or intellectual development of the potential for both which many human beings possess. This would depend upon not all existence preceding its essence. On the other hand, a radical statement contained by this axiom of existentialist philosophy leaves no room for the operation of consciousness: if consciousness is the direct intuition of Time, then neither perfect, crystalline perfection (pure essence) nor radical fluxion (pure existence) provides adequate space for the function of temporality, nor for the intuiting of it by Mind. This is so because the intuition of time must take place within Time itself. Degrees of openness of a closed system, of closedness of an open system. . . What about the end points of this spectrum – only approached, but never achieved. Directionality of time dilation as due to relative velocity – proof of spacetime structure? The speed of time which is the magnitude of its velocity (known as proper time) is always c. The component of velocity of an object along the direction of my time axis is based on the projection of its time axis upon mine. It is the contradictions which drive the temporal evolution.

Contradictions between dual opposites which have been invented by the mind, that is. And so then are these dual opposites not, after all, real? What about the contradictions found in the dreamscape which alert us to the fact that the unfolding is of unreal events? In the real world, these contradictions are as subtle as those underlying the brain’s integrative processes. Processing information is increasing the context of data connecting data together. No pure reception or transmission of information is possible. Pure reception is information entering a “dead end;” pure transmission is information emanating from an isolated system. Life is a gold mine of metaphors. We can only achieve depth by first acquiring breadth. Metaphors appear arbitrary initially, but crystallize into virtual inevitability with continued use/participation with them. The “source” originates within the self or from outside it. Glory before death versus glory after. What frequently makes it difficult to let go is the thought that the love object is in conflict, that a kind of mythic battle between the forces of good and evil is taking place deep within the love object’s psyche. And, of course, oneself represents the forces of good and order, the competitor, those of evil and chaos. To regain the lost love object can only be accomplished by freeing the “imprisoned child” or “angel” which has been abducted by the narcissistic self. One must heroically retrieve the splinters from deep within the mind of the love object. Typically, only oneself has the intimate knowledge of the love object which would be required to effect the “rescue” implied here. But one

must first get through the battlements. au=

Ernst Becker’s “heroic sense of self-significance”: myth always informs the sense of self of the individual as much as it informs that of the collective. When a person or thing achieves the status of being an icon, it no longer has to justify itself. Because music activates the right hemisphere it tends at the same time to suspend the activity of the left – an already high level of human suggestibility is rendered even greater. Poetry is so powerfully suggestive because coherent thought manages to be expressed despite the imposing of metrical, metaphorical/allegorical, and stylistic constraints. This is what enhances the wholeness and originality, and hence, secret appeal to the authority of the poet as conduit of divine insight. The psychological pain is greatly ameliorated whenever some lasting or broader lesson can be drawn from an injury to one’s pride or self-esteem. A splitting between abducted child and “cold, calculating bitch” frequently helps drive the ambiguity of the interpretation of rejection and, in turn, the chaotic play of conflicting emotions. I am here reminded of the Duran Duran song, “Because you’re lonely in you nightmare, let me in.” Meaning frequently starts out as denotative, but through continued use by many different speakers, the associations with myriad different contexts piles up and the term becomes largely connotative. The more intimately known are speakers to one another, that is, the more associative networks they hold in common, the more connotative will be their communications. July 2011 By extension all of the messages which traverse one’s grey matter possess no innate denotation at all, but are

purely connotative, c.f, Russell On Denoting. Denotation is an abstract artifact of connotation. Who you are is what you care about. Can a fundamental shift in consciousness be referenced by the individual? It is as though each entity has its own indeterminate ground. But what makes this seem possible is the possibility or existence of multiple transcendent beings to which these entities can be objects of knowledge.

Is it possible to have a complex signal which results from the modulation of one signal by another, but which is not equivalent to a superposition of two or more signals? Aperiodic functions such as are treated by chaos theory, cannot be represented as a superposition of periodic functions. As noted already, periodicity is only possible within a closed dynamical system. So the existence of chaos is an indication that “outside influences” are at work. The collective can create works possessing an ordered ambiguity and latent structure of networked metaphors of greater complexity than what can be produced by any single individual. Advanced technology is a perfect example of the superiority of the collective to the individual. Tenuous metaphors: the means by which the overdetermined chaos is filtered and vague associations amplified into crystalline conceptions. Dual quality with the capacity to transform into its opposite vs. without such a capacity.

Logic versus finding the path which takes one between systems. No metasystem exists which dictates. This change of systems. One may need to enter a “false set of inputs” to provoke the person to jump systems. Tenaciously robust song lyrics are timeless. If you try to think about what a metaphor literally means in terms of the imagined elements signified within it there is a great deal of ambiguity but of an unimportant kind. Metaphors have an underdetermined literal meaning. Sartre says in Being and Nothingness that “as long as we are conscious of what we are, we can never entirely be what we are.” Otherwise, we are landed in an infinite regress. In other words, a conscious being is never identical with itself and yet there is nonetheless a basis of his continuity through time. Does this fact point up the transcendental “nature” of the self? What if the very nature of the transcendental self is precisely its infinite regressiveness. The self in this case would be infinite and bounded while its incarnation is finite and unbounded. Due to the overdetermination of nature, empirical confirmation can be found for any theory, so long as the theory is internally consistent. Consider the back-reaction of the creative processes of each individual mind upon the collective ground’s activity from which physical law derives. Information versus data is not an absolute but merely a relative dual opposition. The temporality of the past: the past when present did not possess enough time to “crystallize.”

What is the difference between expression and communication? Utilize in the discussion the fact that communication is mediated through the use of “expressions.” Representing “where you’re from.” The appeal of contemporary music. This appeal has frequently been thought to be transcendence, but in reality, it is usually just narcissistic self-glorification. How can “complete integrity” be always desirable in a postmodern world which requires one to play so many incompatible roles? Isn’t some “flakiness” good as a viable adaptation to postmodern conditions of social existence? When I was in my late teens and early twenties, I was in the habit of attempting to “figure out” the answers to the philosophical questions which puzzled me most. Now, about 10 to 15 years later, I am still wrestling with these same questions, only I now simply prepare my mind so that appealing approaches to solution, not answers “dawn on me.” Is all belief and ideology really just disingenuity? What about the person who runs in fear of the necrophile – one who secretly knows that it is what is false within oneself which attracts his reductive gaze? Is it the necrophilic urge which really motivates the stalker? Those individuals who are born with the imprint of a particular facial expression are highly biased and specialized in their mental and emotional functioning. Can God’s genetic blueprint be determined by subtracting Mary’s DNA from Jesus’? If not, why not? When you view patterns of conditioning as being superimposed upon a

vacuum, you begin to understand their pervasive determining power. And yet I possess a greater relevance and universality in your life than can be so easily dismissed as our having met completely by chance. This is a kind of sociological example of the anthropic cosmological principle. Perhaps we could term this the anthropic sociological principle? Unique enabler of changes in the self – is this possible? Returning without immediately realizing it – returning without ever realizing it. Realization cannot exhaust reality. More exists than can be reified. Reality can never show itself false, can never work itself into a cul-de-sac, a lie that it cannot lie its way out of. And so there must always remain sufficient play in the system for it to work out its apparent contradictions and inconsistencies. If the inconsistencies are sufficiently severe they will infect the mind of the observer/participator. But our emotions and motives are also alloyed with compassion and loving concern, just with mean-spirited impulses. What’s the difference between knowing and not having access and not knowing at all? If the filtering structures are independent of the flux, then they may not be thought to contain information? All of our categories are like ladders we climb and then kick away from ourselves. The media-manufactured image of femininity. It was men who invented Lingerie. Until the 19th century, women’s roles in theater were played exclusively

by male actors. Male homosexuals exhibit a kind of hyperfemininity. The repressed elements of the self, according to Jung, are free to form among themselves a more or less unified, integral alter ego and operating beneath the awareness of the socially-defined self. Culture and society tries to exaggerate the sexual differences between differently gendered individuals. XYY, XXX, etc. individuals. Kwd=

reification and meaning crystallization. Example: the over-used term, “genius.” How does this relate to logocentrism? The meaning that those actions have, the meaning that we give them. Temporal back-action. But how are we to understand the back-reaction of one open system upon another? Will implies originality, power, and creativity. Those who respect and seek power do not value peoples’ private opinions, motivations for imaginary actions which they lack the courage to put into practice. To these people dreams which are never translated into action are “less than nothing.” Is there such a thing as completely dissociated experience? At what point does fantasy life become dissociative experience? Acts of true creativity always protruded into the established order in multiply connected fashion. A particularly grave sin it is to believe in your heart that the law of Karma will serve to avenge the infringement of one’s petty, selfish interests.

Investigate these two distinct aspects of temporality: succession versus formation. The instinctive, intrinsic meaning which is an unintegrated response of the higher central nervous system. This is before the instinctive senseperception reactions have been associated with experience. As they way, “when you invest in “gold”, you invest in something “solid”. The quotation marks indicate that we are secretly reifying a complex of phenomenal qualities. Are the phenomenal qualities we attribute to objects no more objectively connected to them than they are in cases of synesthesia? A part of the self is arrested at each step along the learning curve. What is it which doesn’t change about a person? Their consciousness. Shed the baggage of your individuality and you’ll climb that ladder more quickly. If a prediction is partly based upon the processing and interpretation of other predictions, does the first prediction have greater probability than if it is picked out of “thin air.” The so-called spirit world does not distinguish between images which are only metaphors from images which represent something concrete. The problem of etiology and the infinite formal manifestation of the formulas. Duality is system-dependent. True versus False versus New System. This precisely the basis of Hans Reichenbach’s three-valued logic which is developed in his work, The Philosphical Foundations of Quantum Mechanics.

“Nature” and the theorist work in cooperation. Reality is one, a unity, but in a manner which transcends our usual distinction between unity and plurality. This would be a true, transcendent unity. The human being never operates out of his entire consciousness but switches between different ones as between distinct modes Is it from this that we “intuit” the possibility of reincarnation? What about the case in which we believe we have a concept of something like, say, soul or free will, however, upon further scrutiny the notion “crumbles” into a loose collection or montage of abstractions (taken from experience) although this experience may be itself rationally constituted a la Kant. There is not way you can know what will happen tomorrow, but when tomorrow comes, sure enough, you will know it. It is only the part of the self which doesn’t change which experiences time and change. The true subject of experience is eternal, transcendent. Radio station that plays nothing but scratchy, popping and hissing vinyl. I haven’t even gotten all of my toys together so how can I even get ready to play? Making distinctions within a category which possesses vagueness. Is this any guarantee that our loftiest concepts will not somehow fail to refer? Like those of God, Soul, free will, etc. Like the spaces in the walls of the Mormon temple, the architect had not idea what these passages in the walls overhead would be used for. . . This is what is peculiar about the defining of such open-ended concepts.

Do they begin as metaphors, half-baked notions, ambiguous, vaguely emotionally-charged images? The collective unconscious appears to create these open-ended notions and the collective consciousness finds myriad uses for them – only later do they become fleshed out as to their ultimate meaning and significance. Inventive persons of a stereotypical group can always redefine and reprocess this stereotype. But most members of “the group” are not aware of this possibility. What is the rational and moral basis for necrophilia, broadly speaking? You are not trying to figure her out, just to reconcile the contradictions within your own construct or representation of her. Intelligence is positively correlated with strength of neural discharge. Is this because strength of the neural discharges is correlated with the strength with which the mind is stimulated by the brain? This is somewhat in contrast to the “reducing valve” or “radio receiver” analogy of conscious perception and thought. We must distinguish between forming abstractions versus manipulating pre-existing ones. Since communication is always a process comprised of both in mutual proportions which can never be completely disentangled, language can never be merely an implement distinguishable from that to which it is “applied.” The matrix of language is reactive and not passive. In the absence of genuine creative power, there is the display of mastery available to the critic: the effecting of a brilliant reduction. Reduction of a creative work to a collection of influences (memes) is to explode utterly its claim to authorship. Instead of coining new terms out of thin air, many philosophers prefer to

borrow terms from some status-conferring language such as Greek, German, or French. Another device used is to stretch the scope of some highly familiar term or adopt one of these familiar terms to an acception which is on the periphery of normal usage. Gradually, more and more of the routine impulses, emotions, and thoughts are relegated to “the creature’s domain.” The essential in reflective thought may be contrasted with the providential. Why, despite all that postmodern literature has stated heretofore, we just can’t seem to “get away from Plato?” What function is served by narcissistic fantasy and should we permit it to continue – is it a necessary element in the normal, healthy life of the psyche? Topological proof of the transcendental nature of consciousness as a category, quality, or property. Memory and imagination explored in terms of the digital Cat Scanner’s reconstitution of imaging data in the form of slices which were never originally taken? Is the hidden, underlying rationality of experience which permits the phenomenon of imagination? There is internal versus external perception but does this distinction apply as well to thought? Joy is immediate and does not require the promise of anything. Logocentrism is an artifact of the neural network’s enhancement subroutines.

Illusions as such are not necessarily false representations. But the truth of illusions is essentially incidental, or perhaps, co-incidental. So the radical alterity of the other is overcome by the transcendental unity of consciousness qua consciousness. But from radical alterity we must distinguish transcendental alterity. The determinacy of thought is based solely upon the fixed or deterministically changing boundary conditions upon the flow of data and transformations of data structures. But the changes in the highest level boundary conditions cannot be deterministic. By virtue of the being of more than two transcendent alterities, we may speak of higher orders of alterity in the sense of these alterities being distinct from one another in distinct ways. But do such higher order distinctions presuppose the possibility of the similarity of transcendentally distinct alterities?

Thought prepares the advent of insight. Gene/meme hypothesis of textual composition. Genes and a genetic code may provide the greatest access of data structures to dynamic information exchange/processing. It is perhaps remarkable that since Victorian times, the spiritual realm has been identified with the fourth dimension. Here again, is a case of a thinker hitting upon a great truth well in advance of the emergence of an adequately prepared ground for this discovery. There are broad implications which result from choosing to link through association, two heretofore distinct contexts. Only “will” can perform the reduction from infinite formlessness to the assumption of form.

Two kinds of Absolute, that of Will and Representation. Thought as a manifestation of confusion, disunity, or an attempt at reintegration of recollection. Thought as revelation or insight. The subconscious or unconscious “thinks” in completed thought chains which are large, closed networks of associated meaning. These thought togelogies intrude into the conscious mind at myriad points within the conscious mind’s time stream. To see a text or structure in a new context is to see, simultaneously, what is arbitrary and what is “natural” about the structure. A program which doesn’t change the operating system cannot detect all programs which can (viruses). The relationship between the ego and the id, when a healthy one, is one where the one receives inspiration and the other, glory. Hume’s arguments against considering constant conjunction as a demonstration of causal connection can, perhaps, be applied to the constant conjunction of the narcissistic id along with the rational, reflective self’s ideation. Evil is silliness masquerading as something serious. Try to imagine the depth of the love-hate relationship which Satan has with the Lord. This is simply not possible for us. Investigate the necessity of memory loss/forgetting with respect to a thermodynamic analogy with an open system’s entropy. The relationship between selves and Beings is reminiscent of that

between mathematical infinity and Cantor’s first transfinite cardinal, aleph-null. Any categories of transcendent beings would themselves transcend any conceptual framework. The mental versus physical distinction is transcended in this realm. Because existence versus nonexistence is really only presence versus absence which is not a tautologous disjunction within an open system. So both existence and nonexistence require conditions and an explanation. Where the meanings are predetermined until placed within a linguistic context (post-linguistic), we are here really only concerned with signals. Reality as opposed to simulation: dynamic participation and collaboration between district alterities rather than character representations. I suppose that if we’re going to show the arbitrariness of English words we’d best start with the “please-thank you” words. . . Combining the quantum indistinguishability principle with special relativity leads to the hypothesis of the continual refreshing of all matter with vacuum energy. Insight gains authority with being articulated with only the bestsounding phrases. But in massive objects, much of the refreshing of energy is through the mass itself. And so a kind of identity and continuity is created. I know that there are insights that I am going through life without

because there are certain misfortunes that I have not yet suffered. How nonlocality completely divorces reality from its heretofore basis in the notion of substance. The person of few accomplishments does not feel good about himself and seeks to hitch his homely wooden cart to a rising star. Discuss the inversion paradigm shift in the transition from classical to quantum physics. When the brain is networked with the nonlocally-connected quantum vacuum, it exists in a ghostlike superposition of myriad mutuallyexclusive near copies of itself. Necrophilia: to expose the lying imposter of appearance. “I promise you, I’m going somewhere with this.” Quote from a preacher heard on a radio broadcast, which intuitively seems to touch upon the earlier statement about how “one cannot get away from Plato because one must utilize the Forms in order to deconstruct them.” Failure of Memory (not really clear about why I wrote this – probably an idea for a book) The speed of light is infinite when relativistic effects are not taken into account. For instance, a space traveler moving at 70.7% of the speed of light will only require 2 years (his time) to travel four light years (as reckoned from Earth, that is). UFO’s are perhaps best understood, in general terms, as “anomalous” in the Kuhnian sense which merely “telegraph” deep flaws within the system of metaphysical assumptions (paradigm) upon which present physical and psychological theories are based. January 2013 In some of the headier science fiction stories, it is always assumed that the mentality of

extraterrestrials is so, ahem, alien, that the only way communication can take place between them and us is in a form that is one-way and this by virtue of the ability of aliens possessing superior intelligence to pull stock metaphors from the subconscious (which is in the midst of responding to the presence of the aliens) of hapless Earthlings in order to reflect these back. But really one wonders if this isn’t in fact how everyone initially comes to make contact with the outside world anyway, i.e., infants acquiring the language of the vastly superior “big people who make funny sounds.” This suggests and illustrates the notion that if we are ever to communicate with extraterrestrials, several preconditions must first be in place: 1) they must be more intelligent than us. 2) they must have been in the past, perhaps in the very distant past, much as we are now. 3) they must have an effective method of getting us to acquire their language and concepts (which we currently have not the slightest clue about). Prior to contact, however, there will have to be some sort of common denominator of mental process and protolanguage to enable this, which points up a very important insight. Successful communication with extraterrestrials, perhaps someday in man’s distant future, shall only come about within the context of some over-arching providence. Whether that providence is in the form of the “intelligent design” of an eternally preexisting universe as a self-causing, intelligentthough-impersonal organism or of some superhuman person - intelligent designer/creator is beside the point. But the key factor in whether the communication from the superior intelligence is actually ever received is the following: does the recipient of the communication ever get the idea to deconstruct the metaphorical texture in which the communication was placed, i.e., “unwrap the façade of the message” so as to get at an actual message? Or would this be to have been merely successfully indoctrinated into the new, originally alien context? Any action except refraining from the unnecessary is vulnerable to a revisionistic interpretation. We might term this higher order duality, the duality of temporality. The right hemisphere and the left seem to be in an endless metaphysical

debate. The right attempts to broaden, the left hemisphere to restrict the scope of the meaning of the constructs of language. Multiple data copies necessary because of limited data access information available ( accessible?) Processing information is not determination of intended context. Reductionism and holism are both examples of determinism, the former, causal, the latter, teleological. OR is there such a thing as “bad genes?” We must remember that there is not ultimate duality within an opensystem. Yet temporality seems to presuppose duality. But openendedness that precludes duality also seems to require temporality. These are two fundamentally distinct modes of temporality, that of closed versus open system temporality. Have you had a dream about a stranger? Do you want to know if this person actually exists? Soon the internet will be large and integrated enough for you to actually have some chance of finding this person through running a “dream-matching search.” This type of search involves a search engine taking dream descriptions of people, places and events from the night before, entered into a website database during the following 24 hour period by hopefully millions of participants worldwide possessing exceedingly active and vivid dream lives. Human beings’ self image and sense of self worth is highly relativistic. The “crackpot-lightening rod” disinformation campaign theory of the Roswell Incident. Human beings do not realize how truly similar to each other they are, without regard to inessential particulars. This idea is supported by the

notion that every human being possesses the same qualitative spectrum of impulses/motivations as every other human being. What really accounts for the vast differences in the behaviors demonstrated by different people (groups of people) is the weighting of these impulses with respect to one another. This notion can only be rendered truly consistent by admitting the existence of unconscious and repressed impulses. One must begin to examine the subjective and anecdotal basis of classification schemes. Many forms of psychoses are simply fluctuations which lie behind expectation values for coordinated behavior assuming a coherent, macroscopic form. Gödel-numbering and human suggestibility with respect to deriving alternative meanings from sentences reconstituted from sentences in which the spaces between the words have been removed. What about the mathematical Hebrew language in this regard? Gödel-numbering is, of course, arbitrary. July 2011 The fact that in the Hebrew language all of the letters are also numbers means that God was in fact the originator of Gödel-numbering! Reality can only manifest itself in a defined manner through interacting with the other (feedback). The music is still playing and we have not yet found our proper respective places. All outward manifestation is founded upon some conflict within the ether. Whenever heretofore unknown conditions are engineered within the open-ended substrate (quantum field), the dynamism then reveals heretofore unsuspected modes of operation.

Astrology, just as in the case of so-called “normal science” only “works” because of the mass of collective feedback between theorists’ and experimenters’ assumptions and an indeterminate, eternally incomplete and open-ended “nature.” Deconstruction undermines motivation toward the production of great and “inspired” works. Relevant topics here are: The Gods, the Muses, Genius, Romanticism of Madness, all of which must be thrown out. Degeneracy of the state of nothingness; its degeneracy should be infinitely degenerate with respect to all possible variables. We cannot live our lives in the expectation that we will in every ( or any ) case be “vindicated.” Strange or chaotic attractor theory of both love and meaning. Meaning is created because it is arbitrary. The day that interactive virtual reality technology permits us to “walk a mile in the shoes of our brother” will be the day that ushers in the age of the universal brotherhood of Man. The world wide web and the Internet will someday become so extensive and integrated that you will be able to type any sequence of words into a search engine and call up links to websites containing somewhere within themselves that precise description. July 2011 Let’s say this were true because, for example our reality is secretly an ancestor simulation and there’s an indefinite number of these simulations “running” on the “system”, and the breakthrough in quantum computing has allowed us within this simulation to connect to the Internet server on which ours as well as all of these myriad other ancestor simulations are running. Possibilities not realized in our simulation supposedly must be realized in some other simulation. What this really means though is just that the description of each case or state of affairs not realized in our simulation

must have literal correspondence with some state of affairs within one or more of the other simulations. But this is not at all the same thing as all the possibilities definable for us here necessarily being realized somewhere else. We could replace the notion above of server (on which the myriad ancestor simulations are “running”) with the notion, consciousness as such and replace the concept, “ancestor simulation” with that of individual consciousness and we would have here an exact analogy. This line of speculation is starting to remind us of Wittgenstein’s discussion of a private language. @$ Can we just agree that the technology involved in the production of one’s conscious states represents the fruits of a science appropriate to a class III civilization? While the subject matter of the content of these conscious states is that of a civilization that is still a few centuries away from being class 0! The theoretical height of technological development shall be nothing more nor less than our reproducing the technology that 1) makes conscious states possible and 2) makes the content of the conscious states to be coherent and about the existence of a rational (in the sense of cause and effect, conservation laws, etc.) objective world. But clearly if such attempts at reproduction of technology succeed, it will be at one remove and before this point is reached, we shall have detected the ancestor simulation and learned to manipulate and then “master” its dynamics. It is the detection, measurement and discovery of the causal laws of the ancestor simulation’s dynamical computational substrate that shall be responsible for our success in pushing our own technological development to the limits posed by relativistic quantum mechanics. What if the mystery of consciousness is not to be sought in the examination of physics and chemistry (the phenomena of anaesthesia certainly indicate that chemistry is not important to the processes underlying consciousness) because these are only the rules of the simulation (the algorithm). Consciousness represents the locus in which the simulation must “tie itself off” like the knotted ends of thread on the underside of some elaborate weaving and represents the very point of contact between the simulated world and the real world inhabited by either 1) the real person resurrected, 2) a member of the class I or II civilization who is playing an RPG with the ancestor as his “avatar”, 3)

genuinely new persons who are simulations of ancestors of the designers of the simulation program, but in this sense the consciousness of the ancestor is not a simulation (that’s a manifestation of the bottom level or 0th level of a hierarchy of simulations.) The question arise here of whether the ancestor simulation is individual or communal. It doesn’t seem to make much sense to suppose that a “simulation” of the interaction of persons long dead would secretly be the interplay of RPG avatars (controlled by real persons who are themselves members of some class I or II civilization) unless the simulation were an ancestor reenactment. September 2011

Similar to the figure ground transformation effected by the Copernican Revolution and reenacted by Kant in the field of epistemology, linguists and sociologists inverted the relationship of individual and society: far from society being composed by individuals, individuals were, in their very sense of self-identy, constituted by social relations and forces. The purpose of substance is for continuity which is needed as a conduit or path for something else? Re: scalar waves. Historicity is temporal context. Contrast this with “spatial context.” There is no distinction between proximate and remote causes in a deterministic chain. To avoid determinism, space would have to be constituted by the causal relations themselves. Interrogation techniques: control questions, repeat questions in front of the source and some of his/her associates who are also present. Can information be completely free, i.e., not “touching upon” that which is informed by it? Data merely point to information addresses or links within a network. Data concerns representational knowledge objects. Data tell the standalone system where to patch into the network. Of course, the “place”

into which one must patch changes in a manner which can only be tracked (not traced) so long as one remains “connected” to the network. Why must there always be side consequences/effects to enemy designed/engineered process/procedure. The logos of illusion versus the illusion of logos. Because of the overdetermination of all phenomena, a given particular perception does not point to any unique situation of conditions within “the external world,” does not point to anything in particular being the case. Yet this predicament would not seem to apply to the presence of one’s own contents of consciousness. In this case, the phenomena do not seem to be overdetermined, and this is perhaps due to the fact that conscious mental contents point to themselves, while at the same time pointing beyond themselves. That is, conscious mental contents possess intentionality despite succeeding, unlike perceptions of the external world, in also pointing to themselves. These mental contents point to themselves as something external. Emerging as they do from an open, indeterminate system, they cannot have been brought into being through any sort of deterministic process, but must have been brought into being intentionally. They point to that in which a causal chain originates. For any link in the chain which is not a point of origination (rather than propagation according to some rule or other) carries something through itself unchanged. Nonlocality of mental action is implied by the coherence of the influences of multiple points of origination which have had not previous causal connection to one another. In an open system, one cannot make categorical assertions. Of course, the above statement is an example par excellence of a categorical assertion. No falsifiability of the falsifiability doctrine because, if this doctrine is valid, there is no such thing as the positive confirmation of a theory.

Pure Nothingness is like the perfect Platonic triangle – an abstraction only crudely approximated in reality. The notion of “pure consciousness” likewise refers to nothing in reality but is merely an ideal or abstraction. Consciousness is always greater in scope than any definition: the process of abstraction always presupposes consciousness supporting the process. This is what makes the concept of consciousness a transcendental concept as well as grounding the meaning of “transcendental” by virtue of the confirmed application of this concept. “Transcendental” is naturally enough a self-referential notion. Just like the person who always purchases gifts for others which they themselves would like to receive. Believing that associations that are significant for oneself are in some way generally significant. If the human consciousness is truly an open system, then can it be totally and utterly removed from what is, from what has being? Would the removal of this indefinite, and hence infinite, being leave behind an unlimited and open realm only with an unlimited class of potentialities removed? The popularity of television is proof of how pervasive fantasy is in the life of the average member of modern society. The observable universe is just an extension of the Earth. It may be that humanity in its greatest generality is cultural artifice, physical law, technological artifacts. “A human being would not possess the consciousness to seek that which does not exist.” Transcendence requires “meta-alterity.” This is because each individual consciousness possesses unlimited potential for its development, possesses unlimited alterity. So meta alterity would be the alterity with respect to “other consciousnesses.”

Denumerable infinity can be easily viewed as a mere idea based on an extension of the finite, however, the vast structure of higher order infinities revealed originally by Cantor’s work, based upon his diagonal argument, suggests that infinity may not be a mere notion or construction. The finite, then, may well be a construct denied from infinity. Because of the dynamic back-reaction of language upon the poet/ author, he/she cannot really assert what he intends or perhaps even intend what he asserts. Since both tautologies and self-contradictory utterances lead to “sensical” reactions in the listener/ reader, communication never takes place within any particular theoretical system. Our nervous systems respond, millisecond by millisecond to sensory inputs, however the mind itself only experiences temporally integrated structures and responds to them. It is because of overdetermination that modularity is possible and can be effective. Explore relation of over- versus under-determination. The infection of thought and perception by the media’s representational forms. With statistical analysis applied to huge masses of data, heretofore unobtainable without integrated computer and communications technology, it is no longer necessary to keep such rigid control over experimental conditions, say through the pooling and integration of anecdotal information. At some point even dreams, reveries, and “vagary’s” might provide valuable empirical data for the construction of new, revolutionary epistemological (and perhaps even cosmological) theories. An example might be an integration of people’s dream sequences which is daily updated to a “dream archive.” Would we expect to discover any

theoretically significant patterns of correlation/connection between the dream elements of various persons who had been mutually concurrent dreams. “Just think, if we hadn’t turned that corner at the same time, we would have never met.” Well, then, we might have both met someone else more suitable, if only in the long term. Human beings seem innately blind to the richness and complexity of the realm of counterfactuals.

The collapse of the Psi function is proof of nature’s capacity for adapting to the interference posed by the human being’s mercurial will. Although the DNA of each individual human is virtually unique, one out of 10**7, say, the expression of these DNA is hugely overdetermined, e.g., myriad base pair sequences code for identical proteins. This might not really be the case, however, for higher order regulatory base pair sequences responsible for higher order genetic regulation, i.e., regulation of other genes whom themselves produce proteins or regulate genes which do (structural genes). The unconscious does not have the facility for adapting symbols to its communication needs that the conscious mind possesses. During waking states of consciousness, the requisite psychic energy for the production of dream imagery sequences is not available to it, so the unconsciousness tries to get our attention through repetition rather than by variation. When reality does not possess a complete description, does this really mean that any attempt to describe it is just as good as another? There are the additional criteria of internal consistency, coherence, and

sensitivity, receptivity or reality to the description as well as to its application. The factual realm is not complementary to “the counterfactual” “realm.” According to quantum theory, mere possibilities can have a physical effect which is observable. If parents who are raising a child never met, each might have had their own other child with some one else. Is personal identity overdetermined? The “multiplexer-demultiplexer” property of language. What are the meaning creating and sustaining mechanisms that underpin logocentrism? Being irreconcilably different implies irreducibility when it is itself “under a general category.” The individuals all are members of the same class yet are “mutually irreconcilable.” Measured against ineffable knowledge, every utterance is merely figurative. The concept of prayer is a confusing one and may not be able to be unified under a determinate concept. Wittgenstein’s notion of family resemblance may apply here. Are the interesting features of your assertions incidental or intentional? On the hypothesis that only “pure energy” can be spontaneously created within a Euclidean or “flat” quantum vacuum, e.g., virtual fermion/antifermion pairs, it followed that bound energy structures, e.g., atoms,

molecules, etc., are “unanticipated structures.” Such structures which cannot be predicted from the flat quantum vacuum can, indeed, be engendered with a curved spacetime which necessarily itself possesses some kind of bound structure after which a momentum-energy fluctuation may pattern its own bound structure. Perhaps the curved vacuum may be decomposed into two disjoint components: a purely “flat” and a purely “curved” one. The vacuum momentum-energy fluctuation, when engendered within a curved spacetime, may be thought to produce a back-reaction upon the vacuum state from which it is engendered, at least upon its “flat part,” which cannot anticipate the appearance of such bound structures. Could this be simply because energy and three momentum are normally orthogonal to one another with a flat spacetime? Why do we expect the kind of back-reaction alluded to above? Because the vacuum state prior to the appearance of the bound structure fluctuation cannot, at least in its purely flat component, continue in a parallel phase space evolution with it. There is also the possibility that newly engendered bound (momentum-energy) structures possess access to alternative vacuum states altogether disjoint from the vacuum states originally producing them as fluctuations! This would account for a continued back-reaction of bound energy structures upon a chosen unitary vacuum state. On this view, bound momentumenergy structures connect multiple vacuum states. Moreover, gravitation (and inertia, as well) may be a function of the interaction of multiple, heretofore, uncommunicative vacuum states. Also, a curved vacuum state, i.e., a curved spacetime, should be modeled as an interference pattern of multiple vacuum states, previously disjoint. If the hypothesis that mass is simply “bound energy” is correct, then we would expect a shift in the balance between momentum and energy fluctuations to take place ( in favor of increased momentum fluctuations and decreased energy fluctuations) as a mass approaches a gravitating body. This shift, of course, would go hand in hand with a contraction in the positional uncertainty and increase in the time uncertainty. A vacuum state described by a curved spacetime may produce complex ,

bound energy structures. Of course, when energy is supplied to the vacuum from outside as in the case of high power lasers, linear accelerators, strong electric fields, etc., any number of bound energy structures may be produced. Quantum numbers accounting must be obeyed, however. The expectation value of all quantum numbers within the vacuum is zero. We do not appear to make or understand a distinction between concepts which have only a social or collective justification versus those originating at coherent insights or conceptions within the mind of the individual. Operational concepts and methodologies are sometimes “corrupted” into metaphysics. What is the “cash value” of metaphysics? Does language possess a context without the collective – can an individual really philosophize in a vacuum? Astrology’s predictions and explanations are self-fulfilling because of the nature of perception to be heavily filtered. And astrology is a structure which, virus-like, “takes over” the idea-synthesizing machinery of the mind, replacing the inchoate thoughts of weak minds with its predetermined crystalline ones. No information is conveyed by a signal that is not part of a feedback loop. So there really is no such thing as “pure transmission” of information. And any closed system of circulating energy currents can be decomposed into a set of pure transmissions within spacetime. A system of triggers and reactions. No possibility of synchronization, timing or reference frame without an embedding dynamic substrate. Another proof of the necessity of antiparticles might be given in terms of the application of the law of conservation of four momentum to vacuum fluctuation energy. Similarly, the explanation for the Pauli and Bose

principles may be derived from the same application of this law of four conservation to fluctuations of quantum vacuum momentum-energy, or the application of the continuity equation to virtual particle current densities. 07-23-99

But if such a conservation law applies to vacuum fluctuations (virtual particles), then this would imply the existence of nonlocally connected (and interlocked) matter and force fields. Perhaps momentum conservation only applies to the vacuum expectation values, not all components of which being zero within a nonvanishing gravitational field. Is subvocalization just the by product of social conditioned response or is the mute part of the brain able to hear and understand the subvocal utterance of the left? Because we have the gift of the creator, we cannot live within this world, but only partly, if we are not to perturb the laws by which it operates. 0723-99

The polarization of the photon acts in a formally similar way to the spin of massive particles. seanet.com/`ksbrown/kmath340.htm In other words, the electromagnetic wave is the wavefunction of the photon (spin 1 particle). Feynman said that the “photon is the only spin 1 elementary particle, c.f., Theory of Fundamental Processes. A construct can be deconstructed, a person’s motives, interest, etc., but not what is unmediated by language. Language is the mask of subjectivity. The will towards coherence grappling with the overdetermined chaos. The human being in his heart cannot be identified with any particular role or persona. Explain how the godhead achieves the greatest unity through diversity of

creation. The relations encompassed by astrology are neither arbitrary no necessary. It seems that the only way that equipartation of momentum-energy can be maintained (with regard to expectation values) is if there is some embedding medium for interacting gas particles in which stresses and strains can be developed and exchanged. It appears that there is a thermodynamic requirement for a vacuum stress-momentum-energy field. Spontaneous emission, for example, is necessary for thermodynamic laws to be upheld during exchanges of energy between excited atoms and an electromagnetic field. Because the vacuum fluctuations do not themselves possess inertia as individual particles, this may possess collective inertia through nonlocal connectivity. Is backreaction an inertial characteristic? Can nonlocally connected quantum fields be connected to locally connected “causal,” classical fields? Changes in energy along a continuum of degenerate energies, i.e., changes in the absence of changes in the system wavefunction may constitute a kind of 2 nd dimensional time. The statistics of real particles and fields is taken bodily from the statistics of the quantum vacuum. Vacuum statistics are determined by spin. The other quantum numbers constitute constraints upon those statistics embodied in the quantum mechanical selection rules. We are all most presumptuous in our familiarity with one another (Re: the transcendental emanationism doctrine) Random shuffling of genes does not explain the emergence of coherence – unless some sequences are more intrinsically/chemically stable than others.

“Even God could not speak redemption into existence.” Swaggart

-- Jimmy

That which cannot be produced by the vacuum in an unmediated fashion cannot be “comprehended” by it. So there appears to be a connection here between wavefunction collapse and inertia. People redefine themselves in reverie not in reality. One can adapt the self that heredity and culture has made of one, but not to transform oneself altogether. Self transformation is a recurrent fantasy with primitive roots in the genetically programmed flight/escape response, or perhaps, the puffing up of physical appearance in order to frighten a potential enemy. The spurned and forlorn lover of infatuated person cannot disengage from the love object in any absolute sense, but he must first change the way that he perceives/ thinks about the love object prior to “letting go.” Investigate the meaning of a gravitational field itself (independently) altering the Heisenberg uncertainties in /\x and /\t. Don’t /\p and /\E, alone, adequately account for /\x and /\t? So then, does matter distort /\x and /\t directly at the quantum level or indirectly through matter’s gravitational field? A phenomenological theory can be “fleshed out” in an unlimited number of distinct ways, in terms of its statement of underlying mechanisms. But certainly these mechanisms should fall together into a definable “equivalence class.” But could such an equivalence class be unique?

The only difference is that part of the system of multiply reflected mirror images is not discernible. Part of the associative network begins to protrude into consciousness. This is dissociation. Is it inauthentic to respond to persons in terms of their faceted reflections and not to them personally? This association network of all in all, interpenetrating identities has always been operative, but is only now becoming conscious. April 2011 An example of dissociation is the loss of natural “fellow feeling” or of the “workaday consciousness”. Still more dissociation is exemplified by a loss of the perception of the “naturalness” of one’s mother tongue (oral or in printed form), one’s own body/bodily functions and that of the human form/function of others. Characteristically human manifestations such as greetings, courtesies, laughter, facial expressions of emotion, body language, applause, dancing, sport, play, i.e., things humans do without rational reason or instinctively all appear to the dissociated person as arbitrary. Moreover, institutions that provide a culturally grounding context for human existence and endeavor, e.g., government, military, religion, fraternal organizations, etc., also seem pointless and arbitrary. The dissociated individual is the eternal social anthropologist who hails from some other planet than the one to which he appears to have been temporality posted. This all necessarily involves detachment from the network of socially conditioned meaning associations, e.g., sociolinguistic culture. The current trend in literature, art and science represented by postmodernism and deconstruction is perhaps an example of dissociative detachment having become appropriated by intellectual culture. Mankind is intensely and awkwardly self-conscious well beyond where he has reason to be, if his evolution were truly attributable to natural selection alone. Clearly the way forward to resolving this apparent paradox is to gain a deeper and broader notion of what is termed natural. (c.f., perennial bachelor or would-be bachelor who takes a foreign wife). November 2011

What disunity exists within the human psyche? Moreover, how is it that this disunity is even detectable so as to be made the subject of critical examination and comment? Similar remarks apply to the

minority human tendency to critically examine and speculate upon such subjects as temporality and change, consciousness, free will, the aesthetic sense, humor, laughter, etc. How did man manage to achieve enough success in “getting outside himself” so as to make the most unself-consciously natural general aspects of his psyche and sociality the subjects of intense philosophical and scientific scrutiny? The answer to this seeming paradox, of course, might well be that, he has not in fact at all succeeded in doing this! Then the question becomes: “where did man ever get the idea that he could get outside himelf” in the first place? A central notion underlying the metaphysical sensibility is that of limits. Humankind developed the notion of limits because he developed the model of the self as embodied and as occupying a space, which presupposed an intuition of temporality that in turn presupposed a general temporal integrative function. So the stuff at the outer reaches of man’s future metaphysical speculation – his philosophical horizon, if you will, is “always already” substantively a part of the psychic processes underlying man’s integration into a volitional self. Linguistic processes must have started out as a kind of “assembly language” or “machine code” enlisted by the brain for the purpose of reprocessing sense data into various distinct modalities. Somehow the brain hit upon the trick of turning this linguistic processs “inside-out”. June 2011

The mature bachelor knows that to marry means to go through life accompanied by a witness who shall judge him in almost everything he does and in whose judgments he shall usually be found wanting. Suddenly he shall, as married man have to take on an extra conscience, that of how his decisions and conduct shall likely appear to his new constant companion. The end result is now that instead of enjoying having put away his youth, which had so much to prove to itself and others, he must now be ready at any moment to play the part of this extra, superfluous persona, that of husband. His wife shall look to him to solve the problems and resolve the disputes that she in her impulsiveness shall regularly create for him and not merely to finish the fights that she shall start in public gathering places with strangers! He must also remain vigilant now of two timetables and two sets of

expectations, the one always the more aggressive and ambitious than the other! The moment of inertia analogy for the metaphorical origin of logocentric notions. Projections alluding to the presence of spaces that do not exist in actual fact. Virtual optical images analogy. Logocentrism is a disease of the understanding in which metaphors are reified into concepts. This is kwd=reification at one remove. Meaning lies within a tissue of metaphors. This is particularly evident in the almost transcendent wholeness of meaning evoked by poetry and song lyrics which are particularly metaphor-dense varieties of literature. Concepts which possess no dual are not communicable, cannot be captured through discursive symbols, except through, perhaps, the negation of concepts which themselves possess some indeterminacy. This is simply the nondual which Advaita Vedanta speaks of. Of course, the non dual is the dual of the dual, if we engage in dual thinking, that is. But nondual thinking does not see itself as the dual of the dual so is selftranscending as a category. We have emotions about most experiences because they in turn reflect other earlier experiences wherein the associated emotions were more immediate. These earlier emotions in their turn should ultimately refer to a network of earliest held experiences that were “concretely evoked.” Both retention of memory and anticipation are required in order to “foreground the moment.”

One must believe what one’s true self wants to be true. This statement may be interpreted in two fundamentally distinct ways. This is due to the ambiguity of the term “self.” Which self is it that desires a belief to be true. The above statement is either a statement of human nature or it is a moral imperative. When a mass is accelerated, it not only accelerates in a spatial direction but also it decelerates along the time axis. So the mass exchanges less energy with the vacuum and more energy (in the form of 3-momentum) with itself. So fluctuation momentum density increases in the exact same proportion as does the fluctuation energy density decrease. Fluctuation momentum and energy current densities form a four vector which is transformed through a 2nd rank tensor. The speed of light is a limiting velocity in vacuum because c in reality represents “the speed of time” in that, when an object is “at rest,” i.e., in 3-d Euclidean space, it is being reconstituted from energy (vacuum energy) at a maximum rate (this is for the time being, not to take any exotic “squeezed states” into consideration) along a fourth dimensional spatial axis. Of course, to some tiny degree the mass is reconstituting itself from its own energy store ( the basis for inertia and, more subtly, gravitation, as well. Because of the identity of all quantum particles of similar type, there can be no substantive distinction between one such particle at one place (or time ) from another such particle at another place (or time ). Intuition, insight, toy models which are abstract and independent of prior art, models trying to consistently incorporate prior art while elegantly explaining the problem’s “solution.” Do associations begin as arbitrary connections underpinned by mere correlation? But the arbitrariness is reduced through feedback in the presence of constant patters of input. The brain’s associative networks can only form and be sustained by intentional input. 3-vector inputs

relate to social/linguistic and scalar inputs related to quantum coherent inputs. Subtle and dynamic relationships between necrophilia and sadomasochism. Masochism relates to the other as mysterious. Sadism relates to the other as mere object. Self reduces the other in the latter case, is reduced by the other in the former. In dreams the literal and the metaphorical reverse their roles. Karma operates in a completely impersonal manner. Karma knows no favorites and “is not a respecter of persons.” The Dark Ages never having taken place might serve for an explanation for the existence of technology far in advance of that of the 20 th Century mainstream. Unreferenceable changes in an informational system and the explanation of the success of astrological predictions. Representation is to truth as participation is to dissemination. Form versus substance. Context-free identity versus closest continuer as the candidate or representative for being a particular person – what system mediates/decides what would be the phr=closest continuer? February 2014

The principle of causality realize in turn upon the closest continuer principle. The very same mechanism of fine tuning of fundamental physical constants which called one forth from the sleeping void is the very same mechanism which is responsible for transporting one through time . The theory of the multiverse cannot save us from a conclusion of intelligent design because it violates the principle of causality firstly there is no guarantee that other minds with whom I am allegedly familiar accompany me as I temporarily evolve through the vastness of the multiverse the closest continuer to the present moment is the successive moment, but the successive moment, rather than being along a determinate timeline is now set within the enormity of a vast hyperdimensional multiverse of ever so slightly distinct versions of the

current universe. The ground of being itself possesses know being but contains within itself all possibilities of being. The origin of temporality is to be found within the ground of being consequently whatever can be found as the origin of temporality must be a part of this ground of being. After enough centuries, all temporal continuity is completely washed out and so travel to the past from the distant future epochs was not ruled out on account of causal considerations. In the exchange of substance in the continual reconstitution of an object, there is a discontinuity and hence topological change. And now, we will practice Microsoft Word by taking notes on Jacques Derrida,"The Retrait of Metaphor," which was published in ENCLITIC 2:2 (1978): 5-33. As we know, the editors point out that the article works with two semantic systems for the word RETRAIT, which has a variety of meanings in French. The reason that words tend to have myriad meanings is that words coined to denote things or activities within some original context are borrowed for use in an unfamiliar or less familiar one. But the first denotative terms were actually metaphor since various images were being assimilated over time (in the subjective experience of primitive man) to the notion of a thing which appeared and reappeared. So objects are distilled out of the flux of experience in the developing feedback between the infant and his environment and constitute a kind of reified metaphor. And this is what the Self really is. This is somewhat Kantian and is along the lines of what Piaget says about cognitive development in the sensorimotor stage: the infant learns through interacting with a reactive environment that the image of her hand moving, the sound it makes when it strikes a mobile hanging over her crib, the feeling in her hand, the kinesthetic sensations in the arm and shoulder muscles are all part of the same “thing.” This integration of sensation has to be learned

from experience. Existence definitely precedes essence and objects in the external world and the Self emerge from the flux of dissociated sensation simultaneously. We commonly here of the “thrownness” of the individual. More correct here is to speak of the thrownness of the self and its world together in a single act. Metaphor represents the right brain version of the left brain/analytical activity of the instantiation of abstract categories. There is always somewhat of an insight involved in use of metaphor and it's a linguistic competency not likely to ever be equaled by a machine. When we learn a language this latent structure of metaphor lying at various levels beneath the surface of language is subconsciously assimilated and it conditions and delimits all thought, even at its most creative. Especially then. Now mostly what Heidegger does when he's doing metaphysics is to unearth this latent structure by going back, he thinks, much closer to where it originated. Usually in the Greek. When you read Heidegger you realize that, at bottom, that's all metaphysics really is - it's just archeology of language, the "mining" of latent metaphors which are masquerading as purely denotative concepts or logical categories. When I'm doing metaphysics, I always feel that I'm not completely in control of what I'm thinking and sometimes I feel like I'm more or less a passive vessel into which insights flow and intuitions crystallize. And that's because I think that I'm supposed to be utilizing clear and distinct categories although I'm really utilizing metaphor. All of the time, in fact. This is why logocentrism doesn’t really work. And logocentrism is itself the kwd=reification of a metaphor and does not really qualify as a truly denotative concept. Deconstruction deconstructs itself. The statement that absolute truth is false cannot be absolutely true! Deconstruction is a giant case of question-begging, I think. In instantiation of a concept or logical category, the grasping of a particular is prefigured in the pre-existing concept or form which is not expanded or enlarged through this re-cognition under the concept of one of its concrete particulars. In metaphor, however, there is a creative

interpretation of the unknown or unfamiliar through the importation of a contextual web of associations (based in experience) as opposed to logical relations or abstract categories.. A static, stable order in the old context becomes a dynamic ordering principle whenever it is transplanted into the new context. The dynamism is generated by the reactivity of the new context as ground into which a seed or viral contaminant of foreign meaning is introduced. In metaphor an inductive as opposed to a deductive step is taken which enlarges the original category that was borrowed. And all of the entities treated of denotatively are, as alluded to already, metaphorical constructs. This is what makes metaphor open-ended and irreducible in the scope of its action, as well as translogical. Because logic presupposes metaphorical relationships and so the process by which formal categories are generally brought about cannot itself be given a formal description, which is to say, no formal description can be given for how formal descriptions are generally brought into being. Metaphor, which is prelogical, underlies the production of all formal categories/abstract concepts. One of the systems has to do with retreats, retracings, withdrawals, and soon: leading to questions of economy, pathway, passage, and circulation. The second system has to do with erasure/rubbing but also usury, by which use and wear BUILD UP or increase value/meaning. There are two kinds of metaphor - two senses in which metaphor is a "Retrait." The first is the interpretation of the new in terms of the old. The second is the reverse of this: the reinterpretation of the old in terms of the new, such as a metaphor, suggested, for example, by new social relations enabled by developments in technology. An example of this might be the drawing of an analogy between the rise of the Internet and the World Wide Web's impact upon postmodernity and the social/cultural impact of the printing press upon the Renaissance in Europe ( in terms of the freeing-up of individualism). By making of history a Palimpsest, we make the transition (passage) into

the future less discontinuous and more comprehensible. Wornness, worn-outness, will be important here as well, since Derrida will be talking about metaphor as something old, something coming near its end. Is Derrida talking about the ending of History in the sense of the end of grand narratives? Myth is metaphysics clothed in metaphor. The most fundamental myth is that of the Ego or Self-consciousness. The Ego is the most fundamental of myths because it represents the operation of metaphor at its most fundamental: consciousness is an unbounded flux which is in continual change along a determined but not predetermined path. The Ego possesses continuity throughout this fluxion despite its always being the artifact of an ever changing ground. The Ego always manages to reconstitute itself as such against this changing, grounding flux of altering consciousness. The Ego in the present moment is always the importation of a structure from the previous momentary ground (consciousness) into a new one all the while remaining the self same Ego. Sorry if I’m belaboring the obvious. Derrida begins by pointing out that metaphor works with these notions of passage and circulation: inhabiting, transporting oneself, passing through, and so on: all of this is of course is good for poetry in general, and given my fixation, for Vallejo in particular. A key initial idea is that while we think we "use" metaphor, it in fact comprehends us, sweeps us away, displaces us: we aren’t like a pilot in his ship, we_re DRIFTING, skidding. The importation of the structuring of the old ground from the preceding moment manages always ( or almost always) to impose a new structure upon the newly emerging ground which returns the Ego to itself. This return of the Self to Itself continually, all the while the ground of consciousness fluctuates underneath it, represents the power of metaphor

in its greatest generality. For this reason we might term Mind the metaphor of all metaphors. And that is inevitable, for no speech is possible without metaphor. [It is not clear to me why Derrida thinks metaphor is coming to the end of its life_he says it_s old, does he say how he knows it_s almost “retiring” (he says it is retiring)?] But here comes something: because it_s old, it has MORE and not less weight: a lot is attached to metaphor. Metaphor is "a suspensive withdrawal and return supported by the line (TRAIT) delimiting a contour" (9) [this again is good for Vallejo]. Now he asks why we privilege Heidegger_s text (he doesn_t say which text) on this topic. It seems to be because of H_s concentration on TRAIT, in the sense of line, the "tracing incision of language" (10). Now D reveals two of H_s titles: DER SATZ VOM GRUND and UNTERWEGS ZUR SPRACHE. He also reminds us, in his inimitable way, that he will quote himself ("WHITE MYTHOLOGY: Metaphor in the Text of Philosophy") but this is not in order to draw attention to himself but rather, so as not to have to repeat here what he said there (yeah, yeah, Jacques-baby). This is getting difficult. D is going to slip himself through one of H_s notes on metaphor - in which "the metaphoric exists only within the boundaries of metaphysics" - as discussed by Ricoeur in LA METAPHORE VIVE, whose eighth essay, in turn, discusses D_s "White Mythology" piece. [Gossip: the current piece by Derrida was read at a symposium in Geneva where Ricoeur also read.] Anyway, the point is that we will be relating metaphor and metaphysics here, in the above sense, that the metaphoric exists only within the boundaries of metaphysics. [Guessing: as we know, D wants to get beyond metaphysics, so I suppose this article will try to lead us beyond metaphor: let_s see, that_s interesting, it sounds THEOLOGICAL to me

and I know D would probably hate me for thinking so.] D says R didn_t pay enough attention this point of H_s. So now he will critique R. First point. R, according to D, assimilates D too easily to H. Second point. More on R_s misreading of "White Mythology;" overassimilation to H. [Not having read "WM" or the Heidegger piece on it, it_s hard for me to comment here.] [Gossip: D comes from a repressive family background, I can tell, he_s like me, keeps saying "but that_s not what I said, how can you attribute it to me" - he is very fixated on being precisely understood, I agree intellectually with that feeling, but what I am gossiping about here is his tone.] Here, he_s also mad at R because, D says, R criticises D from the place to which D had himself carried the critique. A key point appears to be that according to R, "WM" makes death or dead metaphor is watchword - this idea offends D (note though that R_s text is called LIVE METAPHOR). What D purports to really be talking about is the TWO DEATHS or SELF-DESTRUCTIONS OF METAPHOR [he doesn_t explain this here, we have to read "WM" which I_m beginning to suspect is more interesting than the piece at hand]. Now we talk about economy. A. usury B. the law of the house C. EREIGNIS [?] D. passage, fraying, transfer, translation, withdrawal (because, I intuit, metaphor TODAY is withdrawing, according to D). Now we look at mother-tongue and father-language_again, complicated little arguments, my first guess here is that mother-tongue is not metaphoric, but father-language is metaphorical and metaphysical, has to do with formal language, the law, and so forth. Retreat, tracing, translation_let_s talk about "traits," then. We need metaphor when we can_t get to Being_if we could get there, there would be no metaphor. And, what Heidegger calls metaphysics ITSELF corresponds to a withdrawal of Being. So we only get out of

metaphysical/metaphorical discourse by a withdrawal of the withdrawal of Being. [SIDE NOTE: COMPARE TO THE NIETZCHEAN TALK ON MINERALS IN THE YES: COMPARED> TO THAT, THIS SEEMS VERY WESTERN AND ENCLOSED, AND COMPARED TO EASTERN RELIGION, WELL, NEED I SAY MORE?] Anyway, what we_re going to get with metaphor is a series of retreats, withdrawals_this is how metaphor gets so complex_as it withdraws, it "gives place" to "an abyssal generalisation of themetaphoric." Being, like metaphor, "withdraws into its crypt" [VAMPIRES AGAIN! DOES THIS MAKE BEING A VAMPIRE? PROBABLY, DAS STIMMT, IT FITS.] BUT, and this is going to be important, we get a CATASTROPHE when metaphoricity no longer allows itself to be contained in its _metaphysical_ concept_when (I THINK) metaphor stops being a metaphor of something that is absent (but whose absence is palpable, as in the absence of Abraham_s God). Existence is, of course, the contextualizing of Being. The withdrawal of Being would mean the loss of coherence of the ground of existence. Metaphor is the continual recontextualization of Being which maintains this coherence of ground. Metaphor, in its root and most basic manifestation, effectively simulates the continued presence of Being. But this is for some not satisfactory. One tragically desires the Being of the Other. But secretly the Being of the Self and the Being of the Other are one and the same. For one is the Other for the Other. But one can see from one’s own case, that one is more than merely the Other for the Other! Metaphysics is the attempt to discursively describe what can only be glimpsed, which is the coherence of existence in the light of Being’s presencing as Other. Metaphysics tries to reconstitute Being from out of the coherence of Being’s existence even in Being’s absence.

The immediacy of Being obviates the necessity of metaphysics as "ontological neurosis" caused by its withdrawal. On the other hand, the thrownness of Being is its thrownness as Self and Other simultaneously. The Self is a sociolinguistic construct. The self only emerges within the social environment of a linguistic community. Part of the process of learning any given task is that of the making of subvocalized, mental notes to oneself as one is attempting to perform and master the task. So this is here not entirely a case of learning by doing. But when it comes to learning the “task” of becoming minimally competent in one’s first language - this is entirely an example of “learning by doing”. The understanding of what one is doing appears later after the necessary preparation of ground. We have here the real thing in hand and we can dispense with saying what something is like. Our difficulties in having an authentic relationship with Being which would have powerfully validated the self stimulates in us an impulse to hatefully gossip - to talk bad about Being. Metaphysics is an attempt to deconstruct Being which is motivated by a dark, underlying necrophilic urge to tear down, demystify, and demythologize the Other which seems to have rejected us, not unlike a haughty and unapproachable, would-be lover. But it is not Being which has done the rejecting here. Rather this necrophilic and destructive impulse, which manifests itself in the form of a metaphysics of Being, is precipitated not through Being’s callous rejection of us, but on account of rage against impotence to intimately relate to Being. But there is another sort of metaphor in Heidegger, a non-metaphysical one. [AND AT THIS POINT, I AGAIN CONFESS I DON_T KNOW: I THINK DERRIDA READS HEIDEGGER MORE WESTERN- LY THAN I, AND THIS MAY BE CORRECT_BUT SOMEONE TELL ME SOMETHING ON HEIDEGGER, I READ HIS BEING IN SORT OF A ZEN SENSE, THOUGH I WOULD SAY HE IS MORE INTERESTED IN AN ANTHROPMORPHIC WHOLE THAN ARE THESE

EASTERN TYPES _I GET THE STRANGE FEELING THAT I DON_T KNOW ENOUGH TO HAVE AN OPINION, BUT THAT ON THE OTHER HAND IF I KNEW ENOUGH TO OPINE I WOULD BE INSIDE THE DISCOURSE AND HAVE TO AGREE WITH IT. ] End of metalanguage, metaphysics, meta-rhetoric, but pure metaphoricity_ By now we_re talking about famous Heidegger lectures like "The Nature of Language." Metaphors, words, are INCISCIONS, tracings_as in wood-cuttings, gravures, engravings_and these incisions make possible graftings, so to speak, splicings_ and BEING ITSELF IS A DIVERGENCE, A SPLITTING, SOMETHING CONSTANTLY IN WITHDRAWAL, A BORDER [***AGAIN THINK VALLEJO, THIS IS VERY SUGGESTIVE FOR "LINDES"]_ITS INSCRIPTION SUCCEEDS ONLY IN BEING EFFACED (that_s the English translation, a more interesting affirmation than the French original “n_arrive qu_a s_effacer”)_being happens and comes about only in effacing itself_(there is more on this) The essence of speech is INCISION [this is interesting, we speak of "incisive arguments" but here speech IS incision]_INCISION BRINGS TOGETHER AND SEPARATES THE VEILING AND THE UNVEILING [now there_s a metaphorical phrase_;)) so today, metaphor is withdrawing, splicing, un/joining. What is happening? “Rien, pas de reponse, sinon que de la metaphore le retrait se passe de lui-meme. I have often marvelled at how the movement of Being through time is at the selfsame, identical instant, both a passing away and a coming into being. In other words, the coming into being and the passing away of the Self within the flux of consciousness (during each passing instant) are grounded in the very same phenomena, and this paradox of passage is essential to the continuity of experienced time. 07/98

Representation is grounded in the participatory and the objective is no more “real” than the intersubjective. Representations are metaphors and convenient recapitulations of an open-ended historical process. All

form is metaphor; the concrete always transcends the metaphorical.

07/98

The feeling one has of the inevitability of one’s existence. Whether or not th eform that this existence takes is itself inevitable is a distinct though perhaps related question. If form is intersubjective, then it should have little if any thing to do with one’s personal identity, certainly not its core or kernel. That I am the essence that I am is not something that could have been determined by agreement as essences are by definition (rather then convention) not arbitrary nor are they things, which is to say abstractions admitting of some kind of concept. To say that it could have been possible to have been another person is to say that there is only one consciousness which is able to take multiple forms with the result that consciousness becomes an entirely passive attribute contributions nothing to the distinctiveness of persons or to the determination and development of personal identity over time.

Beginning of Well A

Jbn.com Chrysin aromatization.

Oil

of

Evening

Primrose:

prevents

THIS DOCUMENT SHOULD BE REWORKED INTO HYPERTEXT, IF THE IDEAS CONTAINED WITHIN IT ARE TO BE PROPERLY ORGANIZED. PRELIMINARY TO THIS, THIS DOCUMENT IS TO BE RE-WORKED USING A SIMPLE INDEXING SYSTEM WHICH WILL FACILITATE MORE EFFICIEINT USE OF THE "FIND" UTILITY AND TO SERVE AS A PRECURSOR TO REORGANIZATION OF THIS DOCUMENT INTO A HYPERTEXT.

3/4 of this document have yet to be transcribed as a write file.

The philosopher is superior to the common man, if only because he is able to enjoy his unhappiness. One is disillusioned, but one has the consolation of believing that one has stumbled onto some great and noble truth. It is the type of person who is moved by mystery rather than spectacle and who views paradox as an intimation of the emergence of some greater understanding rather than reacting with an abrupt judgment of something's being nonsensical or ridiculous. 02/98 There is a fundamental dichotomy in the principle of motivation and of temperament here which constitutes the deepest division existing within humankind. The two fundamental attitudes toward the uncertain and ambiguous is that of 1) the phenomenon is all but. . . and 2) the phenomenon is nothing but. . . In the first instance there is the tendency to understand Reality as being organized from above and the partial glimpse of this higher reality is what sometimes is experienced by oneself and other like minded persons as the numinous or mysterious. And in the second instance there is the tendency to view Reality as being reducible to something which is in principle simpler than what is at first suggested by the ambiguous appearances. This tendency is that of viewing Reality as organized from below. We may more succinctly characterize this dichotomy of temperament as that of the mystic versus the necrophilous character.. The necrophilous character possesses no sense of the mystery concerning his own existence, or if he does, represses it since it is something that he cannot at once master and penetrate. He may well find his existence quite pedestrian and ordinary, if not altogether wearisome. The mystic feels that there is no “explanation for existence” because Reality coheres at a

level above and beyond that of discursive symbols. The mystery may only be hinted at through the use of metaphors such as pregnant images. The necrophilous character believes that Reality possess no “explanation” because the words always generate more meaning than what is actually present. The necrophile is bored with his own company. While the mystic cannot seem to drop into the unassuming, unselfconscious mode of being which seems so natural to his fellow humans or if he can, he cannot do it for very long. He is continually startling himself awake from this ordinary workaday consciousness. The necrophilous character feels intense jealousy, usually repressed, and resentment toward the mystic. He feels quite certain that the mystic is the grossest kind of poseur. He will try to unmask this poser who, if he turns out to be genuine (in the sense of believing his own claptrap) must instead be disillusioned or made the object of ridicule, not of scorn which, although altogether appropriate for the poser, is not the just desserts of a well-intentioned, naïve devotee of the central mystery. The necrophile holds a similar attitude towards ideas. All grand and profoundly difficult ideas must be either “unmasked” as false or proved to be naïve, puffed up and ridiculous conceptions. The only kind of power permissible in the mind of the necrophile is naked, brute, mechanical power - power the origins of which are transparent and understandable, such as the power which stems from physical might, wealth or influence. To the necrophilous character, power is merely a contrived implement and does not have a self-existence or mysterious origin. A mysterious power cannot be manipulated and enlisted by the necrophile to reliably aid him. Such a power cannot be relied upon to faithfully serve the worldly interests of its would-be manipulator. Such a power might have to be treated as an end in itself and not merely as a means to the accomplishment of the necrophile’s myopic ends. To such a power the necrophile may well be forced to give an account. Such an awesome power threatens to force the necrophile to give an account of his life and ways. Such a mysterious power threatens to validate an objective moral order. And this is what the necrophilous character fears most of all.

Necrophilia is not an attraction to death, in its essence. It is rather much more, a profound fear of life, or the mystery of life, which masquerades as a love for dark and deathly things and influences. Even such new-age notions as “the higher self” (in the absence of a veritable Transcendent Other) are shunned since the growth of the self into one of its higher forms is inconsistent with the aggrandizement of a greedy, lustful, envious, and mean-spirited ego. The growth of the higher self, should it exist, might coincide with the pain and loss of sovereignty of the smaller, cringing self of the necrophilous character. Nothing must be done to cultivate the growth of the higher self and its existence must be denied to oneself but most forcefully to others. In essence, the necrophile has pitched a rebellion against life, and is motivated by the same impulse which caused Lucifer to lead the rebellion in heaven. This impulse, in the form of a question, is the following: “How come I didn’t get to be God?” If I am not God, then how could anyone else be? And so, whenever the necrophile encounters a person or persons seeming to embody, however, dimly, the form of the divine, these persons are instinctively hated and despised if they cannot be safely placed beneath contempt. And so, just as Satan represents the necrophilic God, satanism itself, therefore, is merely a particularly visible manifestation of the necrophilous drive. The necrophile spends his life forcefully trying to deny the existence of God by simply denying the existence and legitimacy of life in all of its myriad forms. Beauty, Goodness, and Truth are the primary evidences of the existence of a grand design. Although the theological argument from design is not the most logically subtle – in fact it is the least so – of all of the traditional arguments for the existence of Deity, it possesses the greatest appeal to human intuition. So the necrophile denies God through a denial of these three primary manifestations of Divinity. And so the necrophile is preoccupied with that which is ugly, that which is bad, and that which is a lie. It is only when the necrophile is overwhelmed by life and the living that he retreats from a direct assault and begins seeking refuge in Death through a preoccupation with decaying or lifeless things. The necrophile seeks protection in Death since, to him, death constitutes the ultimate disproof of life, and hence of the divine order. The peculiar

manifestation of necrophilia, with which the term is identified in the popular imagination which has been informed by Freudian psychoanylitic theory, is the sexual attraction that necrophilous persons feel almost exclusively for the bodies of recently expired persons, usually of the opposite sex. This does not constitute a positive attraction for the dead, but is merely a result of the redirecting of an otherwise normal sexual impulse away from the living bodies of consciously aware persons. It is perhaps the case of a merely bashful lust which seeks to relieve itself when and where no one is looking. There is also the factor of one’s power being insecure in the presence of the mysterious and unpredictable otherness of a living sexual partner. Arounsal here may be explained by the encountering of a situation or context in which repression of the sexual impulse is suddenly removed. And this dynamic is mistakenly identified by the necrophile as a positive attraction to dead persons. Someone with “nothing to hide” has nothing to fear from the incisive focus of the necrophile’s gaze. But the necrophile has no real or lasting interest in an unassuming person. The ultimate substrate of Reality, if any such "exists", would not itself be "organized" in any ordinary sense, but would possess the unlimited capacity to manifest organization on any number of levels. February 1998

This reminds us of Schopenhauer's claim that the thing-initself lies in a realm beyond individuation which, according to him, takes place only in the realm of phenomena. This seems to imply that Schopenhauer believes there to be only one indeterminate, or infinite being. Leibniz had already given an argument that God was a substance of which there could only be one. March 1998

If the concept of appearance is understood in terms of the appearance/reality distinction, then Divine omniscience would not permit God to experience the phenomenal without self-limitation.

Appearance is here understood as stemming as much from knowledge as from ignorance. Substance represents simply the most general property of Reality and therefore, if Reality is indeed One, then there would be only one substance which would never undergo change. But it is hard to see how this self same substance could be connected with all of the phenomenal changes which supposedly inhere in it when there is no correlated change or transformation occurring to this substance which could be sought as the source of the dynamics of these phenomenal qualities. There is a similar logical difficulty in imagining the connection of two things occupying genuinely distinct spaces or continua. One must secretly suppose that there is some embedding meta or hyperspace grounding the relationships of two objects. It is as though the substantial and the phenomenal belong to two entirely distinct temporal series - one in which nothing ever happens and another in which all that exists is pure flux without any determinable order to the play of transformations. In reality it is a misnomer to speak of transformations taking place within this hypothesized realm of pure fluxion. For the notion of transformation presupposes that there is something underlying and connecting different stages of the same transformation which is common to all stages, that is, the notion of transformation itself presupposes the existence or being of underlying substance. If transformation presupposes substance, then perhaps so too does substance presuppose transformation. For there must be some difference between a purely fleeting substance and an everlasting one. Rather, there must be some meaning attached to the notion of the temporal duration of substance. The transformation here is then simply that of the substance continuing to be what it is and not changing. The substance is continually in the act of transforming itself into. . . itself. But if there is no logically consistent concept of pure phenomenal change, then neither can the negation of this concept be given a logically consistent formulation. The negation of pure flux cannot be defined any more than can the negation of the indeterminate be defined. Within a

closed system of categories, a proposition, theorem, etc., and its negation are clearly definable. But in what kind of system should we expect a concept to contain, or be seen as ultimately identical to, its negation? An example of which might be the concepts of pure substance and pure flux, or transformation. It is interesting to note that in special relativity there is no such thing as a pure matter or charge density; only matter currents and charge currents are treated within this theory. A matter density is only conceivable within special relativity if an infinite time dilation is permitted. So from this standpoint, flux is the primary substrate of reality in relativity theory and energy takes precedence over matter, since matter is not conserved within special relativity although energy is supposed to be a conserved quantity. This trend away from the notion of substance and toward that of flux is much further advanced within the quantum theory and still more within relativistic quantum field theory, in which, as noted elsewhere, even energy itself is no longer treated as perfectly but only approximately conserved, that is, on the average, i.e., over sufficiently large time intervals. One might well wonder what indeed is the relevant conserved quantity within quantum field theory, if it is not to be energy, that is, what serves as the conserved substance within this theory. This conserved quantity is probability. The important question arise here of what symmetry (and mathematical symmetry group) corresponds to a conserved probability? We should note here that neither is energy strictly speaking conserved within classical general relativity (as gravitational energy is not localizable within this theory) so that no consistent energy continuity equation can be written down as a tensor differential equation; only a pseudo tensor equation of continuity may be written down for the total energy - an equation which is, therefore reference frame dependent. On account of this lack of a pre-established order on the part of that which is in the business of manifesting order, it follows that the manner in which the order is manifested is not determined in the sense of having

form, and that which underlies this manifesting is itself indeterminate. To be determined has two related but quite different meanings, depending upon whether one is speaking of a determined representation or a determined will. And moreover, this substrate initially possesses radical freedom of creation and expression. But if that order which is created is to possess any reality even if merely a relative one, then this order must act back upon the ground of which it is a manifestation. It must possess a will of its own. This is the idea that God cannot really grant freedom of the will to his creatures unless He gives up in the same instant, at least in some small measure, his heretofore illimitable Sovereignty. So real creation, that is, the creation of that which possesses its own essence and principle of being, cannot be the bringing into being of a mere existent thing, that is, a merely abstract entity. Real creation involves the engendering of altogether new ground possessing its own indeterminacy and potentiality, not borrowed from the ground out of which it was determined. April 1998

Or if borrowed from this ground, then only within our manner of conceptualizing creation here since a truly indeterminate ground would not possess any determinate boundaries marking it off from anything else, nor would this ground possess any identifying properties which it could either share or not share with some other ground. So to say that there is only one Indeterminate is not to make a positive assertion. There is only one Indeterminate Ground in the sense that there is no possible support for the claim that the number of indeterminate grounds is greater than Unity. So now we have the notion of relative indeterminacy. This is indeterminacy of the ground from the point of view of that which this ground has determined. Real creation always presupposes the production of that which can function as cocreator with that by which it has been created.

March 1998

Some forms of madness such as schizophrenia and manic depressive mania may be manifestations of insight which are inventions rather than innovations. Compromise may be the substance of reality. Rather than saying that the law of excluded middle is violated, we may suppose that a contradiction is not even possible as an abstraction - let alone could a contradiction refer to something genuinely real. February 1998

Nonlocal interactions should not contribute to the effective mass of a particle. When the boundary conditions upon the quantum vacuum are altered in a manner which necessitates nonlocal interactions, the wavefunction describing the system which is subject to these boundary conditions will undergo a discontinuous change. This is what is familiarly termed the "collapse of the wavefunction." This kind of nonlocal change to boundary conditions necessarily requires the system to participate in some momentum or energy nonconserving type of interactions. If certain interactions are not possible in the absence of the right quantities of information, then informed action "within a system" cannot consist in merely altering the probabilities of occurrence for some predefined event(s) in a systematic way, say, in terms of merely changing their temporal or spatial frequencies, but must involve the engendering of radically new possibilities such that the probabilities are not conserved for the predefined set of possibilities, say, of discrete system state configurations. We have already discussed how all conservation laws are special cases of the law of probability conservation. And it is the discontinuous change in the probabilities implied by probability nonconservation which manifests itself in the form of discontinuous changes in the quantum mechanical wave function. After all, the probabilities for each discrete system state are merely the appropriately weighted squares of the associated state eigenfunctions. Certainly the long recognized intimate relationship between consciousness and the quantum mechanical wavefunction is

grounded n the phenomenon of the free will of the observer performing a wavefunction-collapsing measurement. The jumping backward and forward in time, taking place within the individual consciousness, and perhaps responsible for constituting its spatiotemporality, as an activity simultaneous with itself in different times, must be mediated by nonlocal interactions taking place in each moment of the time continuum which is in temporal self-interaction. Thus we see that the nonlocal interactions do not experience the passage of time in the normal sense. The Cathars, a heretical gnostic sect and secret society within Christianity during the middle ages, believed that upon Baptism, the convert was not to receive the Holy Spirit, but his own spirit, this person having existed up to this seminal event as a mere soulless "beast of the field.". In this sense, the creation of Adam was simultaneous with his Baptism, i.e., God's in-breathing of His Spirit into the form made of clay which then at once became an independently living being. Moreover, the original sin of Adam was the besmirching of Adam's soul, but was, much more importantly, in the cosmic scale of things, the attachment of Sin to the Spirit of God Himself which we may surmise was to God an intolerable situation which demanded a desperate remedy, c.f, the Book of Ecclesiaste in which it is stated that upon death the spirit returns to God who made it. God takes the form of a man and submits to both temporal and spiritual punishment in expiation for Sin which, although committed by man, i.e., Adam, God assumes responsibility for - perhaps because God created the possibility for Sin to exist through His having created Man. July 1998

In most forms of Gnosticism, the Cosmic order as exhibited through the character and relationships of the principle persons of the Biblical Creation Story, God, His Son, Lucifer, Adam, and to some extent also, Eve, are fundamentally inverted. An inversion of this type might be the following. God rejects Lucifer, who exiles himself, broken-hearted from God’s kingdom, taking up residence in the Garden

in order to teach Man to outwardly realize his sleeping divinity so that Lucifer might find a new Divinity to worship and serve. Another version is that Lucifer assumes, as best he can, the identity of the God who has rejected him. This tack is, for Lucifer, the best kind of solution he can find which has a chance of easing his pain of rejection. If one can become that which one formerly worshipped and which rejected one, one may overcome the heartbreak. Lucifer does not succeed in emulating God in His divine capacity so well as he succeeds in emulating those sadistic and cruel aspects in God which Lucifer most intensely perceived as a result of his profound experience of rejection by God. Adopting with respect to Man the precise aspect of the Divine’s relationship with Lucifer which led to Lucifer’s heartbreak - this turns into a practical solution to Lucifer’s pain of rejection at God’s hand. By passing an injury received onto another, the brunt of the psychological pain from this injury may be redirected away from the ego. One feels powerful to the extent that one succeeds in identifying with the Other. (The transcendental other) Beneath the surface of this emulation of the impersonality of the Other is the transference of psychological pain received at the hands of the Other to the Other represented as Self while the Self is at once represented as the Other. The psychological strategy adopted here is that of trading places with one’s torturers, assuming their godlike impersonality, and submerging psychic pain through a representing of this pain’s being redirected to the Other as Self - with this redirection itself disguised in the assumption of the other’s identity by the Self. August 2013

It is just in this sense that “God does not exist”: God is the transcendental other, meaning that God is always already the other. So the answer to Satan’s querulous question, “How come I didn’t get to be God” is just the following – nobody gets to be God. And it is only in this definite and precise sense that we may understand that, by definition, “God does not exist”, namely, God is not a person, which is to say that personhood is not a transcendental state or condition (of consciousness or of whatever). The notion of “transcendental condition” is a contradiction in terms. Persons may participate in divinity but only by

achieving transcendental states of consciousness beyond the personal. Conversely, “God” can become a person, a temporal being by achieving an immanent state, but this is only a projection or delimitation of being (a kind of simulacrum), but not a being in itself. In terms of the various other differing senses and meanings of this proposition, sufficient logical demonstration or empirical proof appears to be as yet unavailable to us. Although there is no such thing as the person, God, we cannot deduce from this that God does not exist (in the sense of His not possessing Being). (Relate the continuum of being to the mathematical continuum and God to Aleph, the continuum hypothesis to the hypothesis of God’s “existence”.) God is a personification of being-at-large or being as such. So pick any person at random and ask them if they are God, if they always answer truthfully, they must say “No”. Perhaps all that is necessary is to slightly alter the definition of personhood such that there can be no “complete picklist” of persons such that God could be found on the list. Surely, this is not so drastic a change in the definition of person such that, if God were a person in every sense except this one, it would still be meaningful to assert that He exists. If a necessary condition for personhood is consciousness, then no person exists in an intersubjective sense because consciousness is not intersubjective. So the engendering of newly organized structures cannot be understood as a mere abstracting or filtering of latent structure, that is, selection. Now this displaces the whole Darwinian paradigm - what we might term (with Monod) as creation through the interaction of Chance and Necessity. In a sense this paradigm assumes special creation ab initio, but instead of the special creation of a large but discrete variety of animal species, the Neo-Darwinian paradigm very tacitly assumes a special creation of latent order represented by the first primitive genome - or of the latent order of the self-organizing potentialities of matter which sustain its existence. In this sense, of course, evolutionary theory does no more than can any "rational" explanation - it simply pushes the root cause back another step. Of course, chemical evolution is assumed to have led up to the emergence of the genome itself, but this is a kind of

evolution according to another paradigm altogether - that of selforganized complexity. Dr. Stuart Kauffman of the Sante Fe Research Institute may well represent the leading advocate of this postmodern evolutionary paradigm. A unit of heredity must already be available if natural selection is to have opportunity to foster evolution. If chemical evolution did not arbitrarily cease upon the emergence of the first primitive genomes, but continues to operate in the present epoch, then mutation of the DNA may well not be a truly random process. Certainly the relative stabilities of various genomes will affect how they respond to more or less identical mutation triggering events. One new technique of determining the relatedness of two different species or subspecies of animal is to encourage hybridization of single DNA strands taken from each and then determining the temperature at which the hybrid DNA decomposes. By this method it had been determined that only a 1.6% difference exists between the DNA of chimpanzees and humans. There are subspecies of bird which are by this measure more closely related. "Specie-ation" within a single generation is commonly observed in a large number of species of flowering plants. The mechanism of this instantaneous speciation is termed polyploidy. In a sense there is no real speciation taking place here. Rather, in some earlier epoch, gradually over time, we might suppose, a phenomenon which arises as the appearance of a new species but which we might more aptly term genera-ation has taken place. In other words, a new plant genera has come into being which is comprised by all of the polyploidically related species, only one of which at first manifests itself. When merely a determinate set of enabling conditions is required to produce some new structure or function and this relationship is reproducible, then this does not at all constitute evolution, but merely the enabling of latent order, itself requiring a legitimate evolutionary cause. For evolution is a theory of the origin of order, not of the gradual manifesting of a latent order which is inserted without explanation, by hand, if you will, into the

process. To wit, a genuine evolutionary explanatory paradigm will require a "mechanism" of the production of order and not merely that of the manifesting of a pre-existent latent order which remains mysterious. Jacques Monod has stated that the genetic code must be arbitrary. What this means is that there can be no one-to-one functional relationship between a string of base pairs and the protein for which it is the codon sequence. What is meant here is that the genetic code must be context sensitive and the expression of genes must be orchestrated by not only higher order regulatory genes, but the meaning of the genome as a whole must not be thought to be fixed for all time, but itself must be context dependent. What this broader context might be, no one has been able to definitively say in naturalistic terms. Order by its very nature cannot be a conserved quantity which, like energy, can be transduced from one medium to another unchanged. This would amount to saying that the medium does not contribute anything to the message's content being expressed through the medium. December 2013 See the Wikipedia entry on pragmatics, c.f, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pragmatics for a hint at the open-endedness of genetic meaning, which points to a dynamic interpretive matrix in which genetic information can be endlessly reprocessed, e.g., mental substrate, c.f, semiosis (see The genotype-phenotype opposition is not a pat one in light of the notion of regulatory genes and epigenetics. The phenotype is proteins and their organization, i.e., the body of the organism and its various static and deterministic traits. The static structure of the body, i.e., at a particular moment in time is an expression of the organism concerned’s DNA in its protein-coding capacity. What then is the expression of the organism’s DNA in its regulatory capacity? Septermber 2011 The incomplete translatability of expressions from one language into another is proof that language is not a passive implement for the transmission of ideas and that language possesses some influence on the process of thinking and ideating. December 2012 If it is correct to interpret DNA, particularly regulatory DNA and its epigenetic modifications as a language (and all evidence up to now points to the validity fo this), then DNA is not merely the passive subject of environmental insults, e.g., cosmic ray impacts to its structure, which

have heretofore been supposed to engender so-called random mutations, but itself must play some role in determining the nature and implications of any and all mutations. October 2012 The active or dynamic, as opposed to passive nature of language points up the long suspected fact of the nature of the self as a social construction. Rationality is the means of spanning the chasm in multiple steps, the chasm of transcendent separateness of peculiar selves. Without language, consciousness would have forever remained unaware of itself. It was only through a caleidescopic plurality of finite existences embedded within the socially nutritive medium of language that “a self comes to mind”. September 2011 If DNA really is a language, then the above general observation must apply to DNA: mutations to DNA cannot really ever be “random”. A worldwide consortium composed of, e.g., Epigenomics AG, Encode, GEN-AU, EPIGENOME NoE, c.f., Epigenetics (C. David Allis) will likely map the human epigenome by the early 2020’s. What might be termed “epiepigenomics”: however, it may be that "exotic" enzymatic activities shall be orchestrated from relic information no longer embodied in genomic or epigenomic control, but now latent in networks of catalytic pathways, which also depend in part on the self-organizing properties of atoms and molecules, the very same which provided the motive force for the first billion years of chemical evolution, which led to the creation of the first primitive units of heredity. So the point here is that, “epiepigenomics” or not, you can’t get away from the fact that the self-organizing properties of atoms and simple organic molecules continue to remain of vital importance to evolution and to the irreducible complexity of what happens within the cell. It may be found that these "exotic" enzymatic activities are orchestrated from relic information that is no longer embodied in genomic or epigenomic control, but which is now merely latent within various networks of catalytic pathways, which also depend on the self-organizing properties of atoms and molecules – the very same one, which drove the first billion years of chemical evolution prior to the advent of the first reproducing, informationbearing molecule. It is currently not known “What defines the mechanisms conferring inheritance and propagation of epigenetic information”, c.f., C. David Allis (2007). For the most part,

transcription factor binding is transient and lost in successive cell divisions. For persistent gene expression patterns, transcription factors are required at each subsequent cell division. As such, epigenetic control can potentiate a primary signal (e.g., promoter stimulation, gene silencing, centromere definition) to successive (but not indefinite) cell generations by the heritable transmission of information through the chromatin template”, c.f., Epigenomics (2007). This mechanism greatly enhances the stability of the genome in the face of relatively transitory environmental pressures and acts to "filter the process of natural selection". October 2011 “Standard genetic analysis of mutant alleles of the HOTHEAD gene, which regulates organ fusion in Arabidopsis, revealed that normal rules of Mendelian genetics were not being followed (Lolle et al. 2005). It was discovered that if heterozygous HOTHEAD/hothead plants self-fertilized and produced a homozygous hothead/hothead plant, and then this homozygous hothead/hothead plant was allowed to selffertilize, the progeny from this homozygous parent reverted to a HOTHEAD/hothead genotype at a frequency of up to 15%. This stunning level of wild-type reversion produced an exact duplicate, at the nucleotide level, of the wild-type gene seen in the earlier generations. This reversion was not limited to the HOTHEAD locus-several other loci had similar frequencies of reversion to wildtype alleles. However, all the reversions required that the parent be homozygous hothead/hothead. The gene product of HOTHEAD did not offer an obvious explanation as to how this could occur, but discussions certainly suggested that an archival copy of the wild-type gene was transmitted, perhaps via RNA, through successive generations. Although it could be argued that this phenomenon is outside the purview of"epigenetics"-due to the change in DNA sequence-the heritable transmission of the putative archived copy does not follow normal genetic rules. @$ Nevertheless, this phenomenon has enormous implications for genetics, especially in evolutionary thinking”, c.f., C. David Allis (2007). Here again, we see that the “two pillars” of classical neoDarwinian, namely the principles of “natural selection” and “random mutation” are both seriously undermined by discoveries in the rapidly developing field of epigenomics. Metadata masquerading as

information is that which is “transmitted”, that is, moves through 3space-1-time (classical spacetime). Because of the quantum “nocloning” theorem of quantum information theory, it is perhaps theoretically inadmissible to permit “transmission of quantum information”, only quantum information tagged with inseperable Heisenberg quantum uncertainty (at least during “transmission” or between “transmitter” and “receiver”). Subjective states as information: if these are admitted as a category, then what possible interpretation could be made of the possible significance of so-called “metainformation”? Meta merely in the sense offered within the context of “information reprocessing”, e.g., transpersonal meanings derived from individual human experiential information, reprocessed collectively, say, by way of an “akashic record”. A proper taking into account of the limitations of language along with an analysis of the concepts of “subjective”, “objective” and “intersubjective” might lead us to conclude that all substantive terms must be replaced by the same terms interpreted in quotation marks and all terms bracketed within quotations must be replaced by the quoted terms bracketed within double-quotes, etc. Were it the case that all concepts are really only “masquerading metaphors”, then the problem of there being no bona fide “concept of consciousness” becomes either 1) more or 2) less problematic! It may turn out that Kant’s eccentric category of noumenon (“thing in itself”) encompasses thoughts as well as “physical objects”. September 2012 Mutations are prefiltered (in the sense of operating always prior to the operation of Darwinian natural selection) by way of the self-organizing properties of atoms and organic molecules, as well as by the multi-level regulatory genetic structure qua cybernetic control system of the entire genome and also by epigenetic modulation of the expression of this genome, the specific modulation of which being itself heritable. The ultimate filtering and selecting context for genetic mutation may be that of the downward causation of nonlocal quantum entanglement with the quantum vacuum fluctuation field. March 1998

Perhaps we are touching upon here the much misunderstood conception which forms the basis of Marshal MCluhan's seminal work,

The Medium is the Message. Expression always involves the arising of information in situ, to wit, from out of time. This reminds us of the rather interesting fact that during neural transmission, there is no physical quantity which is actually transmitted from one neuron or neuronal complex to another. Rather, it is a disturbance in the collective functioning of these neural complexes which is "propagating" through the brain. But how would we begin to separate out what may be thought of as unassuming neural functioning from what is a disturbance of this functioning? We may say that the disturbance is always orthogonal, or at right angles to the functioning of the neurons! In this sense, disturbances never enter the brain spatially from outside it since there is not a nonarbitrary way of defining what constitutes the spatial boundaries of the brain, c.f., David Deutsch in this connection. Nonlocal connectivity provides the openended context for all local interactions taking place within the quantum neural network, i.e., the brain. July 1998

The communication of the left and right hemispheres cannot be modeled as appropriately timed sequences of inputs introduced to each hemisphere separately. The sychronization of causally connected events is not as subtle as that of nonlocally connected events. @$Since superposition effects are required for objects to possess macroscopic properties, we do not expect such objects to be capable of forming superposition states amongst themselves. This is similar to the argument against the existence of spacetime constitutive processes taking place within a particular spacetime continuum. Quantum indistinguishability and the identity of particles of like kinds is perhaps related to the distinction between the unitary evolution and the objective reduction of the wavefunction. The hydrogen atom is the only atom on the periodic chart for which an exact solution for Schrodinger’s equation exists. At what level in the hierarchy of matter does the identity of individuals of a given kind break down? @$The very identity of all electrons, protons, neutrons, and other “fundamental” particles

strongly suggests that these particles are not real, but are mere abstractions. April 2011 Apparently at the Planck mass level, superpositions of mutually exclusive states of the same system are no longer possible because quantum indistinguisability breaks down at the Planck level. July 1998

All thought and perception originally arise as insight through an informing of mental processes intending other objects. This informing is always a modulation of pre-existing mental activity. Informing implies a change in global pattern of mental activity. To wit, there is never the flow or transmission of information between different parts of the brain; there is only the informing of the flow of data streams within the brain. Information always sheds light on what is already known and the application of information to a new situation cannot be generally predicted. This is the back reaction of information's content upon itself. The effect of information upon a situation is therefore never truly reversible. April 2011 It is for this reason that the meaning of genetic base pair sequences is not set once and for all. Gene regulation and interpretation are always required for determining gene expression. Although data may be associated with momentum and energy and be thought to possess spatiotemporal location, what is called information, like gravitational energy, cannot be assigned any physical location whatever and can be further likened to the information of a modulated carrier wave which emanates from no particular waveguide, but resides in the very aether itself as one of its unbidden vibrations. December 2012 It is hard to square the quantum theoretic notion of the conservation of quantum information with this more general property of the nonlocality of quantum information, i.e., the fact that a continuity equation is not definable for quantum information. Jacques Monod has stated that the genetic code is an arbitrary one, (c.f., Stephen C. Meyer’s short youtube lectures on the failure of “chemical determinism” of genetic base pair sequences.) What he means by this is that what takes place at a series of base pairs on one segment of the

DNA is unaffected by what may be taking place on some other segment of the same molecule. It seems as though Monod is equating arbitrariness with independence of context. But arbitrariness in this sense may indeed be somewhat of a misnomer as what Monod is really referring to by this term is the unlimited semiosis of the genome qua message, its sensitivity to an open-ended context. Arbitrary in the sense of there being no fixed expression and no final interpretation, but this is not to say that any meaning whatever can be attached to a given genetic base pair sequence. There may be an infinite or merely indefinite number of distinct meanings that can be functionally assigned to a given genetic base pair sequence without all possible meanings being thusly assignable and this since: @$1) Cantor – the infinite is hierarchically structured and 2) Gödel - the provability of logico-deductive theorems is dependent upon one’s choice of axiomatic basis. We cannot give the concept of conservation any coherent formulation for open, unbounded systems. Neither can any continuity equation be given for the underlying processes constituting the boundedness of closed systems, that is, for the process of the system's initial manifesting of itself. The whole notion of quantity itself must be altogether thrown out when radically open systems are under consideration. A ready example of which is the ineradicable difficulty in defining the entropy of an open system. Permanence, continuity, conservation principles, causality, substance, probability, entropy, even modality at its most general - such physical concepts may only be conventionally or provisionally defined for closed systems, for all systems are ultimately open, and it is only the severity of approximation which determines the extent of a system's closedness. There is no such consistent concept as global modality. @$In other words, necessity and possibility are system dependent concepts. The consolation of philosophy is very much like that enjoyed by the fame-hungry research scientist who brilliantly conceives a theory which proves the end of the world in the not so distant future. There are those who would be pleased at the thought that the world was to come to an end with or soon after their death.

April 1997

The truly great ideas are no less so for never having been facts within Space and Time. When a great conception appears within the mind of the individual and never within the collective, metaphysical work has been performed. It is only by intention or Will that any form may arise within a reality which is truly open and unlimited. And it cannot have been by a mere chance occurrence, for chance is what results when one closed reality impinges upon another to which it has heretofore never been connected and where these two realities, if you will, exist as part of one and the same closed system, c.f., au=Corliss Lamont’s treatment of free will. May 1997

How, one may ask, can two closed systems exist together within another closed system without ever having, in the infinite past interacted together? The paradox of the truly closed system, in the sense of its being spatially closed is that, if the system has existed for an eternity past, then this system at first glance appears to be an open four dimensional spacetime. Or it is a closed 4 dimensional space. A closed spacetime is an incoherent notion. The very concept of "particle" is inapplicable to an open or infinite space since no Gaussian wavepacket is definable unless spatial boundary conditions are supplied along with initial conditions upon the wavepacket, c.f., cit=Quantum Field Theory in Curved Spacetime. @$It is for this reason that a “particle” is not indifferent to the passage of time. Inertia is the signature of this lack of indifference. September 1997

There is subtle contradiction at work here, however, and we are reminded of the simple fact that standing waves cannot be set up in a string of infinite length. And this is what a closed dynamical system is, in essence. The system necessarily possesses only a finite if large number of distinct states which the system may be pictured as visiting in succession over and over again endlessly. But if this system is truly closed, then there appears no objective meaning for time spent in a particular state, the "rate" at which the system passes from one state to the next, or number of times that the system repeats a grand cycle in which it has passed through all available states, c.f., prn=Poincare’

Recurrent Time. The passage of time is, as we say, always relative to an environment with which the system in question exchanges energy. The rapidity with which a given physical may potentially change its energy may be attributed entirely to the vacuum (its energy fluctuations). The result of any observation, i.e., an eigenvalue, is the result of an abrupt conspiratorial act on the part of the mind of the observer and the vacuum. Again, the classical world of everyday objects is generated by an interaction of the observer and his vacuum - the intricate relationship of constructive and destructive interference of the consciousness and vacuum fields, if you will, in terms of the interaction of observer uncertainties and vacuum fluctuations for the very same quantities. I say his vacuum because the vacuum, being infinite, cannot be a unified thing, but must exist in infinite multiplicity. And this brings us to the subject which I really want to speak about. If the system was came into being at some time in the finite past, on the other hand, then it must be a mere aggregate of elements, themselves existing from eternity past. These "elements" then represent the openness of spacetime and, by extension, their aggregates possessing a finite lifetime. For otherwise, these elements were themselves created out of nothing, and hence, by extension, any later aggregations of such elements. Some element which has been created ex nihilo has come into reality from outside and this, in turn, presupposes that reality is itself an open, or radically open, system. So Reality must either be spatially open or temporally open and this is to say that Reality must be an open spacetime. August 1997

One must sacrifice clarity to express that which is somewhat beyond the ordinary. In a way, this statement exhibits in microcosm the proposition which is elaborated below – which I will not state but which is, I think, easily enough divined on a second if not a first sympathetic reading. Arguably the greatest analytic philosopher of all time was, if not Bertrand Russell, then the philosopher who was for a short time

Russell’s most brilliant pupil, Ludwig Wittgenstein. Ludwig is famous for saying, “whereof we cannot speak we must remain silent.” Ludwig began as a logical positivist and has always been thought to be the Vienna Circle’s greatest member though he was actually himself never a member. Ludwig was also a logical atomist at this time, largely as a result of Russell’s influence on him. The young Wittgenstein believed that metaphysics was merely a symptom of the confusion of distinctions usually through the unknowing equivocation of two or more senses or connotations of a word during its use within a single argument, through the treating of metaphors or poetic notions as having literal application, or through the making of vacuous distinctions, an example of which for you may be that of existence versus Being, which I make use of below. Needless to say, later in life, although when he was still well within his prime as a thinker, Ludwig reversed his view on the wholesale vacuity of metaphysics, now referring to some of his most cherished earlier held philosophical doctrines as themselves ludicrous, such as that true propositions correspond to “facts.” Now if God has free will, then, as we said, He chose to exist. But such a choice is only genuine provided that, in the case that God did not exist, that this too would have been His choice. So although God may not exist (by choice), He nonetheless possesses Being, which transcends the categories of existence vs. nonexistence. The question, therefore, is not, “Does God exist?,” but is Existence in God? Whether or not Existence is or is not in God is irrelevant to the question of God’s Being. God’s existence is an urgent moral question of judgment of the comparative value of God and not a metaphysical question for Man. God exists, God is merely the Glimpse of the Transcendent at the cusp joining the Transcendent to its voluntary self-limitation which is, most generally speaking, the engendering of the possibility of a Spacetime. The Transcendent itself is forever beyond Representation. And a reduction to its various modes corresponds to the existence of various egos living in the world. Existence in a word is conditioned being, but being, which is conditioned not through or within space and time, and here lies the rub so to speak.

It is true that the infinite if indeed a unity, which we have already said, is too complex to be such, would, of course, possess the motive to enter the realm of self-limitation out of mere solitary curiosity, as the infinite cannot enjoy the experience of limitation of any kind, such as hope, fear, uncertainty, disappointment, betrayal separation and reunion, surprise, growth, etc. To an infinite mind there is no distinction between truth which is trivial and that which is profound. There is not possibility of communication since communication of information is at once the reduction/removal of uncertainty, not a possibility for an omniscient being. For such a Being there can be no revelation, no insight or epiphany, no sense of wonder or mystery. Aristotle’s view of God by the way was that of thought eternally contemplating itself in the act of contemplating itself. fb=@Brettage Munkdial during August 2014

First Draft in December 1995

Although existence possesses a dual opposite, namely, nonexistence; what is properly called Being itself possesses no dual opposite. Being, however, can neither be thought to possess any formal unity since, as we said, it does not participate in duality. Being is beyond space and time as these are, according to Kant, mere forms of intuition out of which all more particular forms are manifest. We have the plurality of existence which participates in the same being and we also have the plurality of existence which participates in the plurality of being itself. It is this distinction within plurality which necessitates the appearance of subjectivity. The plurality of existence presupposes that a space is given. Space is not presupposed in the plurality of being. May we say that existence participates in its being through a temporal mode, in turn, mediated by its ground as the interface between itself and its being? But if Being opens outward, if you will, yet remains prior to space, which is necessarily constituted out of Being, then the openness of Being is internal to itself. Again, we are faced with Subjectivity. Being is constituted outside of space and time; Existence is constituted within space and time and is grounded through the limitation, self-imposed, of

some unique, as opposed to particular, Being. Because Being is incomplete in the sense of lacking any possible formal unity, including, as alluded to already, all spatiotemporal, i.e., substantial, unity, we say that anything which possesses being only does so for itself although a given being may exist for another being through that being's existence, which, again, is a self-imposed limitation of itself, initiated by itself. Existence is the broadest category which we may apply to individuals in our classification of them into sets or classes. Existing together is the most general property which a number of individuals may possess in common with one another. The incompleteness of Being lies in its overflowing superabundance with respect to all possible categories of existence. But the incompleteness of Being with respect to the categorically possible in turn implies the incompleteness of thought as the process by which categories are brought into being. Paradoxically, the incompleteness of Being with respect to its would-be formal unity consists not in a failure or lack, but as already asserted, in a superabundance. What makes all Beings themselves examples of Being Itself is not some property or attribute which all possess in common with one another, that is, what is called Being is not a category which supervenes over its exemplars, various and unlimited in number and extent. April 2011 It is just such a consideration that poses problems for a “concept of consciousness” What makes a Being an example of Being Itself is that which is utterly unique to Itself. Being therefore may more fully realize itself within existence, that is, within space and time, if it embarks not once, but upon an unlimited number of separate occasions, into existence, and then may most fully unify itself through the interaction with itself within existence. This is actually the scheme by which Being most fully realizes itself. Each infinite Being within the infinity of infinite Beings more fully realizes the project of the ultimate realization and unification of Being proper, i.e., Godhood, through each entering the realm of limitation and participating with Others who have by the inner necessity of Being's striving to unify itself have also been led to do the very same. The metaphor which we will apply here is the impulse to escape the condition of Cosmic Loneliness which Being may overcome only

through its own limitation. So rather than the fragmenting of the infinite, which is assumed to already be solitary and hence already unified, in entering the realm of limitation in order to embark upon the project of reunification of itself within Time which is mere re-creation, or, if you will, recreation, we have instead the very serious and real project of the unification of that which, though infinite, is not itself exhaustive or unified. This project is genuine creation, not a mere recreational recapitulation. This is because the act of limitation which each Infinite Being imposes upon itself is not an act of limitation in the sense of mere negation for this would imply that this Being could recoup itself through the simple act of negating the negation and, again, the original act of limitation is seen for meaningless play and without power to connect this Being to Another. The limitation undergone by Being must not be based in terms of negation within itself. This is consistent with one of the outstanding properties of the infinite: no finite reduction of the infinite diminishes it. Real Sacrifice is necessitated in the act of contacting the Other. One does this in the faith that the Other is doing the same. This is the beginning of Fear and of Hope. Hope leads the self into greater community with others while fear leads the self to retreat away or alienate itself from this community, perhaps through attempting to injure it. This is why real achievement cannot be accomplished without the entailment of real risk. There is the risk that if one limits oneself so as to enter Space and Time in the hope of achieving community, one will forget one's original sacred purpose, based in the aboriginal desire of the true Self, and enter with others into an economy instead. Economy may be thought of as false community in which each treats the other not as an end in himself, but as a means to the fulfillment of the unenlightened ends of the false self-concerned only with its incestuous interests the pursuit of which do not permit the occurrence of authentic growth. Those few who have fallen from the Infinite who have not lost all connection with it or who have rediscovered this connection through having learned to contact it; those persons are forcefully impressed with the all important need to help the others remember this connection and so to prevent them from being lost. The idea of being saved is not that of regaining eternity - for one has already

willingly left this state with all of the very real risks and sacrifices necessarily entailed by this foolhardy act. No. One must regain eternity but without the cosmic loneliness of pure individuality or the oblivion of absorption in some impersonal, transcendental unity 06/98, and this means an everlasting life of a loving community of individuals all helping each other in the achievement of this goal which will never be perfectly attained. The infinite must thrust itself into the unknown to meet with the wholly other which it seeks and which can be the only satisfaction of its quest. One must so to speak be born. We see that the project of Being is that of community and not that of mere Unity. This project is of necessity inherently meaningful. In the absence of the self limitation of the infinity of infinite Beings necessitated by each casting itself down into the Realm of Space and Time, No one may communicate with the Other so as to enact the project of Community. Love of the Other as an end in Itself and not merely as a means to the realization of one's own ends is composed of two parts. One must not only love the Other as one's Self, one must love one's Self as Other. Objectivity is necessarily intersubjectivity. Creation of that which possesses real existence can only be accomplished in cooperation with other persons. Creation within the Self alone is akin to the mere endless shuffling of elements already given. What presides over or integrates the infinity of infinite beings is the one thing which all of these beings possess in common with one another: the profound need to complete themselves through the sacrifices of losing themselves in something in common with another or others and acquiring with them desired community. That which prompts this sacrifice is Love. We said earlier, you will recall, that Ground determines Itself as Other. The ethics and morality implied by this doctrine is certainly worth investigating. April 2011 There is contrary to the implied ethics here that ethic based upon the notion of universal brotherhood. A true ethics necessitates doing what is right not as a means to an end, but as Kant says as an end in itself. Certainly if individual consciousnesses are exemplars of such on account of what is unique to each, rather than what is common to all, then doing right by the other involves the sharpest form of ethics imaginable. As Ayn Rand says, “any system of ethics is based on and derived, implicitly or

explicitly, from a metaphysics.”The other that is wholly other is truly a moral end in itself. Limitation is not a circumstance that consciousness just happens to find itself in, but is an act. April 1998

The solitary finite is a superficial abstraction which logically implies the possibility of the existence of other finite beings. Ethics and morality possess application and meaning within a social context but one which is transcended by the solitary infinite. Consciousness is not a medium, among other media, of experience. Experience is always individual rather than collective. August 2014 fb= (@Brettage Munkdial) “

Each and every conscious being is God escaped from cosmic loneliness in the leap of faith of taking upon himself the limitation of space, time and causality...in the hope that there are others who, following the same logic and striving have indeed done the same and committed the foolhardy and desperate act of exploring the realm of "not knowing everything". The world is a projective space and a kind of for the most part unwitting collective RPG.” July 1997

Now an open space-time cannot possess a determinate spacetime topology, by arguments presented elsewhere. The appearance of stable topological structures, therefore, must be sustained through patterns of fluctuation in spacetime topology which are engendered from outside any spacetime. Each particular global topology, itself a closed system of spacetime though extending, perhaps, billions or tens of billions of light years, must possess its own unique configuration energy, just as transitions from one topology to another have their characteristic energy differences. Since both Schrodinger's wave equation of motion, as well as Einstein's gravitational field equations, presuppose an already given spacetime topology, transitions from one topology to another will not be describable by the wave equation, nor will the characteristic energy of a particular topology, i.e., the power input required to sustain this topology in existence for a period of time, be included as a gravitational source term for the field equations. Clearly, gravitational source terms interact

according to general relativity only if they are contained within the self same topological manifold and so fluctuations in the sub-microscopic topology of spacetime, or the energy intrinsic to such fluctuations, must not be included in the gravitational source term, Ti,k, of the Einstein field equations.

02/98 Now fluctuations in the energy of the quantum vacuum must be extremely violent before expecting any gravitational effects. In other words, the energy of the vacuum fluctuations must approach the Planck energy before we are forced to give consideration to Quantum Gravity theory. But again, it is at precisely this stage at which spacetime topology begins fluctuate non-negligibly and potential source terms for Ti,k begin to "slip through the cracks." Considerations such as this may provide a natural explanation for the alleged high energy cutoff of the gravitational source term within theories such as Sakharov's. QQ: Is establishment of the global spacetime metric equivalent to the establishment of a spacetime topology? No. 1/98 6/97 Because causal relationships are always describable in terms of sets of differential equations, these relationships must be supposed to inhere within a continuously differentiable manifold of determinate topological structure. Alterations in the topology of a continuously differentiable manifold cannot be described by a set of differential equations definable on the original manifold. This is why we do not expect that the energies of the submicroscopic topological fluctuations may comprise a contribution to a gravitational source term in the Einstein field equations. A supermanifold must ground the transformation of one topology into another nonequivalent topology such that this topological inequivalence is ultimately reducible within

the supermanifold of higher order topological structure which remains constant throughout the lower order topological transformation. The formalism of General Relativity is not equipped to describe such a topological supermanifold. 7/97 This reminds us of attempts to ground the discontinuous change in the wavefunction which in between measurements evolves deterministically according to the Schrodinger equation of motion in terms of some nonlinear time-dependent version of the S-eqn. Notice that the transformation of one topology into a nonequivalent one necessitates a breaching of the original topological manifold introducing discontinuities which prevent the existence of any bridge functions being defined mediating the transformation which possess continuous differentiability. No consistent solutions to a given set of differential equations exists if the only possible solutions are functions which are themselves not continuously differentiable. All topological transformations must be described in terms of bridge functions which cannot be defined on the manifolds being transformed and so all topological transformations must be mediated from outside all manifolds of determinate topological structure taking part in the topological transformations. Since a metric presupposes an embedding topological manifold, geometrodynamic fluctuations in spacetime topology cannot be described within general relativity theory. Projections of topological transformations in a given space onto a subspace may present the appearance of nontopological transformations within the smaller space. If a chance event yields meaning and significance, it is only because of a common, underlying (concrete) ground of the two things connected. The truly concrete, that is, the ultimate ground of Being, cannot be divided, but can only appear so. To entertain the notion of two separate grounds, themselves possessing no underlying and still more ultimate ground connecting them in the sense of making them, one with the other, (substantially) continuous, is to set up definitions in a manner which invites self-contradiction. We know

that the action by which the continuum of space and time are constituted presupposes a kind of temporality, but one without scale or direction in which the connectivity of the pre-phenomenal is internal but at once without boundaries. 7/97

Delayed choice experiments discussion here.

We have characterized the mental as containing structure which is organized in a top-down manner and the physical as containing structure organized in a bottom-up manner. Another way of characterizing the distinction between the mental and the physical is: the continuum of mind possesses an inside but no outside while the physical possesses an outside but no inside, c.f., decoherence, Rindler horizon, irreducible complexity, Planck mass limit, one-graviton limit, etc. April 2011 If Penrose’s “one-graviton” limit could be shown to be reached much earlier than the level presented by the Planck mass energy level of quantum fluctuation, then this lower energy threshold could be used to calculate the number of distinct, non-communicating vacua which comprise the global/ cosmo-logical vacuum. This number of distinct quantum vacua could perhaps be equated with the number of distinct consciousness’ capable of reducing the wavefunction. On this view how might we interpret the phenomenon of the quantum superposition of distinct vacua. The ground of Being which transcends the distinction of mind vs. matter must then possess both an inside and an outside but where the boundaries between inside and outside cannot be determinate, but must be both indistinct, and when glimpsed, fluctuating. If Jesus never "existed," would the account of his "life" as told of in the Bible be any less significant for those who believe in Him? The origin of all great ideas is ultimately the same, regardless of the particulars of their earlier historical manifestations. The distinction between gentile and Jew consists in this: the Jew does not think that Jesus was the Christ whereas the gentile does not

think that Hitler was the antichrist. The Jew looks to the establishment of the Kingdom upon the Earth. The Gentile looks to this Kingdom being established in Heaven. Human intelligence has evolved to a point just short of that required to conceive a genuinely interesting thought. The proposition that, " there is no such thing as absolute truth," is itself a proposition which can only be true in a relative sense, since this proposition includes itself in its sweeping reference, and therefore in an absolute sense, this proposition is false; consequently, absolute truth exists. 5/97 But may we, therefore, say then that "absolute truth exists" only provided that certain conditions obtain? Since, as demonstrated above, the contradictory to this, "absolute truth does not exist," is a true proposition only provided certain conditions, i.e., this proposition is only true in a relative sense, we are, again, landed in a contradiction. Perhaps the condition which must be provided for the proposition that absolute truth does not exist to be true is that single condition where no absolute truth exists. But if existence is merely unconditioned, transcendent Being with certain conditions added, then absolute truth, if it "exists," would never actually exist though it would possess unconditioned Being. Let proposition P be: absolute truth does not exist. P implies, through the implicit self-referentiality of P, that ~P. P does not actually imply that [ ] ~P, since ~P might be true, but only conditionally. But can the conditional truth of the proposition that absolute truth exists, i.e., that ~P is conditionally the case, be given a coherent meaning? 11/97In other words, is it meaningful to speak of contingent necessity? Surely in the sense of the necessity of physical law, since we can imagine the physical laws having been structured differently than they are in this Universe. But what about for necessity in the sense of logical necessity? For that matter what about the contingently possible? These complex or metamodal categories may only make sense if the law of excluded middle is itself made conditionally true as a law of logic. To say that "absolute truth exists" is itself conditionally true is to

suppose that although Reality is One, it might equally well have been a Many, or to hold the supposition that although a Many, Reality might well have been a One. Which ever of the two ontologies happens to be the case may depend upon conditions outside of the Real, provided that Reality is a Many for there is no "reality itself" in this case. But if Reality is a One, then the necessary conditions for this fact would be contained within the One Itself, which would therefore possess selfexistence. So if the One exists conditionally, it does so in name only; in Reality, the One has absolute existence: if a One exists, it must have always existed. But this is merely to refer to the One in its temporal aspect of everlastingness. Have we also demonstrated that if a One exists, it not only must have always existed (in Time), but it exists necessarily, i.e., the One, if it exists, could not possibly have not existed? We cannot ask whether the Many might not have existed, since this would be to implicitly refer to this Many as if it were secretly, in actual fact, a One. February 1997

This deduction, if valid, seems a bit vacuous. If one is not willing to accept what appears to be a rather dubious bit of logicchopping, one might nevertheless readily concede that the premise that there is no absolute truth at least presupposes, if only as a category, the existence of what it expressly denies. In this way it is seen that the premise is better formulated to fit its intended assertion if it were to read, "the category, absolute truth, is, not instantiated," or, perhaps, what is intended in the original formulation is the stronger assertion, "the category of absolute truth is necessarily not instantiated." But this is to admit, again, its existence. The proof of a truth, on the correspondence theory of truth, consists in the instantiation of an existential claim. The proof of a truth, on the coherence theory of truth, consists in the conceivability of a propositional claim, which may, or may not, make an additional existential claim. There are two distinct varieties of impossible existence: the category proposed of thing is, itself, unintelligible, or, the category is intelligible, however, it is necessarily not instantiated - ever. The concept of coherence of an unbounded system presupposes that unity is not a necessary condition of for

coherence. This brings up the puzzling question of necessary nonexistence. Can anything which has never existed before some time in the infinite past nevertheless come into being at some future time? To answer in the negative implies that anything which exists now must have already existed in the past on an unlimited number of previous occasions in an eternally recurring closed system of events. But this cannot be the case for a reality possessing openness and temporality. So the nonoccurrence of a given event or non-existence of a given thing during the infinite past does not imply its necessary non-existence. But is some event or thing possible even if it has never occurred or existed in the past and even though it will never exist at any time in the future? Such questions may only appear to be asked; in actuality such questions cannot be asked because a reference is being made to something indeterminate as though it were a definite entity - in this case the infinite past or future. The infinite past or future cannot be thought to contain a determinate set of objects such that meaningful statements may be made about what either is or is not a member of either set. It has been remarked that it is necessarily impossible for any person to form a complete description of the world which contains him due to the necessary upcropping of an infinite regress of successive descriptions. But if at some future time the person forming the description no longer exists, then the above logical difficulty is removed and a merely practical (but insuperable) one placed in its stead. This hypothetical person may form a complete description of the future without fear of being embroiled in infinite regress. 10/97 But the forming of a description of one's mental state, which is what forming a complete description of the world ultimately comes to, consists only in an act of determination of one's mental state which is its own description although inconceivably enlarged in its representational content. For this is the most that a complete description of reality can mean if it is to be a real description in the sense of a possible object of knowledge, that is, experience. But such a determination of a superhuman mental state (superhuman, if it is to encompass Reality as a whole) must arise from something altogether outside of the description

itself, if the above infinite regress is to be avoided. And so a so-called complete description of Reality must arise from that which possess no description and the mechanism of this act by which this description is arrived at cannot be contained within the description - again, in order to avoid the vicious regress. And so the process by which the indeterminate determines itself is, itself, indeterminate, which is to say, acausal. Not all of the description may be representational but must contain a nonrepresentational component. There must be something underlying and supporting these representations as appearances which cannot be included in the "complete" description. 06/98

Now assuming that one’s state of consciousness corresponds to a particular brain state, then we might suppose that someone or something must know that the brain is in that particular state in order for the proper subjective mental state to be manifest, i.e., one which represents the actual state which the brain presently occupies. In other words, the brain state must refer to something beyond its own literal structure. To avoid any enlisting of supernatural agencies, we must suppose that the consciousness manifest by the brain results from the brain somehow looking at itself to see what state it is in so that, if you will, the brain can know how it feels, that is, what its subjective state is. The point is that this idea leads to an infinite regress if we assume that the brain represents a closed system. A so-called state can only possess a concrete, as opposed to a merely abstract, significance if it is placed within an open context, itself not consistently treatable as a state or superstate, if you will. The attempt to impose a state description upon a temporally evolving dynamic, i.e., a open system, leads to a system which changes its state nondeterministically. The origin of the fluctuation Hamiltonian of a quantum mechanical system owes generally to describing the system with a merely approximate Hamiltonian leading to an approximate system wavefunction. The system undergoes transitions between its various approximate eigenenergies due to the outside influence of the fluctuation Hamiltonian, Hfluc. The quantum system with its fluctuation Hamiltonian is just an abstraction from the open-ended energy context of the quantum vacuum field itself, for when

all sources of real particles and fields have been taken into account in the construction of the system Hamiltonian, a certain small fluctuation term remains which cannot be absorbed into the system Hamiltonian so as to define a purely time-independent system. This fluctuation term is owing to the existence of a quantum vacuum zero-point energy field. It is this term, what we will call, Hzpf, which prevents any quantum system from ever existing in a true energy eigenstate with , =

e-i

0

And this is why we have been saying that the fluctuations in vacuum energy are the cause of the time-dependent evolution of quantum systems generally. 06/98

But because the future is not determined, it does not constitute a definite category; we can only meaningfully refer to events which may or may not take place at a future time and not to events which will or will not occur. 01/98 There is not a unique connection in the sense of a one-to-one function between internal and external representations, as the connection here is determined completely through feedback between the neural network and its environment. The reason for this is that language is only capable of conveying distinctions and similarities, relationships of class inclusion/exclusion. In other words, the relationship of language to the external world is a strictly formal symbolic one.

It is a peculiar characteristic of language that we are so able to discuss things without precisely knowing what they are about and frequently part of the reason for our discussion of them is just so that we can clarify their meaning. There are two distinct views of this clarification process. One, that we start with a vague notion and then apply theoretical or semantic constraints in orer to more sharply define it so as to make it serve the purpose we have in mind. The other, is that the notion in a latent sense already exists in all the golory of its particularitybut must be extracted from an obscuring tangle of related concepts. The one view is that this clarification process is one of the constructing of categories, the other, one of making distinctions between categories which we already possess. 10/97 There are a number of difficulties with McTaggart's famous proof of the unreality of Time. The proof presupposes that the predicates, past, present, and future may be treated entirely on an equal footing as categories. I believe this is fundamentally mistaken because past, present and future may be distinguished by the fact that the past is determined, the present is the activity of the past determining itself, or of the present determining itself as past, whereas the term "future" does not refer to a determinate category at all, that is, if Reality is, indeed, an open system as we have argued for extensively thought this text. Even the past itself may not be so easily characterized as determinate since the past, at the time it was present, may not have succeeded in fully determining itself as past at the precise moment in which that heretofore present moment determined itself as a forever past moment. We may then distinguish two presents, what we may term the temporal present and the eternal present. The temporal present is that part of the present which itself fully succeeded in determining itself as past within some previous present moment. The eternal present, on the other hand, is that component of this identical present moment which existed in all previous present moments and which may well exist in all succeeding present moments, namely that component which never succeeds in

determining itself as past, but which may therefore be thought to have the essential role in determining the present as past in every case of temporal succession of moments. There is, of course, nothing to prevent the existence of a kind of present which falls somewhere between these two extremes of the temporal and eternal present. For example, part of the indeterminate with which some present moment is continuous may not succeed in determining itself as past before the next succeeding moment, but may succeed in doing so at some later moment. Of course, in a completely closed universe, in which time is completely reversible and possessing no intrinsic scale, the earlier/later distinction of the B series is undercut while the distinction between past, present and future is likewise undercut within the A series. If reality is an open system, then not only the present, but also the past, must possess temporality. 5/97 Now doesn't the mere non-empty existence (in the sense only, perhaps, in which mathematical entities "exist") of a category presuppose the possibility of its being instantiated? The answer to this is: only in the case where a coherence theory of truth is adopted, i.e., where the coherence theory of truth corresponds to actual nature of truth! Apparently, the Coherence Theory of Truth cannot be true in an absolute sense for absolute truth smacks of correspondence. We are here inquiring into the truth about the Truth. As we suggested earlier, the mere intelligibility of a mathematical or logical proposition seems to imply the truth of some proposition of the same type. But according to the mathematician Kurt Gödel, this is not really true, since one can always define mathematical or logical propositions which through a peculiar self-referentiality can neither be determined to be true or false. Or if, on the other hand, all true theorems may be proved true and all false theorems proved false within a particular axiomatic system of inference, then it must also be possible to "prove" certain false theorems true as well as certain true theorems false within this same system. The system in this case is referred to as being

inconsistent. If truth in mathematics and logic is entirely by construction, then such propositions, if they cannot be demonstrated to be true or false must be neither and hence the law of excluded middle is here violated. To save the law of excluded middle, which is a broader law than that of mere noncontradiction, we must admit the "existence" of mathematical and logical propositions which are true in a manner other than "by construction." This is to admit that the truth of certain theorems may only be "seen" through the operation of intuition. The truth of theorems would not be in this case always communicable. It is interesting to note that an algorithm can only demonstrate the truth of theorems which are themselves "communicable." The communication of such theorems would be, of course, in the form of a transmission of data concerning their proof by construction. The realization of the truth of a noncommunicable theorem would be through an act of informing through an act of cognition. The intuitive demonstration of the truth of a noncommunicable theorem would take place through two acts: the formulation or articulation of a particular theorem and then its interpretation such that the theorem manifests its truth to the mind conceiving it. It may be that the conceiving of the statement of the theorem is simultaneous with the preparation of the imaginative ground from which its truth will be intuited. This is similar to the statement that there are algorithms which can be implemented in a parallel data process which cannot be represented as a sequence of discrete logical operations. A metaphor for this is the existence of theoretical mating positions on a chessboard which cannot be constructed in the sense of never coming about through over the board play, but which can nevertheless exist as an appropriate arrangement of black and white chess pieces on a chessboard. It would only be through a violation of the rules of play for such a mating position to be generated by "over the board play," which is to say, returning to our metaphor, that the construction is false of a theorem which is true in reality. For instance, in one example of such an invalid

"construction," one might allow the white King and Knight to occupy the very same square on the chessboard in order that mate of the enemy June 2011 King might be effected on white's very next move. If one could demonstrate that Gödel’s proof of his Incompletness Theorem possesses a serial structure of deductive steps, which is secretly violated by the simultaneous insertion of two or more deductive steps, then the proof could in this way be overturned and demonstrated to be invalid. One must have information about how to process data to engender new information. For information to be "processed," it must first be converted into data and then this data processed through interpretation based upon information about this data. The conversion of information into data and its reconversion back into information does not usually result in the reconstitution of the original information. Data are coded information, but information is not simply decoded data. The mutual interconversion of data and information cannot be understood in terms of a strictly causal process since the conversion of each into the other is overdetermined. This is because strict causality presupposes reversibility, among other things (such as reproducibility) and one cannot insist that a process be at once causal and overdetermined as the reverse of an overdetermined process is an underdetermined process which is inherently acausal. Data and real energy, are interdefinable since both are functions of closed systems which are themselves interdefinable. Neural processes directly involving real particles and fields pertain to the processing of object-oriented data, i.e. intersubjective data or data of differentiated (discursively symbolic) representations. Subneural, or neuronal, processes directly involving virtual particles and fields pertain to integration of data required for constitution of objective space-time, the constituting of the will or intention of action, and the processing of nonlocally connected data into participatory context-dependent, nonrepresentational information. We will never be able to say how human consciousness comes into being, but we can meaningfully speculate about "why human consciousness?" We can only answer the "how

question," partially through identifying additional necessary conditions for individual consciousness. But there can be no finite sum of necessary conditions constituting a sufficient condition for the occurrence of consciousness. @$This is because the necessary conditions are actually only boundary conditions which, as we said earlier, are necessarily spatiotemporal. These boundary conditions apply to a dynamic process not itself confined to any particular spacetime continuum. The sufficient conditions for consciousness lie with both the boundary conditions and the dynamical process constrained by these boundary conditions. We may say that virtual particle processes do not constitute real particle processes but that real particles and fields act as imposed boundary conditions upon the overdetermined vacuum processes resulting in the appearance of virtual processes mimicking the real processes. The real and virtual processes must be constituted together or not at all. This is an application of the principle of irreducible complexity. December 1997

In any causal sequence there is the question of whence the terms of the sequence generally arise. The determination of an effect possess two perhaps fundamentally distinct parts: 1. the determination of one token in the causal sequence by that token immediately preceding it and 2. the determination of the types of which each are merely tokens. This distinction between types and tokens of the terms of a causal sequence reminds us of the distinction made by Kant of that which constitutes the ground of possible experience versus that which constitutes the ground of a particular experience the possibility of which is assumed to be granted. But moreover, because categories are necessarily abstract and the entities to which they refer are concrete, the concrete individual may instantiate the category but it is also a continuous instantiation of a continuum of certain refinements of the said category. 5/97 It must be admitted, however, that this continuum is itself an abstraction, if it is not unique, that is. That which is unique may not be

thought of as composed of nonunique elements. That phenomenon which is reproducible may be reductively explained in terms of entities occupying the next lower level of organization. A truly unique phenomenon is an expression of a level of organization higher than the level it occupies because it must be a manifestation of an open system of relations. Relations which, within a closed system are abstract, presuppose "concrete" entities between which these (external) relations subsist. Within an open system, entities are necessarily abstract and presuppose a pre-existing set of (internal) concrete relations. What we cannot say is what exactly is the trajectory of this continuous instantiation of this continuum of categories. This line of thought seems to presume that the abstract and the concrete are not disjoint but toward opposite ends of a continuum. Hence, both are abstractions from the continuum and both are concrete elements along the continuum. If this is the case, then the continuum itself is neither an abstraction of form from some concrete medium, nor is it a concretization of some preexisting set of abstract relations. The subjective mental states of other minds simultaneously possess objective existence as things. The otherness of other minds' sense data is just as remote as the otherness of June 2011 @$ objects within the noumenal realm. The nominally dual categories, mental vs. physical are complicated by the fact that each individual consciousness must regard the mental states of other minds as not fundamentally distinct from physical states and moreover not fundamentally distinct from the mental states of other other minds. 3/97 There are, however, two predominant schools of thought on the subject of truth. The first is termed the correspondence theory of truth. The second is known as the coherence theory of truth. If reality is bottomless, so to speak, that is to say, open, then it is clear that a coherence theory of truth implies that an absolute truth, that is, a timeless, eternal truth, cannot exist. This is because just as a merely relative coherence-truth refers to a particular system of relationships cohering in equilibrium for a limited period of time within a limited domain, an absolute coherence truth refers to a universal system of

relationships cohering in equilibrium throughout the whole of reality for all time. But an open-system cannot constitute a whole of any kind; the all is not definable in such an open system and no truly static system of relationships can exist within it. Unless this system was closed temporally, only opening itself to temporally through its own action and not the action of any process outside of itself. August 2000 An open-system does not possess a possible complete description and so must always be undergoing temporal evolution with no universal direction of time being definable for this system. Absolute Truths are inadmissible, by definition, within coherence truth theories, in other words. The theory of truth termed Pragmatism may be thought of as a lesser, third contender. Without the possibility of a universal direction of time (because Reality is an open system due to an indeterminate ground), time must be, not merely multidimensional, but infinite dimensional. An isolated system, possessing only a finite number of distinct states, cannot admit the existence of solutions involving multiple time dimensions, e.g., f = f(t1, t2, t3, . . . ). Additional dimensions of time within closed dynamic systems are always reducible to a dynamism in which temporality is simplified to a single temporal dimension but at the expense of a more complicated dynamics within the single time dimension. What introduces the ineliminable necessity of additional dimensions of time is the breaking in upon the heretofore closed dynamic system from outside itself. In other words, the introduction of additional spatial dimensions must always be accommodated by the appearance of an equal number of temporal dimensions. June 2011 @$ The intersubjective component of the subjective time dimension of each individual consciousness is parallel to the intersubjective component of the subjective time dimension of any other individual consciousness. However, the subjective time dimension of each individual consciousness is orthogonal to that of any other such consciousness. 5/97 The highest dimension of time always supervenes over the "lower time dimensions," spatializing them. Insofar as time for a temporal interval possesses direction, throughout this interval the temporal interval is spatial. If local directions of time can be reconciled over

larger domains, that is, fitted to a supervening time direction over this larger domain, then these local time dimensions are spatializable. And so any spacetime must have only one time dimension, although it may possess any number of spatial dimensions. This is to say that an open system, a truly open one, that is, what we have termed earlier a "radically open system," must not be open merely through the breach of a boundary as any boundary is open to two spaces which together define it. This we will term a spatially relative boundary. Where a time dimension becomes involved we obtain a boundary not definable by opposing spaces, one finite, the other infinite. @$Might the brain of an individual human be merely an Atman-Brahman interface device. Local causal interactions obtain between the expectation values of given physical observables. Nonlocal causal interactions obtain between the instantaneous values of physical observables, i.e., is responsible for the existence of correlations between fluctuations. Expectation values of an observable can only be defined when the wavefunction in question, from which these values are derived, is bounded in space and time. Measurement of a quantum mechanical observable presupposes the presence of boundary conditions on the wavefunction representing the system in question. In this case, the wavefunction may be represented as a finite superposition of eigenfunctions of that observable. If a wavefunction is unbounded, then is must be represented as a continuum of an infinite superposition of eigenfunctions. 7/97 These eigenfunctions of such an infinite superposition cannot be individually normalized without the artifice of the delta Dirac function being included within the normalization integral. In other words, the eigenfunctions within a superposition continuum cannot be represented within a Hilbert space. Consequently, Hilbert's action minimalization integral cannot be computed for a system represented by a continuum of eigenfunctions, i.e., for an unbounded wavefunction, and so such a system cannot be described by Einstein's gravitational field equations, since the field equations and the Hilbert action integral are precisely equivalent. We are saying that the stress-momentum-energy tensor,

Ti,k,may only be nonvanishing provided that this tensor's associated eigenfunction is spatiotemporally bounded. The fundamental fluctuations in the vacuum's momentum-energy represent just the sort of unbounded action for which an action minimization integral cannot be defined. 12/97 An important observation in this connection is the fact that the gravitation energy in General Relativity cannot be localized in the specific sense that when one attempts to include the gravitational energy in the total stress-momentum-energy tensor of the field equations, a pseudotensor results which is not generally covariant. The energy of this pseudotensor is only conserved in certain specific coordinate systems, such as in harmonic coordinate systems. Parallel transport of a small volume in which the total energy is defined by this pseudotensor is not generally reversible and we do not here have a conservative force. It has been said that the inverse-square law breaks down in strongly curved spacetimes. This fact may well be related to the problem of the localization of gravitational energy within the theory of General Relativity. Thermodynamically, the vacuum momentum-energy field constitutes an exemplar par excellence of a thermal heat bath, the interaction with which by any other energy system will result in the appearance of irreversibility within this system's temporal evolution. We note here that the temporal evolution of the Schrodinger equation is, strictly speaking, reversible. Also, we noted elsewhere the very close similarity between the Schrodinger and Diffusion equations; more particularly, that a mere substitution of it = t' within the Schrodinger equation transforms it into the Diffusion equation. Paradoxically, to assert the truth of a given proposition categorically, is to say that the proposition is true under all possible conditions, including the very special condition of no conditions, i.e., without qualification of any kind. Language is the medium of communication between distinct minds; it is not the process by which thought originates as such within an individual mind. Why then, does each intelligent individual

possessing the gift of language seem to require its use in order to, not merely formulate a thought for himself, for this is always potentially with intersubjective communication in view, but to have knowledge of what he, himself, is thinking at the present moment? It is because, secretly, intersubjective communication is taking place within the individual, that is, between himself at the moment certain data were originally interpreted and stored in his brain as a quantity of information and the present moment, when he is in a somewhat, and perhaps substantively, different unified mental state. The mental process by which the present mental state of the individual is bound together into an integral whole, i.e., presentation, and which underpins his immediate experience of what has been termed the "specious present" is wholly prior to the phenomenon of language. Language is always representation. When one is trying to remember a thought one has had earlier one is casting about permutationally and combinationally and a flux of words and phrases bubbles into consciousness; it seems that the less one is sure of what one is trying to remember, the more one relies upon these subvocalizations in the attempt to remember. On the other hand, when one suddenly has a clear insight or conceptual breakthrough, one simply experiences a kind of penetrating feeling of new understanding, initially without words. Later, when one must communicate the insight to others, or to make sure one does not forget the insight, one commits it as best one can to a formulation in terms of words. November 1997

To adopt a conceptual framework, entertain new ideas within this framework, and to eventually transcend this framework, does not bring one back to the position which one's thought occupied prior to taking up that particular framework of thought. This is the fundamentally irreversible and creative nature of thinking. One's thinking can be outside of a particular theoretical framework in two fundamentally distinct ways: one's thinking may take place prior to the realization of a theory and one's thinking may ensue after having set aside this theory. These two different processes of thought which take place in the absence of a given theoretical or conceptual framework

cannot be equivalent. This is, again, the irreversibility of determination of thought through the application to it of abstract categories. Traditional logic does not take this irreversible temporality of thought into its account. The law of excluded middle is valid only for thought removed from its temporal context and is valid only for thought which is temporally context-free. This is why thought in its essence is a fundamentally creative process which cannot be captured within a timeless or context-free, which is to say, formal or purely abstract description. Here de-scription may be likened exactly to de-coding. However, what might be termed scription is not the same as encoding. The encoding of a cipher is always overdetermined while the decoding of a cipher is always underdetermined. In a deterministic data manipulation, there exists neither over- nor underdetermination of data. Encoding is the representation of the open-ended within the closed. Decoding is the representation of the closed within the open-ended. This suggests that there are two distinct species of existence, relative and absolute. Absolute existence is unconditioned existence. Relative existence is conditioned existence. When one asks the question, "does God exist?," one is merely asking whether He exists or does not exist in a conditioned relative sense, i.e., in the sense in which black holes, people, animals, subatomic particles, etc., exist. We are then asking whether God exists merely as one particular being among other particular beings. Now God, as a peculiar being, may well not exist. To exist in the fullest sense in which that word, exist, refers, is to possess being in a strictly qualified, conditional sense, that is, within space and time. Being, itself, is that which always underlies mere existence. Being, itself, transcends the categories of existence and nonexistence. That there must be absolute truth cannot be true unless there is something which constitutes this absolute truth as such. This something which constitutes the absolute truth as such cannot merely be the proposition that there is no such thing as absolute truth, for this is contradictory. Neither can the proposition that absolute truth exists refer only to itself without reference to some other absolutely true proposition, for this is vacuity. There cannot merely be the single true proposition,

i.e., that there is no such thing as absolute truth. This something which constitutes the truth that there is absolute truth must itself be an additional truth separate from the truth of the proposition that the proposition that "there is no such thing as absolute truth" is false. But this seems to contradict another intuition of ours about the nature of absolute truth, namely, that it possesses an unconditioned existence whence all other truths must be derived from it, provided certain conditions, which, themselves, are place- and time-dependent. In other words, to say that the statement that "absolute truth exists" cannot be vacuous, that it must refer to more than its own truth, implies that "absolute truth exists" is dependent upon some other separate truth, which then constitutes a condition upon it! April 1997

If space and time are only forms of intuition per Kant, abstract categories of greatest generality, and hence not "really existent," then the constitution of these forms must itself occur outside space and time. If objects exist, independently of the functioning of the mind, then they do not exist in this way within space and time, but are transcendental objects. The realm of the transcendent must have being because the immanent cannot possibly constitute itself as such from out of itself. Particular immanent existents may indeed be derivative from out of other immanent entities, but what we are saying is that the immanent in general, that is the immanent as such, cannot derive from itself. For example, if Time is a Form, it must be constituted as such wholly from outside of Time. The constituting of Time itself is not a temporal process. Without duality and its manifestations as appearing and disappearing forms, there is no means of marking or noting the passage of time. Without that which transcends duality, that is, indeterminate substance, there is nothing to underlie change. When we speak of duality being transcended and of the middle not being excluded, we are not stating that the law of noncontradiction is false. Certainly within any formal or closed system of categories any proposition of the form A and not A is contradictory and nonsensical.

The middle must be excluded within such formal systems. But within open systems of categories in which changes in the system of categories existing at one moment cannot be understood in terms of that set of categories such that the evolution of the formal system is not formalizable, certainly within these systems neither A nor not A can be applied to the whole of which the system is but a manifestation, because there is not such a whole to speak of. Here manifestation is not a mere downward projection of a larger system or object from a higher dimensionality into one of its subspaces. Here the so-called middle is the inevitably indeterminate and unbounded remainder. There is no timescale and no direction for its flow. But the absence of manifestation of form does not necessarily imply the absence of activity. 11/97There is change which underlies the changes which are experienced by individual things, but there is also change which underlies the persistence of things which may for a time not undergo any changes whatever. And so the transcendence of the duality of formal manifestation does not imply a kind of static, block universe, for stasis is only an appearance sustained by activity which is manifested on a particular spatial/temporal scale. For Form to arise ab initio, there must be an intention since there cannot be any reason, in the sense of sufficient reason, for one set of forms rather than another to be brought into being from out of a radically open system possessing no intrinsic spatial or temporal scale or spacetime directionality, i.e., causality - no reason for a particular set of forms to arise before form as such has been established. Forms do not exist in potential in such an open system which are then merely uncovered or manifested. Below are a list of dual opposites. Many of these dual categories appear to neatly line up with one another, forming parallel distinctions. Other of these dual pairs embody distinctions which cut across those distinctions set up by other pairs. Some of these pairs are: Being imaginary

existence real

irrational rational inductive deductive coherence correspondence intuition logic function form creative critical paradigm shift normal science theory application ambiguity certainty dynamism boundary conditions dynamic static relative absolute nonequilibrium equilibrium nonergodic ergodic quantum classical potential kinetic time-dependent time-independent wavefunction amplitude wave equation diffusion equation spin angular momentum Gödel-complete Gödel-incomplete Hilbert Space Spacetime indistinguishable distinguishable Bose Condensation Pauli Exclusion degenerate nondegenerate wavefunction antisymmetric symmetric transitory permanent empirical theoretical individual collective infinite finite transcendent immanent integral differential equation unstable stable contingent necessary existence essence

real ideal auditory visual nondenumerabledenumerable elastic inelastic reactive inert spontaneous stimulated eternal everlasting nondual dual monistic pluralistic Reduction of PsiTemporal evolution of Psi Frequency domain Time domain unique reproducible Time Space Becoming Being Energy Momentum continuous discrete formlessness form ground manifestation constituting constituted source stream Nonrepresentational Representational Will Representation Bell nonlocality Bell locality Correlation Causation Elsewhere Region Absolute Past/Future Mental Physical concrete abstract parallel sequential holistic reductionistic final causation efficient causation formal causationmaterial causation fluctuation expectation value fermion boson gravitation inertia superposition mixture

objective reduction decoherence noncomputable computable imagination knowledge invention discovery open system closed system context-dependent context-free information data irreversible reversible entropy free energy virtual real wave/field particle vacuum e-m radiation reaction field normal ordering symmetrical ordering plenum vacuum convergent divergent coalescence expression undetermined overdetermined ground manifestation noumenal phenomenal chaotic orderly nondeterministicdeterministic indeterminate determinate Heraclitus Parmenides creativity automaticity love pride poetry prose connotative denotative semantics syntax

This is because an open system cannot be partitioned into dual disjoint sets which together descriptively exhaust the system. And so the system, not able to be unified at a purely formal level, must always manifest forms as dynamically changing if it manifests them at all. The

system, in other words, will always possess a middle which cannot be excluded by any logical juxtaposition of formal categories and from out of which utterly novel forms will always be emerging in a way not explicable in terms of the forms which have been previously manifested by the system. This is, for example, why a perturbative analysis of a quantum mechanical system always yields a system which cannot be validly represented in an energy eigenstate. The spatiotemporal/ causal realm transcendant of space and time. Causality is a manifestation of a particular scale of space and time having already been established. Consequently, the process by which a particular scale of space and time is established or posited is itself not analyzable in terms of causal concepts. Now embodied existence presupposes the prior founding of a particular spatiotemporal scale from out of an unlimited set of such possible scales. The embodiment of the individual must therefore be initiated from out of a realm beyond Space and Time, and the ego so embodied is sustained in existence within the realm of space and time by the same process and activity by which it was originally embodied, that is by which the Ego was originally constituted as such. To assume that the human person or ego was constituted in a manner whereby this ego is analyzable through a process of formal or causal reduction, is to assume that its spatiotemporal scale is built up out of progressively smaller and smaller spatiotemporal scales. But there can be no fixing of spatiotemporal scale from below for this is blind process which possesses within itself no natural stopping point in the hierarchy of possible particular spatiotemporal scales, that is, through a process of organization from below, as it were. There is no natural stopping point in the ascent from lower to higher spatiotemporal scales because the lower scales do not comprise the higher and have no knowledge of them, but the higher compreses the lower. Once the forms of space and time are supplied, one then enters the realm of Representation: prior to this one is entirely in the realm of Will ( in Schopenhauer’s sense) or its potentiality. When one asks hat is the origin of something as such, one is asking for a derivation or explanation of something which in no way involves self-similarity or recursivelness, such as the explanation of

certain subatomic particles in terms of a set of interacting particle-like constituents. When, for example, one asks for an explanation for particles as such, i.e., when one asks for an explanation of particlehood in general, one is at once thrust outside of the realm of reductive explanations, and one must turn to an explanation involving a process or organization which acts from above the level of particle manifestations. Everything which we have been saying here perhaps intimates what might be the meaning in Buddhist Philosophy of the term, Suchness.

5/97 It is thought that activity must be preceded by the existence of either monistic or pluralistic substance so that any possible activity is just the movement of either atoms (plural substance) or the movement associated with waves or oscillations (monistic substance). An example of the sustaining of a phenomenal form against a continual change in the underlying ground is the degenerate wavefunctions. The wavefunction represents the most that can be known about a quantum system, but when degeneracy of the wavefunction exists, it is possible for the wavefunction to undergo temporal evolution while one or more of the observables grounded in the changing wavefunction persist unchanged. Q: Does the fact that a quantum system is in an energy superposition state presuppose that the system is undergoing fluctuations in its energy? A: In representing the wavefunction of a complex quantum system in terms of an approximate set of eigenfunctions, one necessarily introduces virtual transitions between the approximated eigenvalues of these eigenfunctions as a way of representing the influence of the relatively small fluctuation component of the Hamiltonian of the system. This is because an open system cannot be partitioned into dual disjoint sets which together descriptively exhaust the system. And so the system,

not able to be unified at a purely formal level, must always manifest forms as dynamically changing if it manifests them at all. The system, in other words, will always possess a middle which cannot be excluded by any logical juxtaposition of formal, that is, dually opposite, categories and from out of which utterly novel forms will always be emerging in a way not explicable in terms of the forms which have been previously manifested by the system. This is, for example, why a perturbative analysis of a quantum mechanical system always yields a system which cannot be validly represented in an energy eigenstate. The concept of nothingness is inadmissible within quantum mechanics since it requires that an unlimited set of noncommuting (incompatible) observables be simultaneously zero. The spatiotemporal/ causal realm is necessarily sustained through a process which itself is transcendent of space and time. Causality is a manifestation of a particular scale of space and time having already been established. Consequently, the process by which a particular scale of space and time is established or posited is itself not analyzable in terms of causal concepts. Now embodied existence presupposes the prior founding of a particular spatiotemporal scale from out of an unlimited set of such possible scales. The embodiment of the individual must therefore be initiated from out of a realm beyond Space and Time, and the ego so embodied is sustained in existence within the realm of space and time by the same process or activity by which it originally became embodied, that is, by which the Ego was originally constituted as such. To assume that the human person or ego was constituted in a manner whereby this ego is analyzable through a process of formal or causal reduction, is to assume that its spatiotemporal scale is built up out of progressively small and smaller spatiotemporal scales. But there can be no fixing of spatiotemporal scale from below for this is blind process which possesses within itself no natural stopping point in the hierarchy of possible particular spatiotemporal scales, that is, through a process of organization from below, as it were. There is no natural stopping point in the ascent from lower to higher spatiotemporal scales because the

lower scales do not comprise the higher and have no knowledge of them, but the higher comprises the lower. Once the forms of space and time are supplied, one than enters the realm of Representation; prior to this one is entirely in the realm of Will (in Schopenhauer's sense) or its potentiality. When one asks what is the origin of something as such, one is asking for a derivation or explanation of something which in no way involves self-similarity or recursiveness, such as the explanation of certain subatomic particles in terms of a set of interacting particle-like constituents. When, for example, one asks for an explanation for particles as such, i.e., when one asks for an explanation of particlehood in general, one is at once thrust outside of the realm of reductive explanations, and one must turn to an explanation involving a process of origination which acts from above the level of particle manifestations. Everything which we have been saying here perhaps intimates what might be the meaning in Buddhist Philosophy of the term, Suchness. January 1998

The fundamental error committed by the Philosophy of Mind known as functionalism is the following. Functionalists contradict themselves by saying that the individual consciousness is exhaustively describable, at least in principle, as a function of brain physiological processes, while treating the brain as an ultimately closed system which can, again, in principle, be given a complete description within the context of some future physical theory. But to say that consciousness is a function of the brain is to say that consciousness is likened to f(x) with the brain processes likened to x itself. But saying the x represents an essentially closed system is to deny the existence of f(x) because x must be accessible to the reach of f(x), which implies that x cannot be closed system. This is the basic contradiction implied by functionalism. November 2013

The brain may participate in the radically recursive structure and dynamics of consciousness, but itself, being a finite system cannot consistently represent true recursiveness. But the functionalist may counter, "If consciousness is not a function of the brain, then what, may one ask, is it a function of?" If consciousness

is recursive, that is, is merely a function of itself, then this consciousness must be infinitely complex, for otherwise it is in principle impossible for consciousness to exhibit itself within itself. The question naturally arises as to whether the self-similarity of consciousness is complete or perfect. What makes the individual consciousness an exemplar of consciousness itself is not anything which, can be given a formal description, which is to say, is objective, nor is it in principle possible that the key feature which makes my consciousness an exemplar of Consciousness - but which at the same time permits my consciousness to be different from that of yourself or some other person - that is, nor is it possible for this feature to be present to myself, in the sense of constituting a feature of my presentational continuum or subjective phenomenal realm. This leads us to attribute to consciousness per se, or consciousness as such, a feature which is neither completely formal nor concrete. This leads to two possible conclusions about this important distinction: 1) either what is termed "formal" and what is termed "concrete" together do not constitute genuinely disjoint categories, or 2) consciousness occupies a realm forever beyond the grasp of disjoint categories, that is, consciousness occupies, if you will, the indefinite domain of the excluded middle, the realm termed by the Greeks, Apeiron. The second possibility is no doubt familiar to us and has been suggested many times within the mystical traditions of virtually every major world culture. The former possibility is then perhaps the more novel and interesting one. We may paraphrase it in the following manner. "What is termed "concrete" is itself partly constituted as an abstract category and what is termed "abstract" always possesses some worldly existence as a concrete entity. This view may fit in nicely with the so-called interactionist view of mind/brain, which has been put forward by Popper and more fully elaborated by Eccles.

One ready means of avoiding this contradiction is to fall back upon psychophysical dualism.

God, by definition, possesses what is called free will. Moreover, He possesses a will, which is unconstrained in any conceivable way, but is only limited by and through itself. This means, for instance, that if God exists, he does so because he chose to exist. When God chose to exist, he chose to render his timeless, unconditioned Being into a conditioned Existence. In fact, this is the only pure example of the exercise of free will: the exercising of choice in the complete absence of any conditions whatever, the choice to exist by an entity possessing Being but not existence. But the only way in which a God which genuinely exists might have had a free choice as to whether or not He exists, it must be the case that if He had not existed before - ever, it would have been only because God had chosen not to exist. 5/98 It would be nonsensical to demand that the ground of existence be at once on a merely equal footing with all other particular existents inhering within it, namely, that it be an existent thing. Although this argument seems to suggest that God, the ground of all that exists, does not itself exist, we must realize that not to exist may be interpreted in two quite disparate ways: nothing may be understood as a complete absence or, it may be understood as that which is, quite literally, "no thing". 4/97 Now a being can only possess a genuinely freely-willed choice from among mutually exclusive alternatives, i.e., contradictories, if this being itself transcends the underlying categorical distinction of these alternative choices. Unity behind phenomena means that there is some over arching form, which comprises, explains, or encompasses in some way all the various passing manifestations. This is what is called formal unity. But the kind of unity we are speaking of and that the mystics through the ages have spoken of whenever they referred to reality being One, is not a formal unity, but a unity of origin or origination. This is the unity of Will rather than the usually intended meaning of unity as unity of Representation. Formal unity always falls short of, and cannot

exhaust, still less outstrip, the unity of origin. But we have not been strong enough in the manner in which we have stated our argument, for the free will of God requires that, if God has never in the past been in existence, then this too was the result of His choice. Here we see that God's choice of existence for himself, which is to say, conditioned, as opposed to unconditioned being requires, of course, that God be capable of making choices utterly outside the continuum of historical time. It requires that God possess an unconditioned existence. There can only be one entity that possesses an unconditioned existence. This follows because if there were two or more entities possessing unconditioned existence, we could ask of any of these entities, what conditions led to the particular entity being what it is rather then one of the other entities possessing unconditioned existence. But this would be to imply that each of these entities possessed conditioned existence in the sense of maintaining their mutual distinctness. This highest expression of free will constitutes its ultimate characterization: the ability to act from outside the spacetime continuum altogether. It is perhaps already apparent from what has been said thus far that our concept of God's Being transcends the category of existence/nonexistence. January 1998

Any freely willed action of the observer must induce a collapse of the wavefunction describing the brain of this observer. There is no such thing as a purely "voyeuristic" observation, due to the inevitable influence that the observer has upon the system he is observing. This is due to either a change in the energy of the system which is not accompanied by a change in the energy of the system containing both the observer and the system he is observing - in this sense the observer's observation is no observation at all in the sense of an operation which engenders new knowledge in the observer. Or this is due to an induced discontinuous change in the wavefunction of the system under observation. A freely willed action does not fit within the confines of either a determinate spacetime or within a determinate phase space. March 2012 The potential conflict between distinct observers’ consciousnesses is

resolved if each observer’s consciousness only resonantly tunes to its own unique ground or vacuum state. Experimentally this could be investigated by comparing the observer-based quantum effects of an observer observing his own brain state versus a different observer observing these brain states. As remarked in an earlier discussion, since the negation of the indeterminate is itself not a determinate thing, in the event that negation remains a well-defined logical operation, or, if negation requires prior determination in order for it to be defined as an operation, it follows that the indeterminate necessarily exists in an unconditioned sense. Since the absolute negation of the indeterminate does not yield what would appear on the surface to be its formal opposite, i.e., determination, the principle of determination must lie within the indeterminate itself. 2/97 Negation, therefore, can only be defined within a kind of local figure-ground system of potential forms or structures. Without the assumption of such a pre-existing, fixed gestalt system of forms and relations, the negation of a negation does not bring us back to the form or relation with which we started. Change of the system of relations and formal structures which does not render negation self-inconsistent in the manner alluded to must merely be a local change which is grounded in a larger unchanging system of metarelations and metaforms/structures. Within a closed, and hence atemporal, system of categories there is no fundamental distinction between forms, meta-forms, meta-meta-forms, etc. Negation is not definable within an open system of categories where radical, that is, merely genuine, temporality exists. This is what is meant by our assertion, made elsewhere already that "temporality is the irreducibility of function to form." This follows logically: If B is not ~A, then either B = A or B is a component of A. This is, if course, if we are to preserve the logical law of the excluded middle. This is all to say that "the principle of determination must lie within the indeterminate itself" is to say that what

are called "determinate" and "indeterminate" must not be disjoint categories; rather, the determinate must refer to the class of forms which can be assumed by the indeterminate. So there is not negation of the indeterminate in general because there clearly can not be a concept of the indeterminate which merely equals the sum of the negations of all possible determinations. We might suppose that the indeterminate is the integration of all possible forms, both manifest and non-manifest. The act of manifestation is logically prior and not reducible to the act of particular negation through the negation of a particular non-manifest form. A theory survives passage through many stages of revision because it is “stable against tinkering”; it is a “robust” theory, in other words. But what, may we ask, makes for robustness of theories? For one, the basic elements of the theory must start out vague and overdetermined. Although the progress of the theory, at least in its initial stages, depends upon an illusion of unique determination or only slight underdetermination of its basic concepts, equations, etc. So it is actually the relationship of the initial determinate meanings of the basic theoretical elements with respect to the myriad latent meanings secretly falling within each term’s “penumbra” which supplies the ground from which the theory is to successfully develop. Stability in this process of the growth of theories is greater if the basic concepts are constant with only their representations flexibly open to change. 2/97 And this is what is meant by the assertion that manifestation as such, that is, within an open system of potential categories, takes place not through a mere act of uncovering of that which already exists in potentia. This is why the metaphor of consciousness as merely a kind of illuminating light that reveals the pre-existent ultimately falls short of imaginatively capturing what consciousness is in its essence. It is rather through the continuous activity of consciousness that the forms of thought and perception are sustained as such; consciousness creates forms that have never before existed - forms which are absolutely novel occurrences! The number of possible manifestations of consciousness

sustained by it is infinite in number, but this set of forms, though infinite, possesses merely denumerable infinity, that is, an infinity of modes of determination as form. The infinity enjoyed by the indeterminate ground of Being, i.e., pure consciousness, is itself nondenumerable! One may intuitively realize that there is no inherent reason why one's consciousness could not be structured with a greater subtlety than that of which one's own brain is capable and this is because the structuring of one's consciousness has, in fact, developed in complexity along with the growth and greater structuring of one's brain from infancy into adulthood. Contrary to what many philosophers of mind tend to believe, qualia or, what are sometimes referred to as "raw feels", "what it's like-ness", etc., is not what is the most inherently mysterious thing about consciousness. There is something that goes towards making a given individual's consciousness what it is, that is, a particular example of consciousness itself, which is never given within the individual experience of any conscious person. And that property is simply whatever is common to all actual and possible individual consciousness and which therefore cannot be unique to my individual consciousness in making it mine as opposed to yours. This property is more general than the most general property of my subjective experience of which makes it mine, in other words; it is not concrete, but abstract and so cannot be related to any of the qualia coloring or fleshing out, if you will, my particular consciousness. This yields the paradoxical result that it is possible for one to be conscious in the complete and utter absence of any qualia whatever. The only alternative to this is to suppose that there is only one consciousness that is simply structured differently by different brains, say, in the case of human beings. April 2011 Only a transcendental mind would be capable of forming a conception of consciousness as such and then only by being able to experience for himself the spectrum of distinct individual consciousness’ so as to form the abstract category wherein each individual consciousness takes on the additional, trans- or supra-subjective, as opposed to intersubjective, meaning as mere exemplars of consciousness per se. Here we see the intimate connection

between the problem of other minds and the problem of an Other Mind, namely that of the existence of God. Faith in the former seems to presuppose faith in the latter. The act of underlying manifestation is non-representational and hence necessarily non-logical - again, not the mere negation of a particular nonmanifest form, that is, not the mere negation of a negation of a particular manifest form. This act of manifestation which is not the mere negation of negation is therefore intentional because the object or goal of the act is not defined prior to the act which is not a mere selecting out from amongst. In other words, the manifestation of particular forms from out of the indeterminate ground arises not from the bringing into appropriate relatedness a number of parts, not from the supplying of some additional necessary conditions. This reminds us of our observation that the appearance of a particular state within an ergodic system possessing an infinite number of possible states is necessarily infinitesimal. All "self-organization" is merely an appearance of such, and in reality originates through the interaction of "elements" or "constituents" with the indeterminate ground which supports their existence and not merely through their mutual interaction. This is why the phenomenon of self-organization cannot be "lawlike." Two "elements" are related to one another never in any direct "physical" sense, but through each being related to the same prephenomenal ground. Jesus, in a philosophical moment, might have well said, "If it is possible for you to forget me, it is possible for you to forget everything you know, in which case, oblivion is for you a real possibility." June 2011 If A, it is true that one only knows one’s own psychological states and B, there is no all-knowing, all-embracing transcendental ground of being, i.e., God and C, only eternal oblivion awaits one upon death, then D, it follows that metaphysical solipsism is true by default. So the converse of this is also true, namely that ~D > [~A v ~B v ~C]

But intuitively, {~A > [~B & ~C]} & {~B > [~C & ~A]} & {~C > [~A & ~B]} Consequently, ~D > ~B; which is to say that the falsity of solipsism implies the existence of God. @$ Only the fact of the existence of God grounds consciousness in a concept of consciousness and vouchsafes consciousness’ objectivity and so the consciousness of the other as more than a metaphor that oneself arbitrarily adopts. So-called default solipsism should then be defined as metaphysical solipsism in which oneself is not God. Intuitively we know that the other of the other exists, namely that the notion of the 4th person is a meaningful concept. However, in the absence of a transcendental being who is the ground of being, there seems no real reason to suppose that there is any real distinction between the 3rd and the 4th person, that is, no real distinction between the other and the other of the other. How does this distinction relate to that of the other and onself as other? In the absence of the all embracing, all knowing ground of being, consciousness forever must remain a metaphor and hence the mystery of consciousness must remain isoluble, except if the consciousness of the self is in fact consciousness as such and eternally preexistent. The psychological states of others may only in this case be known in more than a mere metaphorical sense if all of them can be known on an equal footing wherein the distinction of self vs. other is less than fundamental, which is to say derivative. June 2011

If human consciousness is just a transitory structuring of a more fundamental consciousness, e.g, quantum vacuum consciousness field, then individual human experience is rational because the experiences of each and every human can be fitted together into the larger picture

represented by the experience of this fundamental consciousness, that is, individual human experience can be reprocessed in terms of how it compares and contrasts with that of every other human whose individual conscious experiences have been cumutatively depostited into a rational matrix of collective experience. An apt metaphor here is that of the taste buds of a tongue in which the person whose tongue is doing the tasting is akin to God while the individual taste buds collecting the taste sensory data are the entire population of self-conscious beings. epi=fcbk

Every time Philosophy has in its long history produced a conclusive result, this result has been taken from her and made into a separate discipline. For this reason Philosophy may be likened to the fallow acreage mistaken for infertile land. Psychology on the other hand, seems these days to yield productive results only when it borrows from other disciplines, e.g., artificial intelligence, cognitive science, brain physiology, biophysics, pharmacology, criminology, statistics, anthropology, sociology, sociobiology, economics, linguistics, etc. with relatively little distinctive scientific content to call its own. Once one of the greatest and most influential schools of this infant science, Behaviorism, now seems to have been exploded by the failure of hard AI on the one hand, and the success of Chomskian linguistics on the other. Although pure or general Psychology no longer seems able to contribute much to the advancement of its science, the field nonetheless possesses a bright outlook in light of an interdisciplinary spirit of research, which is to say, on account of its philosophy of applied science. epi=

The underlying psychological drive spurring all human endeavors towards greatness is not per Freud the desire for sexual gratification, but the desire to be not worshipped as a god, but to be worshipped as God Himself. This is what caused Lucifer's downfall, not his desire to gratify his "nasty bits," supposing he possessed them. To abstract is to ignore details for the sake of noticing similarities between things, developing concepts and defining classes and their relations. We are very limited in the number of simultaneous details that

we are able to cognize in the so-called "world around us," and so this world cannot help but take on for us a highly stylized appearance, each moment a scene that is part of a depiction within a story told to a small child. This reassuring cartoon of a world, filled with myriad mythological entities - tables, chairs, animals, trees, etc. - the human form itself is a mere conveniently symbolic point of reference to guide a developing mind through its gestating world, c.f., “soul formation” school of theodicy. @$

Society, the exchange of ideas, insofar as it is not the mere act of mutual signifying or labeling for one another things and their happenings, is to be likened to an economy where bank checks, never cashed, are traded for commodities which are never tangibly produced and transferred, so that no one in this economy ever really knows what has been bought or what that which has been bought or sold really costs. A paradox is only a contradiction within an information system which does not admit the presence of that system-specific ambiguity. Dualism and Disembodied Existence Dualism, as a philosophical position within the philosophy of mind, can be seen as an outgrowth of a prescientific, religious belief in the existence of an immortal soul which set human beings apart from the rest of nature. This soul endowed the human being with will, purpose and self-awareness, as well as a place within a transcendent order beyond earthly life. In this way human beings were thought (through the concept of the soul) to have originated through the downward causation of divine creativity. The concept of the soul, which is the precursor to the philosophical doctrine of dualism (through Descartes), had, in its turn, an even older origin in the animism of prehistoric peoples. Although the doctrine of an immortal soul, of an animating spirit capable of operating and existing independently of the physical body, indeed, seems to open the way to belief in such phenomena as ghosts, poltergeists, etc., dualism as a philosophical doctrine does not

necessarily imply or even permit the existence of such "supernatural" phenomena. In what follows, we will try to argue that although dualism can be given a rational and philosophical justification, supernatural phenomena, such as ghosts, which might seem to be implied by this doctrine, are really not consistent with it. The particular variety of dualism which we believe to have a scientific/experimental basis which at the same time seems to exclude the existence of disembodied spirits or ghosts is the one put forward by John C. Eccles in his book, How the Self Controls Its Brain (HSCIB). Eccles’ hypothesis of mind-brain interaction is that of the microsite. The basic idea behind Eccles’ microsite hypothesis is that the human brain possesses finely-detailed structures responsible for the generation of neural impulses which operate through exchange of such small quantities of energy that these structures can be modified in a probabilistic manner through "quantal processes." Eccles presents a rather technical discussion in sections 9.4 and 9.5 of his book for a quantum mechanical model of the operation of these quantal processes. These smallest physical structures of the neural synapse which can be directly influenced by the mind are what Eccles calls dendrons. The mental structures which interface with these dendrons are called by Eccles, psychons. Not all of the details of the dendron structure need be discussed here. Such a discussion, as well as the detailed one concerning quantal processes of mind-brain interaction, are beyond the scope of this paper and would perhaps obscure our basic question. However, some basic components of Eccles’ dendron are discussed below to aid in our understanding of how Eccles describes synaptic firing. The basics of how the dendron is structured and functions will perhaps show how nonphysical influences of the individual's mind may materially affect the overall functioning of his brain. This may be only to show how the functioning of the brain is open to nonphysical influences and how brain function is not completely determined without a brain-mind interaction like that proposed by Eccles. Moreover, the discussion of quantal processes by Eccles in chapter 9, referred to above, is important in this connection if only because, in it, Eccles seems to demonstrate mathematically that the energies required to alter the probabilities of neural synaptic firing,

through the triggering of bouton exocytosis, are comparable in size to the quantum "zero-point energy" which results from Heisenberg energy uncertainty, in turn, originating independently from the brain itself. According to Eccles, the probability of bouton exocytosis in neurons, particularly of neurons within the supplementary motor array (SMA), can be altered by the mind of the individual without violation of conservation of energy. This is because, as Margenau states, as quoted by Eccles in HSCIB, "some fields, such as the probability field of quantum mechanics, carry neither energy nor matter." Bouton exocytosis is the mechanism by which the neural synapse fires, through the emission of vesicles of neurotransmitter into the cleft of the synapse. Eccles believes (chp. 4.5) that "the synaptic vesicles are recognized as quantal packages of the preformed transmitter molecules... that are ready for release as a quantal package into the synaptic cleft in a unitary operation." This unitary operation, particularly for the cluster of neurons of the supplementary motor array, where mental intentions are translated, according to Eccles, into a set pattern of neural synaptic firings leading to a particular bodily action - this unitary operation is that of the action of the individual mind upon the microsite which Eccles believes to be the paracrystalline presynaptic vesicular grid. "The identity theorist is committed to the doctrine that mental events per se cannot contribute to the generation of neural events, which is a doctrine of the closedness of World 1." The "probability fields," referred to above, relate to a variety of different patterns of synaptic firing, and so are not themselves disembodied and independently existing since they are probabilities of different physical brain states - they are meaningless without an already existing brain. The idea of disembodied ghosts or spirits is inconsistent with this interactionist view of the "mind-brain interface" as set forth by Eccles in HSCIB. This is because the existence of a physical brain is presupposed by the probability fields (for different coordinated patterns of neural synaptic firing). On the other hand, cerebral functioning without the ability of these probabilities to be transformed into actual, physically observable patterns of neural synaptic firing leaves no room for the operation of will and intention. Borrowing from Popper’s lexicon, the openness of World 1 does not

mean its openness merely to other parts of itself, but of its openness to World 2 and/or World 3, the experiential and mathematical worlds, respectively. Temporal coherence can only be explained in terms of the existence of temporal bubbles of non-infinitesimal duration which exhibit cohesiveness and which are capable of undergoing transformations over time. June 2011 Since a time dimension already obtains within the bubble, any temporal change undergone by the bubble as a whole must be orthogonal to temporal change within the bubble. The temporal cohesiveness of consciousness would surely be disrupted within a strong gravitational field or even within a region of spacetime wherein the presence of gravity is very much weaker than 1 gee. This is because biological and subsequently human evolution took place entirely within the presence of a 1 gee gravitation field and individual human consciousness first arose due to the evolving brain’s having learned to exploit a preexistent “consciousness field” so as to bypass heretofore ever-present restriction imposed by block-headed and clunky, stimulusresponse computing. Temporal coherence, of course requires that time possess a dimensionality “transcending unity”. So temporal coherence or cohesiveness, rather forever outstrips the resources of unified descriptions in terms of spatial relationships or deterministic processes (implying spatilized time, e.g, Einstein’s “block universe”) There is something paradoxical about the indeterminate, and that is that its negation is not itself determinate, and this seems to imply a kind of contradiction. This would tend to suggest that indeterminacy is not an abstract category or property of something; rather it is the substance of Reality and constitutes its ground. We said earlier that the operation of negation was only defined within a particular system of categories. This assertion may be better understood in terms of the composition of a "whole" in terms of various sums of complementary, or disjoint, parts. The negation of a given set or category would be another set, category, or sum thereof, such that, taken together the original set plus its complement would reconstitute the whole comprising them. Clearly,

then, there is no possibility of defining the negation of a category which results from its abstraction from a "whole" not possessing closure with regard to the total number of different possible categories, i.e., finite cardinality. In other words, since what we will call an "open set" possesses a nondenumerable cardinality, no particular number of disjoint sets may be defined for it which exhaustively covers the open set: if no possible description exhausts the set, then, in particular, no two component sets may constitute a disjointly exhaustive description of the set. But this is only another way of saying that one cannot specify a category such that it and its negation conjointly exhaust such an open set. July 2011 But what about a set that is an organic whole such that it cannot be divided into two disjoint parts? In the case of a cellular automata, the algorithm driving the temoral evolution of the simulation would not be fully formalizable. The disjointness of two subsets means that in the case of the original abstraction from the whole (the set that is to be disjointly composed, not the whole as such) that formed each subset wherein a (specific?) collection of details was ignored/treated as irrelevant in order to constitute each, those suppressed details of each subset necessarily find themselves included in the category of the other subset. These considerations prompt us to invoke a new principle, namely that the dynamics of the self is located in the other. This suggests that the most intimate knowledge of the self is gained not by the self looking within but through observation and examination of the behavior of the other. This meditation on the nature of negation has led us to the realization that the operation of negation is itself an indeterminate operation. And this is to say that the operation of negation is not definable on an open set. Such an open set cannot possess a unique formal unity of structure. An arbitrary number of possible incomplete unifications of the set may nonetheless be proffered. It is only meaningful to think of the negation of a determinate structure or thing within a particular system of categories. The definition of the function of negation is itself system dependent, and so, when one speaks of the indeterminate in general, one

is engaged in a subtle self-contradiction, subtle in the sense that the notion of contradiction is, itself, a logical or syntactical notion whereas the origin of the particular contradiction facing us, with respect to the notion of the in general determinate and its negation, is one of a distinctly semantic nature, and syntax and semantics are normally understood as being mutually irreducible. Paradoxically, the essence of what is called thinking is the activity of taking thought in its unassuming, un-self-conscious, naturally occurring process, as the object of thought itself. All sufficient causes, so-called are merely necessary causes operating in the presence of that which complements and completes their action so that we may say that their action consists solely of an enabling or triggering of a self-mediating process through its being impressed upon those necessarily abstract entities and guiding them in the imperfect imitation of this their ground. We can never specify the complete sum of necessary causes constituting the sufficient cause of a particular phenomenal event. If all that really exists is the Absolute, the World Mind, then that is one thing, but if there exists a plurality of minds, then there must exist that which is itself not mind, @$ for we must account for the "betweenness" of the various minds constituting this plurality. The plurality of minds necessarily presupposes a spatiotemporal or at the very least an intersubjective continuum and a means of embodiment mediated by forms. The plural state of mind cannot be eternal as it is dependent upon space and time and so must be limited both spatially and temporally. Only those aspects of the individual mind which are not contained within the spatiotemporal context are continuous with the ground from which the individual ego originally sprang and lies within the inmost being of that individual, @$ which, again July 2011 it finds most intimate testimony of in the other. For this is the very same ground from which space and time are themselves originally constituted. Now here is the rub: if there is not disjoint dual decomposition of the whole, then the other (and not just some metaphysical transcendental other) is transcendentally other. February 1998

This notion is very much along the lines set for by Schopenhauer in his metaphysical system, itself owing much to Kant.

There is not a dual constituting of space and time, one mental, the other, physical. The action underlying the constituting of the spatiotemporal continuum is prior to the formal distinction of physical and mental. This is why spiritually and metaphysically-minded physicists and other scientists are beginning to look to the deep connections subsisting within the so-called nonlocally-connected quantum field, or vacuum, for the underlying basis of individual consciousness, as these nonlocal connections within the quantum field are responsible for those newly discovered quantum effects which seem to violate the heretofore inviolable limitations posed by relativistic causality, e.g., conservation of momentum-energy. And so the individual does not transcend the limitations of his own ego by looking beyond the boundaries which define his ego as separate from the egos of other individuals, that is, within the space set up just on the other side of the ego boundaries and complementary to the space in which the person has his individual being, but by looking within himself where these ego boundaries do not exist and have never once existed. This is much like diving so deep down a well that one reaches the subterranean ground-water with which the waters of all wells in a field are mutually continuous. June 1997

Nonlocal connections form the basis of communication within a single mind, while local connections form the basis for potential communication between minds. This is due to the intimate role of the individual observer in the partitioning of reality into real vs. virtual disjoint domains. For instance, the status of a particular particle or field as being real or "merely" virtual is entirely dependent upon the inertial frame of reference of some particular observer. If we conveniently think of the reduction of the wavepacket representing a particle in a superposition state (of different virtual versions of itself), then we see that, in light of the frame-dependence of the real vs. virtual categorical distinction, accelerated motion, and, in essence, gravitation, must play a crucial role in the process of the collapse of the wavefunction or the "conversion" of a virtual particle into a real particle. This is because it is not a mere misnomer that the term “virtual” is applied to both

particles and states. This is perhaps related to Penrose's claim that quantum gravity is relevant to the process of reduction of the wavefunction in the absence of its decoherence through environmental interactions, i.e., what Penrose terms objective reduction. The collapse of a wavefunction not possessing boundary conditions, that is, composed of a continuum of an infinite number of eigenfunctions, creates an infinite quantity of information. Another way of seeing the necessity of a Penrose-mechanism of objective reduction of the wavefunction is to think in terms of the spacetime within which the wavefunction must be expressed. Firstly, let us take note of the fact that the wavefunction does not itself have a "physical" meaning; only the square of the wavefunction represents the measurement of physical observables, that is the probability densities of their associated eigenvalues. The wavefunction itself, rather, represents the most complete description of a quantum system - the most that an observer, or hypothetical observer, can possibly know about the system represented by this wavefunction. Moreover, the phase of the wavefunction has, apparently, no absolute physical meaning, only the difference in the phase of two or more wavefunctions/ eigenfunctions. We may suppose, hypothetically, that secretly, a necessary condition for the proper normalization of a given wavefunction might be the following condition: the sum of the phase differences of consecutive eigenfunctions must add to an integral multiple of pi in the case of a purely symmetric wavefunction, whereas the sum of phase differences of consecutive eigenfunctions must add to an integral multiple of pi/2, in the case of a purely antisymmetric wavefunction. Despite the fact that the frequencies of each eigenfunction are distinct, the collective temporal evolution of all of the eigenfunctions comprising a given wavefunction manages to maintain this precise relationship, stated above, for the eigenfunction phase differences, but only if this temporal evolution takes place within an inertial frame of reference. Of course, there should be a relatively simple way to prove this assertion mathematically. The proof of this may be related to the fact

that a given wavefunction may be expanded into a unique spectrum of eigenfunctions which, in turn, can be individually expanded into eigenfunction spectra with respect to an incompatible operator/observable. The temporal evolution of Psi(x,t) is just a constant multiplied by a time-varying (rotating) phase factor which, for an individual wavefunction, possesses no physical significance - only relative differences in amplitude phase has a physical meaning. Now if the human brain is not capable of entering a peculiar quantum coherent state, then there is no question of comparing the phases of the brain's wavefunction, or its relevant nonlocally-connected components, with the phases of each eigenfunction of the quantum system being "observed" by the individual whose brain is in question in this regard. It is well known that decoherence and collapse of a given wavefunction will take place through the entanglement of the wavefunction with its surrounding environment. Might a wavefunction become entangled with the quantum coherent state of the observer's brain, directly resulting in the collapse of this wavefunction? @$But the entanglement of one coherent wavefunction with another should merely produce a new superposition - not decoherence. October 1996

On this view, the mind of the individual, if only one among a many, must itself, be a kind of abstraction within the Universal Mind, but an abstraction that is always being re-thought, since the operation of the individual mind is not generally formalizable. There is no such thing as nothing. Nothing, by its very nature, is a nonexistent entity: it is its own negation. We might be tempted to say then that "something," being the opposite of nothing, must exist. But not just any "something" constitutes the opposite or negation of nothing/nothingness, but only a something which is, itself, the unity of all that might possibly exist, and the very essence of which is to exist. @$ On this view what we must term God is the truest negation of nothingness and so also the ultimate bootstrap process.

May 1997

But if the world is in reality an open system, which is to say, not merely denumerably infinite or unlimited, but nondenumerably infinite, then this system transcends any unity of form whatever, even though perhaps possessing unity of origin. The negation of such a boundless totality beyond totalizing could not constitute an actual nothingness. And so there is a category for that which transcends the dual opposite categories of existence versus nonexistence. In other words, nothing, not being possible because containing within itself its own negation, implies that there must have always been something (or other). But the only guarantee that there has always been something is the existence of something which contains within itself its own affirmation, if you will, the reason for its own existence. A fundamental and most general property of a thing which contains within itself the reason for its own existence is that of recursion, something which is defined solely in terms of itself, a recursive structure. There are logical grounds for believing that there can be only one recursive structure, that there can be only one self-existent entity - with this entity being the "ground" for existence of all other entities. A recursive structure, if it may be thought to be composite, would be composed of parts which are totally interdependent upon one another; no part is the cause of any other without also being itself caused by this other part and so if this recursive structure had a beginning in time, it must have been given existence through a pre-existing, broader and more complex recursive structure. We see now that a given finite recursive structure comes into existence through a process of uncovering or abstraction from a more complex whole - through a process of negation. We are reminded of Michelangelo's claim that a truly great work of sculpture already exists within its marble block and that all he did in order to produce his works of sculpture was to free them from the marble in which they were imprisoned. The distinction between the "mental" and the "physical" may be drawn in the following way: both are wholes composed of parts, both possess principles of organization, but what is termed a physical whole

is defined exclusively in terms of its constituent parts while the "parts" which "compose" what is termed a mental whole are, themselves, defined in terms of the whole which they compose. The reconstruction of a mental whole must be guided in a top - down manner whereas the construction of a physical whole must be guided in a bottom - up manner. The principle of a mental whole must exist prior to its actual realization ( in terms of whatever substance). Without substance change is not possible. Coextensive with this principle is: change owes itself to a lack of determination, to a deficit of Being, to negation. From which it at once follows that substance, rather than being the seat of being, of thinghood, as common sense conceives it to be, it owes its existence, to the contrary, to a lack of being. It is not possible for a determinate thing to be made up out of substance insofar as this thing possesses determination. July 2011 Our remarks about the processes of abstraction, negation, disjointness, organic wholeness, the relationship of self and other, must be reexamined in light of the fundamentally distinct modes of self-organization of mental vs. physical wholes. November 1997

We are all familiar with the humorous philosophical adage that "time exists because otherwise everything would happen all at once." Although this adage is usually expressed in a facetious vein, there is perhaps greater significance behind it than many people realize. If Reality possessed no totalization ( to borrow from the post-modern lexicon), that is, if Reality is not a Unity of any kind ( because as a totality Reality cannot be a mere kind or sortal), then Reality cannot be given or represented within a single moment, but a plural manifold of moments are required for its exhibition/expression. There is perhaps an argument to be made for an infinity of moments (nondiscrete) being required for this: a finite sequence of moments may be equivalent to a single moment. An infinite space cannot necessarily maintain its orthogonality toward possible time dimensions. In other words, there can be no global "now" or "present." "Past", "present" and "future" are merely relative and not absolute predicates. In fact the incompatibility of temporal predicates which so troubled au=McTaggart may be absolutely required in order to guarantee

the possibility of the continuity of "time's flow." The reality of the socalled specious present would also seem to require this incompatibility of merely relative temporal predicates. It is easy enough to see that continuity is required for the subsistence of what is called historical time which we will henceforth refer to as temporality. Indeterminate substance is the only basis for the continuity underlying all change. There are many reasons for favoring a top-down as opposed to a bottom-up structuring of complex informational systems. We may point up the truth of this statement by listing a number of examples. 1) Socrates' view on education. 2) Michelangelo's view of the act of creation in sculpture. 3) The Hindu understanding of the Void as a Plenum. 4) The James - Bergson - Popper theory of the "origin of consciousness." 5) Chaos theory's view of seemingly chaotic systems as ultra-high density information systems. 6) The holographic model of fundamental particles and their interactions. 7) The fact that the effectiveness of natural selection presupposes the existence of a complex gene regulatory hierarchy. 8) The fact that technological development consists entirely, in principle, of increasing sophistication in the manipulation of boundary conditions to a pre-existing dynamism which itself does not admit of any modification whatever. The notion that orderly structures and systems can be formed out of the random shuffling over an immense period of time of an equally immense state space (defined in terms of abstract variables), presupposes the operation of a kind of progress-oriented "ratcheting effect." Purely random shuffling of state space configurations means that no feedback, either positive or negative exists between the various states of the space, that all of the states are equally weighted in probability. This notion of what is called an Ergodic System, moreover, violates the principle of relativity in the sense that, although different probabilistic weighting of particular states, or, clusters of states, is disallowed for a case of genuinely random shuffling of states, nevertheless, the probability weighting of certain state space configurations is permitted to be modified with time. Specifically, they

are modified with time because somehow once a "favorable" configuration has been "hit upon," it becomes much more probable in the future due to the influence of Darwinian natural selection. There seems to be two significantly different classes of mutations upon which natural selection operates as a purely critical, as opposed to a creative, process. Firstly, and most importantly, those mutations occurring to the regulatory genes, and secondly, those mutations affecting the kinds of proteins which are made available to a developing organism, the socalled point, or structural, genetic mutations. If a "conscious computer" is ever developed in what will undoubtedly be the far distant future, this mysterious property of such a device will in no way stem solely from the design or blueprint by which its engineers will have conceived its construction; the blueprint will, of course, be a necessary component in the realization of such a conscious machine, but will have been derived from a necessarily somewhat fortuitous discovery, owing to much trial and error investigation, of the "correct" hardware interface of the device with the recursive, selforganizing matrix of quantum - vacuum energy fluctuations which underpin and mediate the stability of all fundamental particles and their exchange forces. Such a hardware interface constitutes the man-made component of the complete set of boundary conditions being applied, locally, to the vacuum electromagnetic field, assuming that the interface is to be an electronic device - if not, then other components of the total vacuum fluctuation field will come into play. These boundary conditions should, presumably, are able to be reorganized over time through continued interaction with the vacuum electro-magnetic field. The hardware must not be inflexible, in other words, and not act as a final set of boundary conditions upon the field, but must act merely as a "seed" set of transitional boundary conditions, amenable to transformation in response to interaction with the field. The field, which is open-ended, must direct the organization of the "hardware" interface, ultimately in accordance with its own requirements. 6/97

Sufficient conditions for the occurrence of a given event are

always merely "provisional." 4/97 The question arises whether changes in these boundary conditions to the field, that is, for example, the transmission of neural impulses through a brain's neural network, produce or are associated with perceivable phenomena occurring within some person's mind, whose brain it is, because. . . 1) either a complex disturbance is set up in the vacuum field which propagates through this vacuum, inducing a sweeping (over time) but subtle alteration in the large-scale local system (relative to the brain's overall dimensions, say) which somehow feeds back, modulating future functioning of the brain's neural network, or . . . 2) These changes in the boundary conditions to the field alter the selfinteraction of the vacuum field. The self-interaction can only be defined locally, however. There is no such entity as global self-interaction since there is no global or totally unified vacuum field as the vacuum field is essentially characterized by transient phenomena and constant change. It would seem that any global unification would have to subsist outside the vacuum field. But there can be no outside to the vacuum field since the vacuum field is itself, as already noted, a radically-open system! In such a system, there can be no eternally-pre-existent forms or forms of action/behavior. Such forms must always be provisional, experimental, and ultimately temporal, which is to say, not everlasting! The concept of the so-called global self-interaction embodies a contradiction, though perhaps a subtle one. This is because such a self-interaction would have to be mediated through something other than itself - that is, what mediation means, in essence, the working through an intermediary. The contradiction then is that the global system must modulate its global behavior/action at once through itself and from outside itself. There cannot be perfect continuity in the interaction between the forms inhering within the global system since, if one goes down deep enough into the activity underlying the interplay of these forms, one reaches an intermediary substrate of activity wherein the boundaries between these

forms as separate is altogether lost. But perfect continuity, for instance, physical continuity (describable by a continuity equation involving some conserved quantity or quantities), is absolutely required if a causal analysis of the behavior of a dynamical system, say, is to be possible. The interaction of the dynamism of the global system is ultimately not mediated by, or explicable in terms of, these very same forms which are temporarily sustained in existence by this underlying dynamism. This is intimately related to what has been said earlier about a process not being exhaustively describable in terms of its by-products, its epiphenomena. But just because one cannot exhaustively describe a process in terms of its by-products does not necessarily make of them epiphenomena: there may still be some use or function to these by-products/forms at levels logically or ontologically prior to them. A true epiphenomenal mental state would constitute a context-free mental state containing no information. "Mental state" in such an instance would be misnomer. If one were to apply this idea to the Mind and its sensory/perceptual/conceptual "phenomena,” one would be forced to view their obtrusion/eruption into the realm of consciousness as wholly irrational. There may well be spatiotemporality at this underlying level of activity, but it must be a spatiotemporality utterly without scale or directionality. This underlying substrate is therefore beyond the limitations of time and place. Is it still possible, however, to conceive of activity as such as taking place at such a fundamental level? We may say that the temporality of the interplay of forms sustained by the posited global substrate/system stems from the fact that the boundaries implied by the forms themselves do not strike down to the bottom of an ultimate underlying substrate because such a substrate does not exist: metaphorically speaking, Reality is bottomless! The changes of the forms relative to one another are realized as illusory and so vanish once one gets to that level of lower substrates where the boundaries

constituting the separateness of these forms leaves off. The ultimate application of metaphor is simply in the sustenance of one's self-same ego from moment to moment despite ever changing fluxes of sensation, thought, and perception. The ego is the ultimate mythological expression of consciousness. This is perhaps why philosophers of mind have termed the mind the metaphor of all metaphors. 01/98 Words are frequently borrowed from other languages, particularly from French or German, and used by English speakers/writers for purposes of creating special emphasis of a concept which is either altogether new or which is being presented or represented in an unaccustomed and novel, interesting light. Now it is not that these borrowed foreign words or phrases possess such intriguing meanings within their root languages, for they usually have ordinary if not pedestrian meanings as they are used by native speakers. Take the fairly common borrowing from the French, "Je ne se qua." In the French, this merely means, "I know not what." And if one were to say concerning some person with an elusive talent, he possesses a certain, "I know not what," this would well fail to connote the fact that the person enjoys some intriguing and mysterious quality. Whenever one encounters these foreign borrowings, notice that that they are always italicized. The function of italics is to provoke the mind to pause to dwell on the word with the thought that a point has just been made which is revelatory, that a pregnant kernel of thought or insight is to be reached in the reader's mind just at this precise moment and the emphasis is provided so that the reader knows to watch for this event. The emphasis of the italicized foreign borrowing is intended to signal, "the context thus far provided should be just now sufficient for the intended message to precipitate or crystallize in the mind of the vigilant reader." This tactic works if the reader has some familiarity with the language from which the word is borrowed, for the literal acceptation of the foreign phrase will, under the influence of the context into which it is borrowed, transmute spontaneously into the required

metaphor precisely delineating the author's intended notion. Now does this manner of stimulating the metaphorical thought of the reader sometimes lead the author to communicate with him at cross purposes? Metaphor is an artifact of what might be termed "intersubjective subjectivity." New meaning always seems to develop organically. What is meant here is that new meanings arise from old, through reinterpretation; they are never brought in from outside pre-existing boundaries, like material for a construction project. Rather, reinterpretation results in a redefining of boundaries. We may say that what we sense constitutes a much larger domain than what we perceive and that what we perceive constitutes a larger domain than what we cognize, i.e., what we can articulate to ourselves at the moment of the cognition. The cognitive domain is still larger than the domain of that which we can recollect and articulate to others. Metaphorical thinking is the simultaneous realization of some abstract feature of one particular context and its application toward an understanding of the dynamics of some superficially unrelated context. Another way in which language seems to exhibit this peculiarity is in its role of referring to concrete individuals. For example, if we were to mention “the person you were sitting next to on the 100 th occasion (in your life) on which you travelled by bus while sitting next to a definite individual person, perhaps still living, and without the slightest idea that he or she is being talked about at this very moment. If my listener is not a city dweller, there is a very real possiblity that the label, “100 th person” refers to a person of the (to you) distant future – a person yet to be determined or perhaps to a nonexistent person, assuming you almost never take the bus. It might be thought that your hypothetical bus companion of the future is basically different from the real person whom you rode the bus with at some unknown occasion in the past. After all, it could have turned out that we and our bus companions are all members of a highly neurotic society where people are in the habit of keeping meticulous records of everything which ever happens to them even to

the extent of keeping an accurate count of the number of times which like events occur so that if the desire ever strikes us we may quickly flip through a black notebook in order to determine the identity of the 100th person with whom we rode the bus. But the equally anal retentive rural dweller who has only ridden the bus, say, a dozen times in his life: he has no way of determining the identity of companion #100. But returning to reality we must say that in either case: real past or hypothetical future person #100 that a physically real human being is involved. April 2011 There are circumstances in which perceptions are commonly or unreflectively supposed to refer to concrete individuals; moreover, this very type of perceptual circumstance plays no insignificant role in constituting the warp and woof of one’s workaday, unreflective consciousness. An example might be the myriad cars, houses, people that one observes while flying at several thousand feet in a passenger airliner. One is unreflectively positive that each recognizable object seen on the ground from great distance corresponds either to a person or is uniquely related to a specific person or group of persons. 10/97 Metaphor may be thought of as representing the dynamic potential of the unlimited scope of the application of logical categories in which semantics transcends syntax. Metaphor as it underlies the creative capacities of mind is not merely the implementation of abstract categories within new, unfamiliar contexts, but the unbounded capacity and inclination for doing this in a truly pervasive manner. Metaphorical imagination is never foregone, but always essentially creative. Anyone will grant that no single individual or group of individuals invented human language. A certain amount of metaphorical thinking is built into each of the thousands of distinct but related human languages through the fact of the typical linking of several distinct meanings of conceptdenoting words by virtue of such words possessing any number of different connotations or acceptations, e.g., the word, cara, in Spanish, which has the separate but intimately related meanings, dear, face, and expensive. Sometimes within a collection of related languages there exist words which have related connotations by virtue of their common

descent from a word in the root language of that language family, while this root word suggests a metaphysical or theological idea. For example, the English word Sin and the German word Sinn. Both words are related to a root word in the proto-Indo-European root language of these two languages. The German word Sinn means, sense or consciousness and the idea suggested by the existence of a protoIndo-European word from which both stemmed in which the two ideas of Sin and Sinn are intimately related is that of Sin arising from the emergence of a sense of Self distinct from that of others as well as from the Other, namely God, which led to the loss of harmony between the human and Divine wills, that is, the fall of Mankind as represented in the Biblical story of the Garden of Eden. Although the word Sinn by itself does not have the same meaning as the word Sin in English, there is, however, the compound word in German, Sinnflut, which literally means the Great Flood sent by God as punishment for mankind's sinfulness. Of course, the converse of this is true as well: words which originally fused together two meanings in the root language later become two separate words in some descendant language. An example of this are the German words, Realitat and Wirklichkeit, words which stand for reality in its temporal and eternal modes, respectively. Both of these words originally stemmed from a single Latin cognate. In light of these considerations the Biblical story of the Tower of Babel takes on a new and perhaps larger significance. The question that concerns us is whether or not the human self that each individual human is, is just one particular form among many possible particular forms, or whether the individual human being is in his depth that through which his temporal ego is just an expression. If just a form, then there appears from what has already been said, no chance for the self that each is to participate in Eternity, to have life beyond the temporal. We know that consciousness itself, or as such, is not a mere form or expression of something else which is itself not consciousness. This much we know about "forms." They are always constituted

out of that which is other than what they are: matter is derived from energy, water which is a liquid is derived from hydrogen and oxygen which are gases, figure in painting is derived from ground, living from nonliving. Each form or structure, it seems, can be derived from its own opposite, provided certain conditions. Each form is determinate and so possesses a definable, dual opposite. But what about that which is not closed, but open, not enframed, but boundless? This is what we have been calling the Indeterminate, which possesses no dual opposite, rather, all dual opposites derive from it! A truly deterministic computing device in a certain sense possesses no genuine temporality, although in another sense the device indeed possesses temporality as a particular physical realization of a device hardware design. In the first sense, the device "computes" without utilization of its energy uncertainty as a physical, that is, a quantum mechanical device - the fact that the device is a quantum mechanical implementation of a computing device is merely incidental to its functioning as a classical physical system. No information processing is associated with virtual transitions of the quantum state of the device. There is merely the processing of "data," the data are converted into genuine information at output provided that someone, i.e., some consciousness, reads and/or interprets this outputted data. February 1997

There can be no increase in available information of one thermodynamic system without a concomitant increase in the entropy of some larger thermodynamic system to which the smaller system is connected, say, through the exchanging of matter and energy. Now the quantity of entropy of a reversible system can never change, if the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics is generally valid. From which consideration it immediately follows that the information content of a reversible system can never change. We said earlier that information was data placed in context, that context is needed to make data refer beyond themselves so as to possess meaning. We also said that processes taking place in an "open-ended" context could not be, strictly speaking, reversible.

December 1997

Our demand for the contextual embedding of data in order for information to exist may be questioned. Perhaps it is possible for information to be brought into being without data. @$The requirement for context is really a requirement for metadata in the form of a two-way "communication" between data and its context for it to function as information. Still more, all three laws of thermodynamics are contradicted when the influences of the open system of the vacuum energy field are taken into account. The 1st Law of Thermodynamics: this is just the standard energy conservation law and energy is not conserved in virtual quantum processes. The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics: the entropy of all closed thermodynamic systems must increase as a result of processes taking place within this system. The quantum vacuum is not a spatially closed system since its very action constitutes any local spacetime. Moreover the temporal evolution of all physical systems is reducible to changes in system energy, discretely or continuously. If the system is in an energy eigenstate, then only the phase of the system’s wavefunction evolves. But the absolute phase of a quantum mechanical system has no physical meaning within quantum theory - only relative phases have physical meaning. But if the two systems with a relative phase difference can be consistently described as a single system with a unique wavefunction, then the relative phases of the two “component” subsystems cannot be known without interacting with the system through some third system. So a quantum system in an energy eigenstate possesses no genuine or physical temporality. The 3rd Law of Thermodynamics: the energy of a perfectly ordered crystal at 0 degrees Kelvin is zero. The quantum vacuum possesses an ineradicable temperature. It also possesses an entropy and this vacuum is in continual interaction or energy exchange with all objects in spacetime. No crystal could exist in a "perfectly ordered" state so long as it exchanges energy with a thermal reservoir possessing entropy such as the quantum mechanical vacuum. Reversible systems therefore, contain data but do not actually contain information; however, such systems do potentially contain information, but not information with a predetermined content, or reference.

There is a confusion of the direction of time with the temporal evolution of physical processes to states of progressively greater entropy. We are either referring to a global or cosmic time when we speak of the 'direction of time" or we are only speaking in this way metaphorically. But a global time is only definable if reality is a closed system. But since there is no place for irreversibility within a truly closed system, the notion of a direction of time makes no sense in either the case of a closed or an open cosmic system. The notion is incoherent in the case of an open system because of the incoherence of any notion of there being a global time which then might be supposed to be irreversible. In the case of a closed system, there is simply no possible basis for irreversibility within a system possessing a finite and unchanging number of discrete states. Even if we were to observe physical processes to take place in the opposite direction such that the entropy of the systems in which these processes are occurring were to decrease, this would nevertheless be the case of time moving from the past to the future through the present. The concept of the "direction of time" is incoherent since there is not a coherent meaning which can be attached to the hypothetical reversal of this alleged time direction, by arguments stated elsewhere in this text. We have elsewhere said that "nothing means anything" in the absence of a grounding context, which ultimately had to be open. Conversely, nothing exists, as a determination of ground, in the absence of locally imposed boundary conditions. This is the most that we can mean by the term "thing," namely a particular determination of "ground." The ground is not itself a thing. And so the concept of "nothing" does not involve the negation of ground. As we argued heretofore, the concept of negation is not definable with respect to a radically underdetermined ground. The meaning of any form abstracted from the ground as a particular determination of this ground, locally and temporally, depends upon a connection between the form and its ground. This connection is not forged after the form is made manifest, but is a residuum of ground which is within the purview of the concept or form and maintaining

contact with the original ground from which the form was initially abstracted. This form continues even though its ground never remains what it is, being a constantly changing flux. In this way forms are overdetermined phenomena rooted in an under-determined substrate, i.e., the ground. Forms are not transitory despite the backdrop of an infinity of possible alternative forms which might have come into being in their place, and so all forms which persist are intended. November 1997

Since the determination of form through the abstraction of form from indeterminate ground is not mere manifesting or uncovering of something preexistent as potentia, that therefore the determination of form in the ground must constitute an act of creation of a creative process or creativity, a necessary component of which is intentionality. May 1998

Essential to the notion of intentionality is the capacity for consciousness to entertain thoughts about that which is not at the time being represented within consciousness, to wit, the capacity for objectless thought. Intentionality is essential to metaphor. April 1997

The figure/ground analogy to the form/formless distinction breaks down when one realizes that in painting, for example, the ground can always become figure and the figure, ground, as long as one is talking about what representation exists solely within the limitations of the painting's enframing, if you will. But when speaking of figure and ground in their metaphysical sense, ground is always beyond representation in its entirety; there is a continual succession of figures, or representations, which succeed one another and so which marks the passing of time, but there is never a complete gestalt inversion such as one experiences while beholding certain contrived ambiguous visual patterns such as are used in psychological testing. This is because in painting figure and ground together are merely figure within a larger system of representation. One can see the painting in its frame as such an object hanging on the wall of an art gallery. But in the metaphysical sense, one cannot do this. Ground is not secretly figure in some larger system. The notion of a possible larger system is completely

inadmissible where a genuinely open system is concerned, which Ground is. It always remains what it is, that is, Ground. It is inherently indeterminate with respect to any possible system of representation. This is why forms in Reality, what we might call "real forms," cannot be understood simply as negations within some larger formal system, and this is the reason for the inadequacy of The Principle of Excluded Middle within Ontology, even if it is a perfectly valid and useful principle within a particular system of logic. October 1997

In Fichte's Theory of Subjectivity, he proposes his concept of the self-positing ego which at once posits the not-self. But the not-self of a particular ego cannot be thought to include other egos in the sweeping category of the particular ego's not-self, if the categories of mental and physical are indeed distinct. August 2011 Though selves are distinct, so too, are “not-selves” distinct, so each self must possess its own transcendental ground, which perhaps poses a real problem for the concept of intersubjectivity. As we have remarked before, “intersubjectivity is the cash value of objectivity”, but deconstructing the metaphor, cash value points up the following paradox: “intersubjectivity = objectivity” is an intersubjectively agreed upon principle, which ultimately depends upon these two concepts being transcendentally (in “reality”) distinct. Part of what makes the equivalence, “intersubjectivity” = “objectivity” valid is the ultimate truth of the relation, “intersubjectivity ~= objectivity” . Clever-seeming, but “fishy” arguments which appear to establish remarkable, counterintuitive conclusions typically employ the cynical rhetorician’s informal fallacy of the equivocation of sense in the particular case where the scope of two or more concepts are either broadened or restricted during the course of a single deductive argument, c.f., the proof that “time = money”, etc. Only in appropriate dynamic conjunction with this fluctuating energy matrix will any realization of a hardware design possess the topological energy structure sufficient to tap the pre-existing "consciousness potential" of spacetime. In other words, it is only the

grace of Reality's fundamental dynamism which will permit the eventual construction of a so-called conscious computing device. This empirical discovery of the correct interface design will manifest itself perhaps during a testing phase where a long series of simulated sensory inputs, of increasing complexity, are in the process of being fed into the device while its output signals (responses) are being closely monitored. The memory medium of the device will begin to accumulate stored or remembered inputs which it has never received through its various sensory apparatus. Identical sets or series of inputs will produce significantly different series of outputs both from an individual machine over time as well as from different machines at the same time - even if these machines possess identical designs. Occasionally, radically different series or sets of inputs will produce identical sets of outputs. A significant portion of the functional relationship between output and input will depend upon changes in energy in the internal components of the machine's hardware which are, themselves, smaller than the overall quantum energy uncertainty of the device as a whole. Moreover, no mutually orthogonal set of eigenfunctions will describe the "functioning components" of the device. This is why we have been saying that the abstract spatial structure of our hypothetical computing device is non-topological. Clearly, any realization of a static blueprint for a computing device, regardless how complex, in the form of a dynamically functioning prototype, will itself be merely a topological transformation of the blueprint from 2 or perhaps 3 spatial dimensions to 4 spatial dimensions rather than the non - topological transformation from 3 spatial to 4 dimensions of 3 space and 1 time. This is because the state space of the transcribed structure, i.e., the design, can be adequately described in spatial terms. In a very real sense, an object may not be thought to possess an internality unless it possess an a genuine "outside" in the sense of a radically open system - a system which cannot be contained within a closed system; a system is "closed" only if it is finite and neither receives nor transmits energy to or from any system except itself. Such a closed system possesses no "outside." There is no need to invoke a temporal description of this state

space - the only reason one would attempt it is because we project our genuine temporality onto the mind's eye realization of the computing device in its act of "functioning." Henri Bergson, in his essay, Time in the History of Western Philosophy, complained of a confusion which inevitably cropped up whenever metaphysicians attempted to analyze the problem of motion. With a kind of gentle contempt he described the frustration of these philosophers in trying to reconstruct linear motion from infinite series of "immobilities", i.e., fixed points of infinitesimal length. He explained their failure as being due to their ignorance of the nature of a linear interval as a mere projection of "mobility onto immobility." 10/96 Similar in principle to this is the projection of the mental qualities of meaning and intentions upon what are in a very real sense merely inanimate objects, that is, digital computers. One speaks usually unconsciously, or perhaps, glibly ( if one is a "hard AI" proponent like Minsky) about how the computer processes "information." To avoid begging the question of whether computers actually think by secretly importing meaningfulness into what the computer is doing, one should refer instead to the processing of "data" by the computer. Information results from the interpretation of data. Conversely, data maybe thought of as information removed from its original meaning-grounding context. What digital computers manipulate is context-free information, that is, data; the output follows logically and deterministically from the inputted "data." 10/96 This projection, naturally as such, does not capture the whole phenomenon, but merely a point of view with respect to it out of an infinity of equally valid points of view, and so from a single projection, or even a finite number of projections, one is never permitted to reconstruct the original object as it is. Subjectivity and Objectivity are only separated through the action of determination. The most that we can possibly mean by the term,

objective, is intersubjective. That is, what is objective are those features, necessarily abstract, which can be conventionally agreed upon by different subjectivities, which is to say, those features which can be described in terms of discursive symbols, or language, which by their essential nature are only able to convey differences or similarities of various orders or levels, in other words, class inclusion or exclusion. The formation of categories is not always dependent upon a heretofore consciously and conventionally agreed upon negation of certain aspects of commonly perceived phenomena as irrelevant, but certain aspects of a phenomenon are altogether missed through the limitations of perceptual apparatus which are themselves partly conditioned by the abstractive scheme underlying the common language of perceivers/observers. Since, as we alluded to already, objectivity is exhausted by what we have termed intersubjectivity, the genuinely subjective, that is, that which is uniquely peculiar to an individual's psychic/mental processes, must be altogether disjoint from the intersubjective, or, objective, i.e., that which can be treated in terms of abstract categories. From which it follows immediately that the subjective cannot have a formal or abstract (timeless) representation, but necessarily falls under the domain of the participatory (temporal). The representational form of knowledge is context-free while the participatory form of knowledge is radically context-dependent. I say radically because the dependence is upon context which is not itself representational. It is easier to understand the fundamental limitations of representations if one considers them as artifacts of a system of representation. Just as the stream cannot rise higher than its source, so is it impossible for a process to be completely understood in terms of its phenomenological byproducts (epiphenomena). 04/98 The process by which the phenomena are created is one with the process by which these phenomena are sustained in existence. So the phenomena cannot succeed in pointing to the processes sustaining them.

So a phenomenological theory will never be "reality covering." An important instance of this is the logical impossibility of creating a formal description of the process by which formal descriptions are generally arrived at. April 2011 This invokes the notion of a category that cannot be arrived at by abstraction, but which subsists in some fundamental process. On this view, consciousness as the essence of intelligence must itself be a fundamental process to reality and not derivative. The brain therefore does not produce consciousness, but a most merely structures, forms or channels this consciousness. This observation is, of course, intimately related to the Gödel Incompleteness Theorem. Only in appropriate dynamic conjunction with this fluctuating energy matrix will any realization of a hardware design possess the topological energy structure sufficient to tap the pre-existing "consciousness potential" of spacetime. To have a past, something must be coupled to a context which is changing with time, and this context cannot be a system which is, itself, context-free. Clearly, any realization of a static blueprint for a computing device, regardless how complex, in the form of a dynamically functioning prototype, will itself be merely a topological transformation of the blueprint from 2 or perhaps 3 spatial dimensions to 4 spatial dimensions rather than the non - topological transformation from 3 spatial to 4 dimensions of 3 space and 1 time. There is no need to invoke a temporal description of the state space of the hypothetical computing device we have been considering the only reason we would attempt it is because we project our genuine temporality onto the mind's eye realization of the computing device in its act of "functioning." This is an example of the subtle and tenacious persistence of animistic thought into modernity. Henri Bergson, in his essay, Time in the History of Western Philosophy, complained of a confusion, which inevitably cropped up whenever metaphysicians attempted to analyze the problem of motion. Within larger state spaces, however, computations must be performed through the exploitation of indigenously available order already existing within the state space through utilizing the dynamical attractors of the state space via an over arching structure linking them dynamically. We must realize that

"favorable combinations" are not "hit upon" by chance and then magically locked in and sustained against the thermal fluctuations of energy which supposedly originally led to their formation, but that these favored configurations, themselves, represent configurations of least energy within a necessarily pre-existent system in which the energy minimum configuration is already defined prior to its being realized in actuality. Mathematically speaking, a minimization integral does not "exist" if the integral, or various parameters of its argument, i.e., of which this integral is a function, do not satisfy certain boundary conditions. In other words, it is only by virtue of nonlocal quantum correlations that this system might unify itself so as to possess an objective simultaneity. But correlations within a system imply convergent temporal evolution of the systems component processes. There is, however, no place for the phenomenon of convergence within either deterministic computational statespaces, nor within an ergodic dynamical system. Information is not here a conserved physical quantity and so if in some context energy and information are inter-definable, this is because within this context the principle of the conservation of energy does not strictly hold. 3/98 Conservation laws only apply to what may properly be termed substances. Prior to the advent of atomic theory in the 19th Century, matter was thought to be a substance and therefore a conserved quantity. With the advent of the theory of Special Relativity and Einstein’s' famous equation, E = mc2, matter was seen to be not conserved in some physical processes because of its interconvertibility into energy, itself thought to be the physical quantity which was truly conserved. But in light of advances of quantum theory, particularly within the subfield of relativistic quantum field theory, which treats of virtual particle/field reactions, it is known now that not even "energy" is conserved and so can no longer be considered to be the ultimate underlying conserved substance or reality. To what substance can modern physics point which

is interconvertible with energy and which obeys a conservation law, qualifying as the substance of physical reality, if you will? 3/98 Because energy is ultimately not conserved, there is a profound difficulty in making the notion of objective space and time coherent. For space may only be objectively defined operationally in terms of the spatial relationships of bodies composed of some conserved substance. Moreover, time must be also operationally defined if it is to be understood as a genuinely objective concept, that is, in terms of the more primitive notions of simultaneity, temporal order, and duration. Since there may be no underlying permanent substance to render the existent objectively real, space and time must be reduced to being merely relative and phenomenal. Another reason to believe that a physical continuity equation does not apply to information is that information appears to reside in between the discrete energy levels of crystalline, or quasi-crystalline quantum systems, and so information is not here really localizable, in principle. Any functionalist theory of mind must run up against mental states for which it cannot supply corresponding functional states. This is because, in essence, identically prepared quantum mechanical states, themselves constituting the most exacting definition of functionalist brain states, frequently produce a wide variety of outcomes whenever measurements are performed on them with respect to observables incompatible with that observable with respect to which the quantum system was prepared. If functional states are thought to be neutral with respect to the actual physical manner in which they are realized, then this means that one's functional theory of mind does not take differing physical contexts into its account of how the particular contents of consciousness originate in the appearance of distinct specific brain states. The interpretative contextual structure must be the ultimate arbiter of the meaning of brain states, and these brain states must remain radically ambiguous in the

absence of such contextual structure - this structure must not itself be "context-free." Two separate entities can never interact with one another as exhaustively and subtlety as does the dynamical substrate sustaining their existence in interacting with itself. There can be no ultimate commensurability of a medium with respect to the representations within it. This is because the root abstraction underlying all further abstraction is that of bringing into being the medium through which all representations are to be expressed. 06/98 This aboriginal process of abstraction, i.e., symbolic and syntactic structure construction being itself necessarily non-formalizable, i.e., the process of abstraction is not itself a formal procedure. There is something paradoxical about the indeterminate, and that is that its negation is not itself determinate, and this seems to imply a kind of contradiction. The function of negation is itself system dependent. Syntax and semantics are normally understood as being orthogonal notions. All sufficient causes so-called are merely necessary causes operating in the presence of that which complements and completes their action. But not just any "something" constitutes the opposite or negation of nothing/nothingness, but only a something which is, itself, the unity of all that might possibly exist, and the very essence of which is to exist. If the possibility space is itself open, that is, infinite, then the notion of the negation of nothingness remains not definable. Negation must remain a formal concept, an approximation for an action which contains but transcends a negation. We see now that a given finite recursive structure comes into existence through a process of uncovering or abstraction from a more complex whole - through a process of negation. This notion of what is called an Ergodic System, moreover, violates the principle of relativity in the sense that, although different probabilistic weighting of particular states, or, clusters of states, is disallowed for a case of genuinely random shuffling of states, nevertheless, the probability weighting of certain state space configurations is permitted to be modified with time.

There seems to be two significantly different classes of mutations upon which natural selection operates as a purely critical, as opposed to a creative, process. Firstly, and most importantly, those mutations occurring to the regulatory genes, and secondly, those mutations affecting the kinds of proteins which are made available to a developing organism, the so-called point, or structural, genetic mutations.

There is something paradoxical about the indeterminate, and that is that its negation is not itself determinate, and this seems to imply a kind of contradiction. It is only meaningful to think of the negation of a determinate structure or thing within a particular system of categories. The definition of the function of negation is itself system dependent, and so, when one speaks of the indeterminate in general one is engaged in a subtle self-contradiction - subtle in the sense that the notion of contradiction is, itself, a logical or syntactical notion whereas the origin of the particular contradiction facing us, with respect to the notion of the in general determinate and its negation, is one of a distinctly semantic nature, and syntax and semantics are normally understood as being orthogonal notions, or independent of each other. They are related through a conventional agreement about their possible application. There is no such thing as nothing. Nothing, by its very nature, is a nonexistent entity: it is its own negation. We might be tempted to say then that "something," being the opposite of nothing, must exist. But not just any "something" constitutes the opposite or negation of nothing/nothingness, but only a something, which is, itself, the unity of all that might possibly exist, and the very essence of which is to exist. In other words, nothing, not being possible because containing within itself

its own negation, implies that there must have always been something (or other). 6/97 A thing which is its own negation is the dual opposite of that which contains within itself the sufficient reason for its own existence. But the only guarantee that there has always been something is the existence of something, which contains within itself its own affirmation, if you will, the reason for its own existence. A fundamental and most general property of a thing which contains within itself the reason for its own existence is that of recursion, something which is defined solely in terms of itself, a recursive structure. There are logical grounds for believing that there can be only one recursive structure, that there can be only one self-existent entity - with this entity being the "ground" for existence of all other entities. This reminds us of Spinoza's claim that there can only be one Substance. A recursive structure, if it may be thought to be composite, would be composed of parts which are totally interdependent upon one another; no part is the cause of any other without also being itself caused by this other part and so if this recursive structure had a beginning in time, it must have been given existence through a pre-existing, broader and more complex recursive structure. We see now that a given finite recursive structure comes into existence through a process of uncovering or abstraction from a more complex whole - through a process of negation. We are reminded of Michelangelo's claim that a truly great work of sculpture already exists within its marble block and that all he did in order to produce his works was merely to free them from the marble in which they were imprisoned. The distinction between the "mental" and the "physical" may be drawn in the following way: both are wholes composed of parts, both possess principles of organization, but what is termed a physical whole is defined exclusively in terms of its constituent parts while the "parts" which "compose" what is termed a mental whole are, themselves,

defined in terms of the whole which they compose. Such acts of abstraction from a "whole" which is in reality an open system, that is, infinite, which is to say, indeterminate, must be initiated/constituted from an arena which contains spacetime and not, rather, contained within it. The reconstruction of a mental whole must be guided in a top down manner whereas the construction of a physical whole must be guided in a bottom - up manner. The principle of a mental whole must exist prior to its actual realization ( in terms of whatever substance). Without substance change is not possible. Coextensive with this principle is: change owes itself to a lack of determination, to a deficit of Being, to negation. From which it at once follows that substance, rather than being the seat of being, of thinghood, as common sense conceives it to be, it owes its existence, to the contrary, to a lack of being. It is not possible for a determinate thing to be made up out of substance insofar as this thing possesses determination. 01/97 We might also say that without activity substance is not possible. The objection naturally arises, how can one posit activity as prior to substance since any activity must be an activity of some thing or things. This objection, natural enough, contains the assumption, implicitly, that all activity ultimately reduces to that of some fundamental constituents which themselves are not composite and which hence do not themselves possess any intrinsic activity, that is to say, no internal activity. Here all change is conceived of as reducible to the changes in the configurations of fundamental particles of substance/stuff, i.e., atoms. There is implicit here, still more, an assumption about the nature of time: each of these atoms experiences the passage of time in a completely indifferent manner. In a word, if the phenomenon of activity is exhaustively pervasive, if all things are constituted out of activity and/or the potential for activity, then no real substances exist, only the appearances of such. 6/97 But the physical concepts of activity and potential may be interdefinable so that neither is primary. The general temporal evolution

of potentials may be thought of as activity, while activity within an open system cannot occur within a finite possibility space so that the potential for novel patterns of activity is always present. In this way, activity itself must always possess potential; the potential is never merely so, but must itself always be undergoing activity. Spatiotemporal scale may become established through a complex system of decoupling of spatial and temporal frequencies of some abstract region of the quantum vacuum field from itself. We have said elsewhere that any particular thing must be a particular determination of ground at one particular time and another determination of ground at another particular time, if one is to suppose that the very same thing has continued in existence from that time to the other time. It is easy enough to see that continuity is required for the subsistence of what is called historical time which we will henceforth refer to as temporality. Indeterminate substance is the only basis for the continuity underlying all change. However, indeterminate substance, not possessing a complete description at any particular time, must itself be comprised by activity. We must realize that "favorable combinations" are not "hit upon" by chance and then magically locked in and sustained against the thermal fluctuations of energy which supposedly originally led to their formation, but that these favored configurations, themselves, represent configurations of least energy within a necessarily pre-existent system in which the energy minimum configuration is already defined prior to its being realized in actuality. Darwinian natural selection is in reality just the channeling of genetic drift which is entirely composed of neutral, randomly occurring, point (structural) mutations of amino acid codons, i.e., base pair triplets. Three things not "explained" by natural selection: 1) the fact that the DNA molecule contains information 2) the fact that this information contained within the DNA can be expressed through the coding of protein structures.

3) the original formation of the gene regulatory, genetic cybernetic control structure. The transformation occurring within an informational/ cybernetic system which owe to the influence of context upon the system cannot be reductively understood in terms of operations definable within this system. Within a closed computational state space, which is to say, a state space with merely a finite number of distinct possible states, there is no room for the operation of such principles as convergence. The phenomenon of convergence is fundamentally nonlinear in nature. Conservation of momentum and energy is strictly maintained within this system so long as it remains closed. This is, of course, assuming that the system containing the first system is itself a larger closed system so that action and reaction of the smaller system upon the larger and vice versa is maintained. In a closed dynamical system, momentum and energy are each conserved separately. This type of conservation law is much more restrictive than the mere conservation of momentum/energy conceived of relativistically as the conservation of four-momentum. Energy which is only locally connected, say through the operation of classical cause and effect, may produce the appearance of convergence or convergent processes within a system exchanging this energy, but this convergence will be merely statistical in nature and will necessarily be "short-lived" and will not exhibit robust stability in the face of thermal perturbations, for instance. The emergence of order in such a system is only an appearance, therefore, and cannot be built upon to produce greater order. Locally-connected energy obeys the continuity equation of classical physics and cannot, therefore, be thought to possess or "contain" information content. In other words, statistical changes in momentum and energy, wherein momentum and energy are each separately conserved, cannot produce the coherence required by the system in order for it to acquire stability as a self-existing and semipermanent entity. Nonlocal connectivity cannot be accommodated within the spacetime of classical relativity. Nonlocal quantum correlations point to the existence of a continuum transcending that of

classical spacetime. We cannot simply identify this transcendent realm or continuum with the infinite dimensional Hilbert Space of Quantum Mechanics because the structure of any given Hilbert Space must vary in a spatiotemporal manner through the spatiotemporal evolution of the wavefuntion, Psi(r,t). Intentionality is a temporal coherence on a larger scale than that required by ordinary system-dynamic coherence, which is based upon reverberative feedback. It is, by the way, doubtful whether a state space is definable over an infinite number of distinct possible states. In fact, a Hilbert space cannot be defined for a continuous spectrum of eigenfunctions; such a continuum must be first approximated in terms of a "near-infinite" set of "nearly-continuous" spectrum of eigenfunctions corresponding to a pseudobounded wavefunction. Until the phenomenon of Ontogenesis is fully understood, naturalistic science hasn't a ghost of chance of ever understanding the much broader and deeper phenomenon of Phylogenesis. Within a closed thermodynamic system, in which conservation of energy must hold, the general effect of perturbations upon ordered structures such as macromolecules is to degrade these structures with concomitant increases in entropy. The random perturbations, which are, themselves incapable of sustaining the existence of ordered structures, cannot be invoked to explain the origin of these very same ordered structures. In this assertion I am adhering to the view, first clearly stated by the rationalist philosopher Leibniz, that "those conditions sufficient to create a thing are necessary at every succeeding instant to sustain this thing's existence. These conditions are the activity of abstraction, which is continuous and never perfectly completed. The notion of sufficient reason is dependent on the possibility of derived self-existence. Within the theory of quantum mechanics, however, the principle of the conservation of energy does not generally hold, even for those systems, which, classically speaking, must be considered to be closed. Within

such systems, therefore, the 2nd Law of thermodynamics is not, strictly speaking, valid. It is perhaps not the quantum nature of the Universe itself, which renders the law of conservation of momentum invalid, but the fundamental fact of the Universe's being a radically open system. What are called critical processes and what are called creative processes may act individually within a particular dynamical system, or even in combination with one another, but either cannot be reductively described in terms of the other. It is these seemingly magical self - organizing properties of matter, owing to the recursiveness of its ultimate "constituents," which make any attempt to calculate the "improbability" of biological macromolecules an incoherent and meaningless enterprise. Similar activities are the routine pastime of myriad scientifically inclined creationists attacking evolution. The staggeringly large numerical ratios which they cite against the "chance occurrence" of the simplest eukaryote DNA are calculated upon a permutational /combinational modeling of a prebiotic "soup" in which chance collisions continually occur between precursor molecules, e.g., peptides, amino acids, nucleic acids, etc. December 2011 The coherence and cohesion of combinationalpermutationa systems implies the existence of a finer grain of dynamics underlying the explicit kinematic statespace. Applying the Anthropic Cosmological Principle here, we should suppose that any world which Man emerges into (or “out of”, c.f., Alan Watts), which happens to contain molecules encoding biological information, would most likely possess an overdetermined causality, i.e., many different pattern or large classes of patterns of genetic base pair sequences would code for more or less the same human species. And or course, if we are honest with ourselves, the Anthropic Cosmological Principle isn’t about some novelly peculiar logic that makes the existence of the human species virtually overwhelmingly likely in the Universe, it’s about the virtually overwhelmingly likely existence of you in the Universe, to paraphrase Joseph Campbell. The serious problem with such a modeling approach is that it is not an empirically derived statistical calculation as in actuarial computations, where a distinct probability is assigned to each possible

event within a pool, based on the observed relative frequencies of each event, but is an abstract calculation where the probabilities are fixed at the outset and remain unchanged throughout all series of calculations. In this way so-called scientific creationists beg the question of evolution's possibility. For example, there are a vast number of nucleic acid reactions taking place within the ribosome organelle of every living animal cell which in the absence of certain mediating enzymes will take place anywhere from 9 to 20 orders of magnitude more slowly than if these enzymes are present - the ribosome is responsible for "translating" the coded information of nucleic acids into various macromolecules (proteins) and in so doing expressing the genotype of the developing organism. We see from this example that the probability of the occurrence of various macromolecules essential to the appearance of the first reproducing, metabolizing organic units begins infinitesimally small when the molecule's precursors are yet unavailable, but that this probability grows by large discontinuous jumps each time one of these precursors, the precursors' precursors, etc. arise inadvertently in the prebiotic "soup" so that by the time the exhaustive set of macromolecular precursors is present, the formation of the original macromolecule is virtually assured. The ribosome itself, despite its inordinately complex structure, has been observed under experimental conditions to reform spontaneously after having been dissociated within a carefully prepared enzyme bath into its precursor polynucleotide constituents - and this within the space of only several hours! It is indeed true that a countless variety of different enzymes (of the precisely correct type) must be simultaneously present along with the polynucleotide matrix for this seemingly magical act of spontaneous self - organization to occur. This is because the self organization of such an enormously complex organic structure depends, throughout the entire process, upon the almost simultaneous juxtaposition (collision is a better term) of three or more precursor molecules which all happen to have the exactly correct spatial orientation, with sufficient kinetic energy to overcome the activation energy barrier against the reaction occurring. It should be noted here

that just the chance of any three compatible molecules ( in terms of a desired product ) colliding at once with the roughly correct spatial orientation is an event with a probability only infinitesimally greater than zero - let alone the question of proper activation energies. And so, even if the primordial Earth possessed the appropriate reducing atmosphere with oceans chalk full of all of the required precursor molecules for the ribosome to properly form, without the necessary catalyzing cofactors ( the enzymes ) there would not likely have formed a single such structure by this late epoch. Then perhaps there must have been an extremely long period of time during which the necessary enzymes appeared on the scene, one might think. One suspects, then, a similar self - organizing process behind the formation of these necessary enzymes, the only difference being that the precursors which we are now concerned with are simpler, while their precursors must have been simpler still, and so on. But the precursor macromolecules for many particular enzymes have, indeed, never been manufactured ( because we don't know how to do it), but have to be obtained from more complex molecules than themselves, if not from living or recently living organisms. The theory of evolution, chemical evolution in this case, has secretly conditioned us to believe that there must be some definite if inordinately complex sequence: precursors + cofactors ~ simpler precursors + cofactors ~ etc. leading back to the very simplest organic molecules which form by self - organization spontaneously and easily in a wide variety of environments and without the need for cofactors or helper molecules of any kind, and that it must have been such a process (only in reverse) which ultimately lead to the first self - reproducing biological units which could then be developed further through Darwinian natural selection. 3/97 It is interesting for opponents of the Darwinian theory that, by far, most of the favorable characteristics which have been selected for by the process of evolution have never before been manifest in nature since they are the phenotypic expression of heretofore untried genetic combinations. This rueful fact for Darwinians suggests that the greater

part of the driving force behind the progressive complexification of living forms is owing to a physical process which cannot ever be captured within the purview of the natural selection mechanism, which is purely critical in its action, as noted elsewhere, and this process is itself fundamentally creative. Natural selection did not engender the genetic code since it necessarily presupposes the prior existence of this code for its efficacy in bringing about more complex organisms. The notion of self - organization gives some of us pause because it concerns a natural process which sits precisely on the fence between what might be called less - than - self - organization, i.e., formation from simpler components, and what is aptly called greater - than - self organization, i.e., formation from more complex components - and it is just such a notion which strongly suggests a top - down hierarchy within the natural order which can only have intelligence at its apex. At every step in the chain in the formation of higher level precursor molecules, the mediation of the required reactions is accomplished via self - organization principles: those who attempt to calculate the probability against "chance" formation of important precursor molecules forget a very important general principle first articulated by the great rationalist philosopher Leibniz - which is - that set of conditions which in combination are sufficient to produce some complex structure must necessarily remain in operation at every succeeding moment to sustain the existence of this structure. The upshot of this is that a complex structure, which owes its origin to mere chance, cannot endure, still less could it respond to its environment in an adaptive fashion. There are possible boundary conditions which might be easily placed upon the dynamic of the "flux" which are nonetheless infinitely improbable as "natural" occurrences, which is to say that the operation of intelligence is required to institute them. The asymmetrical nature of time perhaps has some bearing on the hierarchical structuring of complex macromolecules. The fact that a molecule has been formed from a set of simpler constituents does not

guarantee that it can then be decomposed back into this set of constituents. Similarly, the fact that a molecule has been broken down into a set of simpler constituents does not guarantee that it can be recomposed from this selfsame set of constituents. Geometric symmetries are responsible for the time constancy of dynamical quantities. Symmetry under translations in the x-direction, for example, is responsible for conservation of momentum directed in the x-direction. Similar statements apply for the y and z directions. This implies that energy is conserved only for operations, dynamic systems, etc., which are symmetric under time translations. In other words, energy is only conserved in system whose temporal evolution is reversible. Perhaps the asymmetrical nature of temporality implies that any sufficiently large set of macromolecules may be partitioned into two disjoint parts; those molecules possessing a bottom - up structure and those possessing a top - down structure. This distinction, which I am drawing, is not a solid theoretical one; it is a pragmatic distinction, which assumes that status of a theoretical distinction when we refer to molecules occupying either extreme end of the probability spectrum (in terms of their ability to form "naturally" from simpler parts). Causality always takes place through a medium of sheer unrestrained activity. This ultimate medium's own activity cannot itself be causal in nature, but must transcend causality. Causality presupposes the medium in which it operates. This is because causal interactions always take place between determinate entities and so always at a particular level of abstractness. There can be no interaction in a causal sense of parts with wholes. Causality, which may be figuratively thought of as "horizontal interactions," is transcended by what might equally figuratively be termed "vertical interactions," although a better term for this might be abstractive or concretizing transformations, depending upon whether one is speaking of transformations taking a system to levels of higher or lower levels of abstraction, respectively. The relationship between the horizontal and vertical interactions, so called, is analogous to the

relationship between the temporal and the eternal. It should seem selfevident that the process by which abstract categories are brought forth, i.e., abstraction, must itself, defy any attempt to formalize it in terms of a finite set of abstract categories particular to a specific level of abstractness within the hierarchy of all possible abstractions. Abstraction, being a temporal process, cannot be captured within an atemporal framework - there will never be a set of equations or otherwise abstract relationships which will be able to tell us what distinguishes a moment in time when it is present from the same moment in time when it is past. Intuitively, we may say that this distinction lies between this moment, when separated from the ground which brought it forth, and this moment during the instant in which it was continuous with its ground, which is to say, the instant in which its ground was bringing it into being. The ground itself is, of course, never separated from itself and so is always in the present. This prephenomenal ground, since it is always bringing things into being, since this is the very essence of its nature, cannot itself be a being of any sort. Temporality lies with indeterminateness, openness and indefiniteness. Time, which we are thinking of as temporality in the past, is the history of successive determinations of the indeterminate ground wholly from outside itself. The ground is determined by itself as other. In other words, for the ground of being, its subjectivity and objectivity are one. Subjectivity and Objectivity are only separated through the action of determination. The wholly indeterminate requires no explanation and, in fact, transcends the notion of existence because existents are simply various determinations of ground. 12/96 From which it follows immediately that the interdeterminate ground transcends the categorical distinction of existence versus nonexistence; and these categories are seen in light of this to be not genuinely disjoint, not because these categories in reality overlap though understood as distinct, but in the sense of these two "fundamental categories" not being conjointly exhaustive: whether or not ground is

presently determined as some particular manifest form is forever an issue independent of the necessity of ground's being. To say either A or not-A says nothing about the ground's intrinsic nature. Even to posit such a nature (per se) for ground is simply to, once again, indulge in a specification of one of its possible determinations. Here we are implying a distinction between what is called being and what we might term "the merely existent." Causal relationships are always partial in nature and therefore are always mere approximate relationships. This is because causal relationships can only exist between determinations (existents) which belong to different moments in time, and in the intervening time the "wake" of the earlier determination has necessarily "spread" in its influence on later events, although this earlier event prevents the later from being exhaustively determined by the instantaneous context of its present moment. The past is always free to change, but only within the boundaries set by its original determination. That which is in principle unknowable is not secretly describable in terms of some deterministic algorithm, but only by an algorithm, which is in principle unknowable, that is to say, in principle incomprehensible. That description, which does not depend upon temporality, cannot capture the subtleties of the action of the quantum vacuum, itself, the timeless (eternal) originator of temporality. That which is nondeterministic is noncomputable in its operation. July 2011

The two postulates of special relativity may be unified under this single postulate: the vacuum behaves in relation to light as though it is not supporting its propagation. In other words this medium of virtually infinite energy density must behave as though it is not supporting the propagation of light. The Lorentz invariance of the vacuum is demonstrated by the orderly many in which the correlational structure of vacuum fluctuations systematically changes under a Lorentz transformation. I imagine that a propagating gravitational field (not necessarily a “wave”) passing through a region of the vacuum must effect a sudden change in the correlational structure of the spin-0 and spin-1 fluctuations of this vacuum in a manner that is characterized by a change in the local density of collective spin-2 fluctuations. This change

to the correlational structure of the local region of the vacuum could not have been predicted from a tracing out of the past temporal evolution of this local region. So the transformation of the local vacuum should not normally be essentially causality-preserving, except for the fact that, included in the transformation of this vacuum is also a change in its Heisenberg uncertainties in postion, momentum, time and energy, which mask the causality violations. So causality is not merely determinism; it is @$determinism combined with a reliable mechanism for hiding causality violations. This is in accord with Heraclitus’ notion that “the latent is the master of appearances”. December 1996

It is not possible to define a deterministic trajectory in phase space if the phase space of the system is expanding, say, due to the expansion of the Universe. This is because no non-arbitrary one-to-one functions of the phase space variables can be defined to represent the deterministic evolution of the system through the expanding phase space. In other words, there is no non-dynamical embedding "superstatespace" in terms of which the evolution of the trajectories with respect to the state space variables of the expanding state space may be defined. We always gain knowledge of a system's behavior through the positing of a deterministic model of the system, but at the expense of relegating understanding of the motive mainspring of the system to the mysterious. Kinematics ignores the dynamics, which sustains the illusion of the permanence of the entities with respect to which the kinematic variables are defined: Time cannot be captured within a formal description. EXPERIMENT: If very sensitive spectroscopic observations can be made of the deflected stellar images predicted by general relativity to occur during a total solar eclipse, then chromatic dispersion of the various optical wavelengths may be observed indicating that the true mechanism of gravitational light deflection is not on account of spacetime curvature produced by the Sun's mass, but due to the refraction of the starlight on its passing through a vacuum of radially decreasing zeropoint energy density. We would expect the zero-point density of 3-

momentum of the vacuum to actually increase in step with the radially decreasing vacuum energy density. Since we assume that in free space the fluctuations in vacuum four-momentum (which are either 0 or fall outside the scope of Ti,k ) are equipartatively distributed among the four distinct four-momentum components, any decrease in the density of energy fluctuations in the vacuum would be expressed in an equal increase in each of the 3-momentum components (if geometry, i.e., curvature, is not taken into account) equal to the cube root of Evac Now it is the geometry of the matter distribution as well as its density distribution which determines the geometry of the redistribution of the vacuum’s four-momentum fluctuation components. 06/98 DISCUSSION: This is due to the general properties of refractive media where wavelengths of different energy (different size) traversing a refractive medium must follow slightly different trajectories with shorter wavelengths being refracted more than longer wavelengths. Since the vacuum's zero-point energy is the zero-calibration of all energy measuring instruments, it is expected that the energy of a photon passing through a vacuum of increasing zero-point energy will experience an apparent shift in its observed energy (gravitational redshift ) commensurate to the change in the zero-point energy between the point of its emission and the point of its absorption ( by an energy measuring instrument ). Gravitational time dilation is also explicable in terms of the proposed vacuum mechanism of gravitation. EXPERIMENT: Observed decreases in the barrier tunneling probabilities within a "de-tuned" resonant cavity. This cavity would enclose the potential energy barrier and will possess a specific geometry such that vacuum electromagnetic field fluctuations are suppressed which possess an energy approximating the difference in energy between the tunneling particle and the potential barrier. EXPERIMENT: Set up a series of Casimir capacitor plates in which the separation between the plates is changed by a discrete amount as one

moves in line from one plate to the next. Starting from the end of the series where the plate separation is smallest, project a coherent beam of photons through the series of plates and observe the shift in the beam's frequency. The fractional change in the vacuum electromagnetic field energy density should give the fractional change in the frequency (energy) of the coherent light beam. The beam may also be projected through the series of Casimir plates at a small angle and the amount of refraction of the beam measured. There is a practical problem concerning the interpretation of the energy uncertainty of unstable "elementary" particles. Physicists do not seem to have convinced themselves as to whether this energy uncertainty which is responsible for the eventual decay of all unstable particles is to be understood as being inherent in the structure of the particle itself, or as inherent in the energy structure of the vacuum which perhaps induces the decay of the particle through perturbing energy fluctuations of a fundamental nature. The fact that a particle possesses an uncertainty in its energy, however arbitrarily small, implies that there is a nonzero finite probability that the particle will experience a fluctuation in its energy large enough to induce decay of the particle. According to Milloni, a preeminent thinker on the subject of the quantum vacuum, the energy uncertainty of an unstable excited atom, for instance, is owing not only to the perturbative influence of the vacuum electromagnetic field, but also to what is called "radiation reaction." Both of these components play a formally equal role in composing the overall energy uncertainty, /\E, of the unstable atom. Of course, the uncertainties in any observable, not just in the energy, are, we might well say, radically overdetermined. This is because, for example, in the case of the energy uncertainty, there is a truly indefinite number of different admixtures of eigenenergies which, if superposed, will sum together to give one an energy uncertainty of precisely /\E, whatever /\E happens to be for the system one is considering. /\p x /\x >= h and the tunneling of a particle across a potential energy barrier can therefore be interpreted in two complementary ways: one may suppose that the tunneling particle possesses a positional uncertainty which is greater than or comparable to the width of the barrier, or one might suppose, contrariwise, that the

momentum uncertainty of the particle is such that there is a likelihood that the particle will experience a momentum fluctuation strong enough to "boost" the particle "over" the potential barrier. Either interpretation seems to adequately model the particle's tunneling across the potential barrier. The first interpretation relies on the positional uncertainty inherent per the wave description and the second interpretation on the momental uncertainty per the particle description. In the first case we are thinking of a momentum fluctuation of a wavelike entity with positional uncertainty whereas in the second we are thinking of a fluctuation in the particle's position to which is associated a momentum uncertainty. We may say that the momentum uncertainty of a particle is inherent in the particle while its positional uncertainty is induced by the attendant fluctuations in its momentum whereas the positional uncertainty of a wave is inherent while its momentum uncertainty is induced by the attendant fluctuations in the wave's position. July 1998

In the Fourier expansion of a function of x and t, f(x,t), which possesses discontinuous endpoints, we find that no matter who many harmonics are added together, there will continue to exist at these endpoints both an undershoot and an overshoot. This is what is called Gibb’s phenomenon. Interestingly, the magnitude of the overshoot is unaffected by the number harmonics one adds together to construct the Fourier transform, F(w). @$In order for the function to be “properly” expressed in terms of F(w), either we must deviate from perfect orthogonality of the energy eigenfunctions which we are summing together to approximate f(x,t), or we must not permit f(x,t) to be truly discontinuous. This suggests that an interaction of amplitudes corresponding to extremely low probabilities underlie the dynamics of July 2011 quantum tunneling phenomena. There is grist for an analogy here which might be used to help illuminate the problem of evil in Christian theology, c.f., WKB approximation of potential barrier problem, imaginary momentum of a tunneling electron, Gibb’s phenomenon, electromagnetic fringe phenomenon, Gibb’s free energy, wavefunction basis functions, analyticity of a function, Heisenberg uncertainty and Hawkings “chronology protection” mechanism, etc.

Spacetime fluctuations are related to momentum-energy fluctuations in the sense that the more violent the spacetime flux, the more calm becomes the momentum-energy flux. The most precise spacetime trajectory would them be determined by fluctuations of momentumenergy of the greatest possible violence! A serious problem for general relativity presented here is that violent momentum-energy fluctuations should normally be associated with equally violent gravitational field fluctuations, i.e., gravitational waves or great energy, but this is inconsistent with mild fluctuations in the spacetime metric. December 1996

No massive body can travel faster than the velocity of light because there is no stable, continuously existing medium, as in the case of the "still air" for sound, which supports the propagation of light. Rather, the quantum mechanical vacuum, specifically the quantum vacuum electromagnetic field, "supports" the propagation of real electromagnetic waves, i.e., real photons, in the particle description. This medium supportive of the transmission of light is composed of vacuum fluctuations of momentum-energy otherwise known as zeropoint fluctuations of the vacuum. This quantum vacuum cannot serve as an absolute reference frame relative to which an observer could move at some finite velocity, and this is why the velocity of light must always have the same value, c, regardless of the state of motion of any observer. What prevents the vacuum from being seized upon as an absolute reference frame is the fact that it is composed of energy fluctuations which possess a positional uncertainty, /\x, and a time uncertainty, /\t, such that /\x//\t = < c >. We say , < c > instead of c because locally, that is, over submicroscopic distances, the velocity of light can be exceeded within "submicroscopic times." This is all to say that, the velocity of light, c, = < c > over distances, x, > /\x over times, t, > /\t. This suggests that the Minkowski light cone representation of spacetime must begin to break down as one approaches the vertex of the light cone - the boundaries between the tiny region, absolute past/here-now/absolute future, and the elsewhere region must lose its neat rectilinearity as one

approaches spacetime dimensions, x,t < /\x, /\t. It is as though spacetime possessed a kind of "granularity" made up of three dimensional "cells" of minimum dimension, /\x, and lifetime, /\t. The lifetime of a given cell may be re-expressed as a frequency, 1//\t, so that we may think of each "cell" as being continuously recreated or reformed at frequency, f = 1//\t, where /\t is, again, the lifetime of the cell. The energy, /\E, of each cell is constantly being absorbed by the vacuum and recreated at the frequency, f, described above. An analogy with one's personal computer will serve to help us understand how what has been said thus far bears on the problem of the origin of the finite, not-to-be-exceeded value of the speed of light, c. It is obvious upon a moment's reflection that if one "grabs" an icon on the left hand side of one's computer screen by "clicking on it" once and "dragging" this icon across the screen that one cannot move the icon in this way arbitrarily quickly, but there is some precisely definable limit to how fast any object represented on the screen can move across it. This limit, if one is talking about an "icon" the size of a single pixel, is determined quite simply from two easily ascertainable parameters, the width of a "pixel," i.e., the minimum image length scale or resolution of the computer screen, and the clock rate of the computer's CPU, or central processing unit. For example, if the clock rate of the CPU is 100Mhz, that is, 100 million (108) cycles per second, and the pixel (assumed to be square) dimension is, say, 100 microns ( 10-4) meters, then the theoretical limit to how fast a pixelsized "represented object" may move across the computer monitor is about 108 x 10-4 = 104 meters/sec. This is an extremely high velocity, and the actual practical limit is probably several orders of magnitude smaller than this figure, say, around 10 meters/sec for an average sized icon. The reason for this difference in the theoretical and practical limits in the "represented object," velocity, or the "representational velocity" for a particular computer monitor we will go into in greater detail a little later. Suffice to say here that the crux of the problem of the finite limit on propagation speed has everything to do with the fact that the "objects" which we have been considering are, in reality, not objects at all, but are merely "represented objects," or "object representations." As long as one supposes, perhaps unreflectingly, that "physical objects" are

hard and massy, composed of some simple, undifferentiated "stuff" which persists through time indefinitely because quite indifferent to the "passage of time," and as long as one conceives of space as a "veritable emptiness" through which matter may indifferently pass, then the idea of an absolute limit to the velocity of masses through "the void" must seem as arbitrary as the gravitational action between masses separated by an empty void seems inherently mysterious. But according to modern quantum theory, all operators corresponding to physical observables are decomposable in terms of two fundamental operators, `A and `At, the annihilation and creation operators. This is what is called the 2nd quantization formalism, and this theory supplants the semi-classical, "old quantum theory" of Bohr, Rutherford, and Planck. The so-called "solar system" model of the atom which is still being taught in high schools throughout the advanced, industrialized world is an outstanding artifact of this early version of quantum theory. Thus far, the analogy with the computer strongly suggests the type of mechanism which may lie behind the universal speed limit represented by the velocity of light if one associates the pixel length and (clock rate)-1 with the inherent length and time scales of spacetime, /\x and /\t, if, indeed, these exist. This would be possible if the energy and momentum uncertainties, /\E and /\p, which engender /\x, /\t, could be traced to the fluctuating momentum-energy of the quantum vacuum itself. We may argue in favor of this in the following way. There are two ways to interpret the decay of an unstable nucleus through the ejection of an alpha particle. The traditional approach is in terms of the positional uncertainty of the alpha particle which is "ejected" This particle has a nonzero probability of being found outside the nucleus due to positional uncertainty of the particle, /\r. An alternative approach is to think in terms of the energy uncertainty of this ejected particle. By virtue of a nonzero energy uncertainty, there is a small probability that the particle will experience an energy boost, /\E, greater than the nuclear binding energy associated with the strong nuclear force binding the particle to its nucleus. Traditionally, this energy fluctuation was thought to have originated within the nucleus

itself. It is more likely that this fluctuation energy is supplied by the quantum vacuum in which the unstable nucleus is embedded and with which it is in continual interaction ( momentum-energy exchange. Call the energy of an energy fluctuation, Ex , and call any fluctuation in energy larger than Ex, Ez. If the energy uncertainty, ^E, is thought to be associated with a particle itself, then we face the serious problem of a nonlinearity in the probability distribution function describing the spectrum of energy eigenstates which comprise the energy uncertainty of the particle. This is because the occurrence of an energy fluctuation, Ez > Ex, implies that no fluctuation in energy, Ex < E < Ez, has already been experienced by the particle, for this would have meant the previous dissolution of the particle, whereupon the probability of energy fluctuation, Ez, of the particle's intrinsic energy would become 0. So we see that the probability of the occurrence of perturbation energy, Ez > Ex, i.e., P(Ez), must be modified so that the new probability, taking into account the interdependence of all perturbation probabilities for energies, Ez > E > Ex, that is, P'(Ez), becomes, [ 1 - S(dP(E)) on [E0 to Ex] = S(dP'(E)) on [Ex to E ] This situation does not lead to a discontinuity in the perturbation energy probability function, however, as [ 1 - S(dP(E))], is exactly zero at the "cusp" where the modified probability function, P'(E), begins and the original probability function, P(E), ends, in the composite function, which is given below, P = P(E), P = [1 - S(dP(E))],

for 0 < E < Ex for E > Ex

However, if the original probability function, P(E), is normalized, then the new, modified probability function, P'(E), cannot be normalized. If, on the other hand, we normalize this new function, we then find that the predicted probabilities for each of the energy eigenstates, which together comprise the total energy uncertainty of the quantum mechanical system in question, will no longer conform to the results of experiment because the original probability distribution function, P(E), is now no longer properly normalized. This is because the original wavefunction, upon which the perturbation energy probability function is based, is, in fact, the correct wavefunction - the modified probability function, given above, is simply false: very simply, we must not interpret the energy uncertainty of, e.g., unstable subatomic particles, as residing with the particles themselves, but with the quantum mechanical vacuum state with which these particles continually interact, via constant energy exchange with this vacuum; more accurately, the particles, themselves, are constituted by various energy exchanges between the vacuum and itself and the particle is continually being reconstituted out of the continual transformation of this vacuum energy. It is the organization of this vacuum energy into a form represented by the particle which more or less possesses permanence or persistence through time that we normally think of as intrinsic to a particle as such, not the vacuum energy itself, since it is the cyclic replenishing of the particle's energy out of this vacuum which itself marks the passage of time for the particle. This argument for the vacuum as the origin of particle energy uncertainty follows from the assumption that the products of the spontaneous disintegration of the original particle are collectively described by the original particle's wavefunction even after the components have separated into which the particle has disintegrated. Here we have a situation which is quite dissimilar in principle to the abrupt change to the structure of the Hydrogen atom's ground state energy induced by the sudden switching on of a magnetic field in its vicinity. The Hamiltonian of the Hydrogen atom is altered through the sudden addition of the energy of the magnetic field, however, and this, in turn, precipitously alters the wavefunction of the Hydrogen atom which

is calculated from the Hamiltonian function via the time-independent Schrodinger equation. Quantum physicists will say that the energy levels of the Hydrogen atom were degenerate with respect to the spin quantum number until the switching on of the magnetic field coupling to the atom's spin altered the Hamiltonian, and, hence, its attendant wavefunction. The origin of the discontinuous change in the Hydrogen atom's wavefunction is as much due to the intrinsic spin structure of the atom as it is to the sudden appearance of a magnetic field to which the spin couples. In the case of the spontaneous disintegration of the unstable particle, no new term need be added to the particle's Hamiltonian to account for the disintegration event which was not already present prior to this event and this is why no change in the particle's wavefunction, discontinuous or otherwise, is observed, but, as we indicated already, the very same wavefunction suffices to describe the products of the disintegration as were sufficient to describe the particle during the moments leading up to this inherently unpredictable event. It is simply that the original Hamiltonian describing the total energy of the unstable particle all along contained an energy term which was unaffected by the disintegration event. This energy term must not have been associated with the original atom, but was independent of it and equally present both before and after the disintegration took place: the vacuum energy term of the Hamiltonian. The influence of the vacuum energy term of the Hamiltonian is probably generally responsible for the phenomenon of entanglement of widely separated quantum states which had previously interacted. The nonlocal connectivity of the local vacuum energy terms in the Hamiltonians of the quantum states, considered separately, may provide the mechanism for such entanglement of quantum states. 01/97 Perhaps the same wavefunction describes the products of the disintegration because the total energy of the products remains the same as that of the particle just prior to the disintegration event and what makes this possible is a change in the vacuum energy term of the Hamiltonian which compensates the changes to all the other energy terms, conserving the total energy. Or perhaps, rather, the change in

energy "causing" the disintegration, because March 2011

It is the quantum statistics of the vacuum that enforces the Lorentz invariance of quantum entanglement. All other manifestations of Lorentz invariance, e.g., electromagnetic fields, is on account of this “vacuum statistics” of Bohm’s “correlated fluctuations.” @$To bring time in as more than a mere descriptive parameter, we need a theorem that shows that instantaneously correlated fluctuations (as opposed to fluctuations *correlated across time*) cannot be equivalent to a set of causally connected particles and fields. November 2006

As cit=Misner, Thorne and Wheeler say in Gravitation, “curved spacetime tells matter how to move and matter tells spacetime how to curve” and so the phenomenon of inertia must be grounded in the action of matter upon vacuum in combination with the back-action of vacuum upon matter. The complexity threshold where matter becomes too complex to be simulated by the deterministic, time-independent Schrödinger Equation, is precisely the threshold at which both spontaneous spacetime symmetry breaking, manifesting as spontaneous quantum decoherence, thermodynamic irreversibility, inertia and gravitation suddenly manifest themselves. @$(Quantum systems of smaller mass than the Planck mass – which we’ll take as the decoherence limit – still have a gravitational and inertial effect, but of a distinctly different character than do more massive bodies, i.e., significantly larger than the Planck mass, @$which is a topic that definitely bears further investigation.) The polarization and magnetization field strengths should exhibit the same sort of incompatibility as quantum observables as do the E and B fields. Given impressed static E and B fields of magnitude 0, a Lorentz transformation applied to a dielectric material should cause a shift in which polarization is decreased and magnetization increased. All quantum interference effects are really quantum self-interference effects, the origin of which

may well be self-interfering processes within the so-called quantum observer. Is information conserved if the quantity of information remains constant while the contents of information vary? The dynamical ground for spontaneous symmetry breaking seems in the same vein as the ground that provides the meaning giving context to brain physiological processes making up the contents of the conscious mind. The electric and magnetic field strengths are mutually incompatible through the incompatibility of position and momentum applied to electric charges and currents. Specifying the position of an electric charge more precisely permits more precise specification of the charge's static electric field, but at the price of an uncertain charge momentum, which must be associated with a corresponding uncertainty in the electric current and hence in the magnetic field strength. Similarly, the more accurately is the magnetic field specified, the more precisely is the charge momentum specified, which by the uncertainty principle, the less precisely can the charge position be measured, leading to a less precisely measurable electric field. In Feynman's parton quark model the interaction between quarks (partons) becomes time dilated so that the binding energy of partons (making up a single hadron) decreases as v approaches c. Like any other accelerating mass, if binding energy is the basis of inertia and is lost with acceleration and as a function of relative velocity, in accordance with the correct functional relationship F(Eb) (v, a), then the amount of binding energy given upon the mass reaching c must be mc**2. However, as a hadron falls into a gravitational field it enters a region of vacuum where energy fluctuations, embodied in the vacuum's /\E are progressively transferred into 3-momentum fluctuations, embodied in the /\p of the vacuum. The magnetization of the quantum vacuum in the form of the quantum entanglement of electrons and positrons within virtual Cooper pairs, created and annihilated spontaneously in accordance with the magnitude of the density of the vacuum's Heisenberg uncertain energy is progressively degraded in ever stronger gravitational fields; the virtual e+'s and e-'s become progressively more independent and the molecular bosonic character of the spontaneously created virtual Cooper pairs is progressively degraded, which may be understood as decoherence and

breaking of spontaneous symmetry (of spacetime, which includes the electromagnetic gauge?); in this way the Pauli Principle acts ever more strongly upon the constituent fermions of the spontaneously created and annihilated virtual Cooper pairs. And this is the mechanism by which matter's effect upon the quantum statistics of the vacuum is strengthened in progressively more intense gravitational fields. http://phys.org/news/2011-08-dark-illusion-quantum-vacuum.html January 2014

Abstract: “The notion of quantum information related to the two different perspectives of the global and local states is examined. There is circularity in the definition of quantum information because we can speak only of the information of systems that have been specifically prepared. In particular, we examine the final state obtained by applying unitary transformations on a single qubit that belongs to an entangled pair”, c.f., http://arxiv.org/pdf/quant-ph/0304060.pdf Paradox of Quantum Information by Subhash Kak, Louisiana State University (now Oklahoma State University at Stillwater) ess=October 2006

In terms of our current and natural scheme of categories, the "that which creates" is also "that which sustains" of Leibniz' Principle are understood as distinct, externally by Darwinian Theory, internally by theologians. To successfully remove both "Deus" as well as God by extension, i.e., "Deus ex Machina" from the naturalistic world view of cosmogony, one has to see the creative principle within the sustainment principle (after all, according to naturalism, the Universe has always been here) while at once letting go o the tendency to wish to see this principle the other way round. A tenuous application of this new understanding of Leibniz' Principle might be within the debate between Machian and classical relativists' understanding of prn=Einstein’s Equivalence Principle, e.g., must we treat prn=equivalent Lorentz frames as possessing a common origin, say, either through vacuum entanglement or via cosmological initial conditions? - or would we treat them thus on purely formal grounds?, that is, is Einstein's Equivalence a kinematic or a dynamic principle? If the so-called stuff of which the

world is made was not created and "has just always been here," then Leibniz' Principle must break down - though perhaps only within the understanding, c.f., au=Kant’s notion of "the understanding". In other words the dynamics is "squeezed out" by the kinematics. Simultaneous reinterpretation along metaphorical axes while forging a line of literal exposition behaves akin to multi-temporal process. At root of all quantum interference phenomena is self-interference of the field, which can manifest itself as particles though only when this self-interference loop becomes short circuited, either by an observer or potential observer. My review of the spin and orbital angular momentum theory suggests that these two quantities are separately conserved just like the separate components of 3-momentum are conserved, well at least for the case where v/c 1. @$The separate conservation of S and L seems to imply that S doesn't exchange J with L in an analogous way to how say, colliding gyroscopes (with rough surfaces) might exchange angular momentum between like components of L (in such a manner tha Lx = Lx1 + Lx2 = constant; same for Ly, Lz, etc. One might expect that for the relativistic case that there would be a break down in the separate conservation of components of not only 3-momentum, but 3-angular momentum, 3-spin, etc., c.f., reinterpretation of Einstein's perihelion precession problem, origin of inertia in gyroscopic resistance to acceleration, an so on. Hawking radiation shows the extreme case where the entanglement of spins has been 100% transformed into /\p manifested as the 3-momentum fluctuations at the event horizon surface. Is there a deep connection between the two basic varieties of information non-conservation vis a vis continuous vs. discrete decoherence of the density matrix, that is, loss of quantum information across a Rindler horizon vs. collapsing of Psi by a freely willed interaction of an observer with a quantum system? Magnetization (spin polarization) of virtual Cooper pairs may be considered internal entanglement. External entanglement of virtual pairs may be described in terms of polarization of the quantum vacuum. The bondage to decay as described in the Book of Romans. Waxing old and wearing out. If the Universe were secretly a computational system, then we couldn't really have an entropy flow/gradient without a complementary information flow/gradient. In

the same way that Einstein deduced spontaneous emission from purely thermodynamic considerations, we may be able to deduce nonlocality from the necessity of a thermodynamic ground (thermal vacuum states(s)) for enabling flows of entropy and conversely, transmission of information. Chaos-Cosmos; Complex-->Simple Give an example of multiple copy of a context-sensitive content of information. The only way to side step the 2nd Law is to receive input from outside spacetime. Clearly the vacuum must be in a "prepped state" for order to arise spontaneously. When spin has been determined to be in the + xdirection with eigenstate Sx, then the values of Sy and Sz are indeterminate. So what then if no spin measurement had been performed? Then all three spins would be indeterminate (in the sense of "up" and/or "down" along each spatial axis) - and so the spin must be determined secretly to be Sw or timelike. (Does this imply absolute direction of time - no - because the orthogonal Si's are indeterminate? Like Leibniz' clock whose ticking was only noticed once it had stopped, one's bizarre metaphysical assumption, i.e., more or less that life is an illusion and not real, was exploded by the devastating critique of the Schrödinger’s Cat Paradox. The related phenomena of spontaneous symmetry breaking (under infinitesimal perturbations), spontaneous decoherence, wavefunction collapse, e.g., spontaneous emission, quantum tunneling, etc. constitute proof of the objective nature of classical physical reality - classical physics is the correct description of physical reality at its appropriate scale! This is what objectively real means vis a vis recent pseudoscience watershed of Jungian quantum voodoo "What the Bleep Do We know" style bullshit. The phenomenon of spontaneous decoherence, which is one and the same with the inadequacy of the deterministic time-independent Schrödinger equation (and derivative prn=Klein-Gordan and prn=Dirac equations) as a complete description of the quantum field, again, is proof positive that the Universe is not a simulation, but is real. This "realness" is importantly related to the phenomena of free will and consciousness. Both free will and consciousness "surprise" the alleged ground of physical being, i.e., startle the quantum vacuum as cosmic CPU of "simulated Universe" leading to the faltering of the simulation in capturing the state of the

Universe. Entanglement entropy is not covariant. Vacuum supports superposition so superposition of distinct vacua is no allowed. Superposition principle vs. principle of equivalence. The fact that perfect isolation of a quantum system does not prevent environmental decoherence implies that the vacuum fluctuation field induces decoherence. The mind allegedly does this as well through the action of its consciousness. The mind concentrates quantum entanglement and so observation enhances the effect of vacuum-based environmental decoherence. But then part of what discomfits the quantum vacuum is the unanticipated will of the conscious observer, implying that the brain of the observer is somehow altogether outside "the environment". It is the indistinguishability of quantum particles that leads to teleportation and substance-like properties of quantum information which defy context-sensitivity, up to a point, that is. EPR's position was that a measurement must be predetermined if it can be known with certainty. But the decision whether or not to make this measurement is not predetermined. The less well correlated (via quantum entanglement) are the, e.g., electron and position making up a virtual Cooper pair, the less does the pair behave as a collective spin-0 particle, i.e., boson and the more do the particles of the pair behave as independent fermions to which the Pauli Principle is completely democratic, not making distinction between virtual and so-called real particles. Henceforth we will term this notion of the radically democratic Pauli Principle. Feynman's Pauli Principle or, "Feynman's Principle" for short. /\E is decreasing all the while e+ and e- are becoming more mutually independent, which should normally imply a greater /\E. ??? e+e+e-ee+e+ --> +1, +0, -1, -0, +1. . . How do we interpret "+" and "-" in "0+" and "0-" ? The mitochondrion is now thought to have once been an independent bacterium that "gave up too many genes" after which it could only survive in symbiosis with a eukaryote cell. This inexplicably suggested to me the contrast between "sin" and "grace" as being complementary entities. When spin has been determined to be in the + x-direction, say with state, S(x), then the values of S(y) and S(z) are indeterminate, i.e., there is a total of 360 degrees of uncertainty, you might say because of 180 degrees of /\S(y) + 180 degrees of /\S(z).

Could it be that the 180 degree rotation of a spin-1/2 particle in the x-y plane, for example (rather than in the x-z plane - both rotations representing a change from s = S(x) to s = -S(x), by the way) is secretly accompanied by rotations in the Heisenberg uncertainties in th spin in other orthogonal directions? We should not here that the antiparticle to particle with spin, +S(z) must have an opposite spin of -S(z), which is apparently part and parcel to the antiparticle's interpretation (originally by Feynman) as the same particle, though moving backward in time. I supposed that the spin uncertainties were rotated along with the determinate component of the particle's spin being rotated because, when the state Q of a particle is teleported, the Heisenberg uncertainty in Q, /\Q is also teleported. This way, interpreting particle propagation as the continuous teleportation of the particle implies that a Lorentz boost not only transforms Q, but also transforms /\Q. Confirmed that the "prior art" literature asserts that the speed of light in vacuum is increased in a Casimir vacuum and that this is on account of a decrease in the number density of scattering virtual electron-positron pairs in the path of a propagating photon, which must be interpreted as a decrease in /\p relative to /\E for the the quantum system of conducting plates and vacuum between the plates. The polarization of light rotates as it passes through dielectric medium (Faraday rotation). , Electrons have DeBroglie wavelengths because of the 1-loop propagation via continual substitution within e+e- virtual pairs, which are timelike fluctuations and so, by Fourier's theorem must be represented by a wavepacket of frequency domain functions. Collective spin-1 and spin-0 are in competition in supporting the propagation of photons and electron/positron pairs, i.e., e+e-, e-e+, e+e+, e-e-. When /\s(x), /\s(y), and /\s(z) are nonzero, then does this imply that /\s(w) = 0, i.e., the spin is pointing in a timelike direction? During a Lorentz boost, spin and momentum degrees of freedom become entangled, c.f., Wigner's "Little Groups". Cooper pairs have 100% anti-correlated spins, +/- S(i)'s (where i = 1,2, or 3 or superposition of 1,2 and 3 and the +/- /\S(i)'s cancel because of the entanglement of the +/-S(i)'s.) In the same way that we might ask whence comes the energy liberated by a matter-antimatter annihilation

reaction we might also ask, "whence comes the extra 3-angular momentum that we can't account for from Newtonian mechanics which appears as perihelion precession of the planet Mercury's orbit and which is predicted by the General Theory of Relativity?" Could the anomalous boost in Mercury's 3-angular momentum stem from the transformation of the planet's 4-angular momentum through a cyclic continuum of acclerated frames? In which case there msut be a hidden component of timelike angular momentum possessed by the planet, which becomes more and more spacelike as the planet orbits closer to the Sun. This hidden timelike component of angular momentum resides with the collective elementary spin-0 of the planet's bulk material, the properties of which are determined by hidden quantum entanglement of all particles composing the planet's mass. Causality, simultaneity and spin-1/2 measurement: In one reference frame, Alice measures her particle's spin 1st; in another reference frame, Bob measures his particle's spin 1st. "Bohm's Law" only applies when certain entanglement conditions obtain. Probability against a certain selfdecohering system doesn't necessarily increase moving backward in time (even taking emergence into account). Decoherence is in opposition to emergence. During propagation, what is the relationship between the net angular momentum vector and the linear momentum?, e.g., the photon's spin is . If spin-1/2 is to be associated with timelike angular momentum that is directed parallel or anti-parallel to the direction of timelike propagation, then the equation of a complete wavefunction phaseshift with a 720 degree (rather than 360 degree) rotation of the spin-1/2 particle can be intuitively understood in terms of 4-rotations of the particle within spacetime. If a spin-1/2 particle, say s(z) = +/- 1/2 is Lorentz boosted to near "c", then, as reckoned from the original laboratory reference frame, what is the direction of the particle's spin, s(z)' in terms of s(z)? The spin of an elementary particle cannot be altered, only the direction in which the spin of the particle pionts. Does this suggest that when /\S(x), /\S(y), and /\S(z) are nonzero that the spin must be determined to be +/- 1/2 in some orthogonal directions that is "incompatible" with "x", "y" and "z"? The "incompatibility" would

perhaps be indirect, e.g., /\x(i) is incompatible with /\p(i), /\t is incompatible with /\E and /\x(i) and /\t form a 4-vector while /\p(i) and /\E form a four vector. Talent is sublimated rather than the motive lying with appreciation or enjoyment of the specific subject matter. The "no-cloning" theorem is essentially a statement of the principle of the conservation of entanglement, which supplants the classical physical notion of "stuff conservation". Without the activity of substance, which is irreducible to form, (implying an unconserved quantity) there can be no legitimate temporality. "Stuff" is actually a quantum construct that is not conserved, though indeed, perhaps quantum entanglement is. In the way, decoherence becomes a physical necessity! It's not the momentum of the photon (Heisenberg's light microscope thought experiment), but the state of knowledge of the observer (or mere "knowledgeability" of some hypothetical/possible observer?) that reduces Psi? "/\Q about", i.e., /\Q in context-collapsed by the mere possibility of measurement/knowledge. "/\Q of", i.e., /\Q out of context - can only be collapsed by actual measurement/knowledge of observer (which we are assuming here can only be gotten by measurement, but there are socalled "non-demolition" measurements that exploit Bell nonlocality. Environmental decoherence is related to consciousness' role in collapsing Psi. What about when information embodied in /\Q is tied to a microscopic state?, c.f., 2-states superposition, environmental decoherence has the same effect as observation, i.e., binary opposition. This is not the case fo systems of sufficient complexity. But such systems can start out context-free and binary opposition-reducible, but lose this character due to environmental entanglement. The structure of spin decoherence show that under sufficiently large accelerations, spin possesses the property of timelike angular momentum. Investigate the quantity, J = L + S in a Lorentz-boosted context. Propagation may

perhaps be interpreted a la Bohm's Law/Principle in terms of . Not knowing what information was teleported - just that the state, Q was transmitted is suggestive of a . "" means perform Google search on contents of angle brackets. The complementarity relation between nonlocal and local (classical) information in addition to evidence that entanglement is a conserved quantity (quantum # = quantity of von Neumann information) suggests that all information-bearing structures distill prn=von Neumann information from quantum entanglement that ultimately exists within the vacuum, i.e., all entanglement derives from vacuum entanglement. How do we distinguish uncertainty of from uncertainty about and are they sometimes the same thing, e.g., intentionality of consciousness. December 2011 Investigate the paradoxical notion that the essential intentionality of consciousness is intentionality in the absence of the object. And yet this is very much in the nature of pure consciousness, understood as the immediate object of Buddhist meditation techniques. prn= Vedral's notion of how photons appear to take on mass in a superconductor that is manifesting the prn=Meissner effect due to quantum entanglement between electrons that have formed Cooper pairs seems closely interrelated to mine and Volovik's dual superfluid vacuum model for induced gravity, c.f., au=Vedral's cit=paper on entanglement underlying the bulk properties of matter such as the complementarity between magnetization and magnetic susceptibility. This was suggested to me when I chanced upon the New Scientist article, cit=Quantum Quirk May Give Objects Mass. Teleportation involves transmission of unmeasurable quantities, /\Q and states protected by the no-cloning theorem. Classical information packaged as quantum information, e.g., turn around time for correlations of heated LiF chips with metastable states.

DeBroglie wavefunction as wavelength of a physical wave versus as a wavelength for a Psi. Planck cutoff for energy of highest frequency prn= DeBroglie matter wave implies such a cut off for most dense encoding of quantum information, i.e., vacuum information saturation. Tie this in to the two distinct interpretations of grounds for decoherence. , Local realism is false and quantum decoherence necessitates inertia and the reality of classical information embodied in the local systems and states. Reality of nonlocal "stuff". A deterministic chaotic system could not be modeled in terms of correlated quantum fluctuations, which would be a linear description. Is the turn around time the classical information that must be sent along with the teleported information? Continuity of boundary conditions in the electron two slit experiment. The no-cloning theorem is essentially a statement of the principle of entanglement conservation, which supplants the notion of "stuff construct that is not conserved, though entanglement is - so decoherence becomes a necessity. It's not the momentum of the photon (Heisenberg's light microscope thought experiment), but the state of knowledge of the observer (knowledgeability of hypothetical observer?) that collapses Psi. April 2014 “A typical expression of this uncertainty is the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, where, the more precisely we know the position of a particle, the more imprecisely we know its momentum (and vice versa).Opinions are divided as to whether this epistemological uncertainty is also an ontological uncertainty. Of some relevance here is the following observation by Quentin Smith: "Heisenberg originally interpreted [the uncertainty] relations epistemically, but Bohr convinced him in private communications to accept a verificationist metaphysics, with its attendant ontological interpretation of the uncertainty relations" (Smith 2002, 137) There are many competing interpretations of the quantum mechanical mathematical formalism.”

web=

http://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.109.100404 http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/09/120907125154.htm web= http://www.questia.com/library/journal/1P3721764311/methodological-solipsism-and-the-multiverse April 2014

“Methodological Solipsism and the Multiverse" defends the many-universes interpretation of quantum physics, but draws attention to a major philosophical obstacle to the interpretation's acceptance: the question of why, if there are many universes, all on a par with one another, at a particular time the 'I' is manifest in only one. This is known as the 'preferred basis' problem. The so-called methodological solipsism approach, introduced by Driesch and employed by philosophers, such as Putnam and Fodor, is used to answer the question.” web= http://philpapers.org/rec/KINMSA Take for example my friends, Ziad, Gilberto and John. It is unlikely that mine is the universe in which their consciousnesses are quite as precisely tuned, that is in a biocentric, anthropically principled sense, as is mine. Although solipsism per se is indeed false in its usual metaphysical acceptation, the anthropic cosmological principle as applied to the multiverse is indeed fundamentally solipsistic. The cosmos has to be just right for me first and need only possess a verisimilitude of plausibleness for everyone else. At their most extreme decimal expansions, on their rightmost end, the fundamental physical constants are biocentrically fine-tuned for my mode of conscious functioning, since it is I here who considers the question, or not, if the fine-tuning had been biased in favor of someone else. I have no doubt that Ziad, Gilberto and John actually exist – just not in this, my universe as the chance of this would make any high stakes slot machine win or series of consecutive wins pale in probabilistic significance. Each consciously exists in his own biocentrically fine-tuned universe and is attended by intelligently acting human simulacra, which inevitably includes my philosophicalzombiefied doppelganger. The various friendly personages that I simulate in my brain and project outward into my virtual space are indeed mere zombies at least insofar as they are my projections, perhaps

guided intelligently by data inputs ultimately stemming from the biocentrically fine-tuned human projecting from beyond his own cozy corner of the multiverse. So we see that teasing out some of the philosophical implications of the multiverse and anthropic principles introduces a new metaphor that radically shifts the quality of subjective social experience. The deduction is performed in an as if mode. Of course, one simple approach to the cosmological constant problem is to suppose that the vast bulk of the quantum vacuum is in a Bosecondensed "zero state" where the Bose particles make no contribution to the vacuum's energy density or pressure, c.f., p. 74, McGraw Hill Concise Encyclopedia of Physics. "Lines of induction due to a conductor of any shape" must form a closed path about the conductor. How do you form a "closed path" about a conductor that happens to be an event horizon? The electron's spinning about its axis" is not to be understand literally as in the days of the old quantum theory but merely figuratively. However, the question nonetheless arises as to which axis, if indeed not a spatial one, about which the electron does in fact literally turn. Gregory Benford's SF short story, "Anomalies" gives a good intuitive insight into the causes of quantum decoherence. A "quantum substance" isn't identified until you have specified all possible quantum numbers. Observations of quantum systems of fermions specified in terms of a particular list of quantum numbers shall instantiate the Pauli Principle, provided that the specified list of the quantum numbers constitutes a complete set of quantum numbers. If one quantum is left undetermined, then the system remains capable of behaving as though insubstantial. *See relationship of cellular automata (CA) theory with theory of entanglement and quantum

decoherence. Interpret principle of equivalence, motion of test bodies, event horizon, gravitational redshift, perihelion precession, deflection of starlight, and radio time delay in terms of Volovik dual superfluid vacuum theory. Look at causal structure in special relativity in terms of Bohm's Principle and then the departure from this principle necessitated by the theory of general relativity. Perturbations of quantum statistics of the vacuum by real particles and fields that can be processed by the vacuum + matter's nonlocal connectivity, i.e., processed (as though by a cosmic CPU) while Bohm's Principle remains inviolate do not contribute to inertial or gravitational mass or, for that matter, to decoherence of the nonlocally connected vacuum fields and no irreversible or time-asymmetric processing occurs, i.e., no entropy is generated. The twin paradox is revolved by noting that O and O' have different notions of simultaneity in comparing their clock readings. How can the field equations of GR be truly nonlinear if the tensor equations of GR are coordinate system independent. Maybe the pesky non-gravitating vacuum component of the cosmological constant secretly appears within all three terms of the field equations and so canceling out. The solution to the cosmological constant problem would then be trivial. The (-) sign occurring in the expression for the spacetime interval, which serves to distinguish time from space, to the (-) sign that serves to distinguish fermionic or asymmetric wavefunction from bosonic or symmetric wavefunction. This was first suggested to me by the equation, |Psi| = |Psi(s) + iPsi(a)| = (Psi(s) + i Psi(a))x(Psi(s) - iPsi(a)) = Psi(s)**2 + Psi(a)**2 = |Psi(s)| + |Psi(a)|

There are spatial rotations and spacetime rotations (aka Lorentz transformations), so it seems reasonable to suppose that the motion of "time rotation" is a valid number. We must distinguish wish rotations of the time axis from rotations "about" the time axis. So fermions may be interpreted most broadly as substance/figure and bosons as insubstantial/ground. "Ground" as merely hidden figure, that is, as merely complementary to ground shuts out the dynamics by which figure transforms itself into its complement given certain boundary conditions (discrete quantum transitions) or continuous transformations (through continuous change in the quantum field boundary conditions?) (See Leggett (1987), especially chapters 5 and 6.) "Interactionism" theory of mind is most compatible with the Copenhagen "Collapse Model" of the quantum measurement problem. One solution to the quantum measurement problem might be to involve (1) interference between quantum superposed states of the system under observation with superpositions of an observer's perceptions of the system, in addition to invoking (2) nonlocal connectivity of the quantum brains of multiple simultaneous observers of the system. The nonlocal connectivity of the vacuum is not uniform but is comprised by cells or domains of greater nonlocal connectivity. Temporality implies that the system is not in an energy eigenstate. When prn=Bohm's Principle is violated and entanglement is not conserved, a dynamics as opposed to a merely kinematic process is ongoing, and of course a certain amount of entropy (von Neumann or Shannon?) is generated. Entanglement non-conservation forms the basis of temporal evolution and is fundamentally non-computable. Classical information constitutes the boundary conditions for quantum information. The reverse of this is true as well, i.e., quantum information constituting the boundary conditions for classical

information, though only up to a threshold. This threshold is situated at the onset of irreversibility in the system's changes in state. @?When quantum information capacity of a system is outstripped by the system's classical information, it is here that the system begins to undergo decoherence. As the rate of increase in classical information begins to outstrip the quantum information processing power of the system, then it is here where the system experiences a relativistic increase in mass. Associated with this is a relativistic increase in momentum acting in the opposite sense to the vector of the impressed acceleration, which is the origin of inertia. Conservation of quantum entanglement may b demonstrated through analysis of the generalized uncertainty relations for so called squeezed states. In the equation for the derivation of E = mc**2, interpreting the term under the integral, mv/sqrt[1 - v**2/c**2] as the product of an invariant "m" with a relativistic velocity, v' = v/sqrt[1 - v**2/c**2] appears to yield an energy of mc**2 long before v reaches the value of "c" in the upper bound of the integral. Why? SQUIDS may be used to measure quantum scale changes in magnetic susceptibility, which in turn could be used to measure magnetization entanglement in bulk material. SQUID’s could measure small changes in susceptibility at different gravitational potentials as well as changes in quantum gravitational noise in vacuum. Dirac's equation really calls for creation and annihilation of 4 spin-1/2 particles in vacuum, or rather, a/a+ of superposition states of 4 spin-1/2 particles. Can a particular Lorentz frame be associated with a particular possibility for a quantum measurement? Instead of using M, the magnetization as an index of entanglement, it

might be better in light of the paper, Magnetic Susceptibility as a Macroscopic Entanglement Witness, Vedral et al. to utilize mu the permeability and chi the susceptibility as such an index. Hopefully another similar paper shall be published soon in which it will be shown that electric susceptibility can be a witness of electric dipole entanglement. We have free will in the sense of our brains being able to outstrip the quantum computing capacity of the local vacuum, but it is still for working out our character, which is also our fate - but a fate that can change if caught up with that of others. Bohm's principle/law is transcendental across the temporal horizon where causal law becomes too complex to be modeled by a matrix of correlated quantum fluctuations - this is the idea of historical determinism within but not between historical moments, c.f., Gibb's phenomenon, edge effects of electromagnetic fields at boundary surfaces, etc. Discuss: locally versus globally mediated causality, Rindler horizons, Bohm's Law and decoherence of quantum information. ********************************************************10 -07-06 ******************************************** How do we characterize what happens to the psyche of a young bureaucrat who is at first forced but then with time less and less forced to rationalize the directives of his so-called superiors as being in accord with his own personal judgment? How is a series of vacuum fluctuations nonlocally connected fundamentally distinct from a series which is simultaneous (the components of the series, one to another) only in a unique Lorentz frame? Does causal connection transcend mere quantum correlation rather than being merely a subclass thereof? - in the sense of exceeding

the one-graviton Planck mass virtual black hole limit? And wouldn't the transcendence of quantum information by classical information, paradoxically enough play an important role in explicating decoherence and collapse phenomena? In other words, can a set of nonlocally connected up to but not including the one-graviton limit? The riddle of the would-be gravity and inertia of the quantum vacuum, i.e., the cosmological constant riddle is intimately bound up with this consideration. Perturbation of the action of the vacuum state cannot be treated perturbatively, i.e., as a summation of plane waves (non-interacting particles) is precisely the point at which spacetime is obliged to curve. Note that "particle" is an ill-defined notion in strongly curved spacetimes. Rather than decoherence being an effect of gravitation, it seems more logical to suppose that gravity is a special case of decoherence processes within the quantum vacuum. Volovik's suspicion that the cosmological constant tracks the cosmological (average) mass density of the Universe combined with the fact that in GR gravitational energy (to include gravitational binding energy) is nonlocal leads us to a possible mechanism for Volovik's equating of the two energy densities, cosmological constant and average mass density of the Universe. web=

www.cornponeflicks.org/RAGAD.html - review of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are dead. The Anti-Gnosticism of E. M. Cioran - essay in Probe magazine/ezine. A Short History of Decay, E. M. Cioran. "A thumbprint doesn't open the door of perception, it blows it off the hinges. You melt into eternity. You let go and die into the moment which is all. There is no you anymore at all. The intensity of this can't be descriped, but you realize as you're slipping away that it's familiar".

If consciousness truly exists and is not an illusion (if there's something left over once all mental contents have been removed), then the self would be truly at home in and a citizen of so to speak the realm of Being, which is to say, eternal being. Polonium Halos: Unrefuted Evidence for Earth's Instant Creation, c.f., Earth Science Associates, P. O. Box 12067, Knoxville, TN 37912, c.f., That medium which serves as the "ground of being" cannot be fully reconstituted through a cobbling together of entities originally abstracted from this dynamic, creative and sustaining medium. Some embedding and enabling context would be needed to fill in (flesh out, if you will) the aboriginally suppressed details that constituted the original categories (read: "things") that one is seeking to cobble together into a coherent whole. If we are always in time and never separate in our being from its flow, that is, composed of this very flow that also comprises the temporality of the outside world, then how indeed do we subjectively reckon time; how is it possible for us to experience temporality at all, unless there is some component in us that itself resists this flow? Self-organization of matter is a symptom of the feedback of quantum entanglement in time. Multidimensional temporality is experienced by the quantum uncertainties or by the virtual processes composing them, and it is within Heisenberg uncertianty that timelike quantum entanglement has the degree of freedom to act. Philip K. Dick might have speculated that we are all robots persisting in the fantasy that we are human. In a sense this is the implication of the works of Baudrillard and Lacan, etc.

When listening to intelligible speech one is simultaneously subject and object, meaning that one reacts simultaneously in two distinct ways, mechanical (and moronically) and insightfully. How are both responses to speech reconciled on many distinct scales of behavior and action (in the sense of spatiotemporal scale)? The function of this opposition is best understood through the concept of discourse - like Campbell's religious images, discourse both limits and facilitates thought and experience. Institutions and bureaucracies so utterly transcend the subjective rationality of the individual. Institutional wisdom is both necessary and not necessary to the survival and vitality of a bureaucratic organization, c.f., Bohr's remarks about death of the previous generation of physicists being necessary to the "advancement" of physics. The nature of language as nexus of otherwise irreconcilable contemporaneous speakers/ authors or generations of practitioners must account for the openness of institutionalized knowledge (as all knowledge must be) to its being endlessly reprocessed without reaching exhaustion of its content, which is both context-dependent and context-determinative. All of the subjects of knowledge must be recast as the interpretation of these subjects of knowledge, e.g., history = interpretation of history, etc. The distinction between "real" and "virtual" breaks down at the Planck scale. Spacetime is conjugate to momentum-energy in QM and so it only makes sense that there should be this intimate connection between space, time, matter and energy. Concrete reality as interdimensional nexus. Because of consciousness, reality is necessarily simulation. When you stop and think about it, interpersonal communication, particularly human speech is a bizarre process based as it is on what can easily be made to appear a far fetched metaphysics.

Suppose the universe is a black hole (is of critical density so that spacetime is considered “flat”) that is undergoing cosmological expansion. The mass of the universe must then increase as you pointed out ( I suppose this increase is reckoned from infinity). If the density of the zero-point energy inside the hole is decreasing while in interaction with the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, then during the time that an energy fluctuation lasts the zero-point has every so slightly decreased and so not all of the energy borrowed from the vacuum during the lifetime of the fluctuation need be paid back. So here to is a mass generation mechanism. We now have the basis for a new equation of two time rates of change in mass – one cosmological and the other quantum. So the zero-point energy of the vacuum doesn’t possess any inertial mass until something is done with this energy (within the context of a curved spacetime, expanding or contracting). This equation may perhaps point to some new physics or at least help reassure us that it is only difference in vacuum energy density that are gravitational and inertially significant. How is a series of vacuum fluctuations nonlocally connected fundamentally distinct from a series which is simultaneous (the components of the series, one to another) only in a unique Lorentz frame? Does causal connection transcend mere quantum correlation (somewhat contrary to the spirit of David Bohm’s observations on the subject, perhaps). . . rather than being merely a subclass thereof – in the sense of exceeding the one-graviton, Planck mass virtual black hole limit? In other words, can a set of nonlocally-connected quantum fluctuations only successfully model causality up to but not including the onegraviton limit? The riddle of the would-be gravity and inertia of the quantum vacuum, i.e., the cosmological constant riddle is intimately bound up with this consideration. Perturbation of the action of the vacuum state that cannot be treated pertubatively, i.e., as a summation of plane waves (non-interacting particles) is precisely the point at which spacetime is obliged to curve. Note that “particle” is an ill-defined

notion in strongly curved spacetimes. Rather than decoherence being an effect of gravitation, it seems more logical to suppose that gravity is a special case of decoherence processes within the quantum vacuum. Because causal relationships are always describable in terms of sets of differential equations, these relationships must be supposed to inhere within a continuously differentiable manifold of determinate topological structure. Alterations in the topology of a continuously differentiable manifold cannot be described by a set of differential equations definable on the original manifold. This is why we do not expect that the energies of the submicroscopic topological fluctuations may comprise a contribution to a gravitational source term in the Einstein field equations. A supermanifold must ground the transformation of one topology into another nonequivalent topology such that this topological inequivalence is ultimately reducible within the supermanifold of higher order topological structure which remains constant throughout the lower order topological transformation. The formalism of General Relativity is not equipped to describe such a topological supermanifold. This reminds us of attempts to ground the discontinuous change in the wavefunction which in between measurements evolves deterministically according to the Schrödinger equation of motion in terms of some nonlinear time-dependent version of the S-eqn. Notice that the transformation of one topology into a nonequivalent one necessitates a breaching of the original topological manifold introducing discontinuities which prevent the existence of any bridge functions being defined mediating the transformation which possess continuous differentiability. No consistent solutions to a given set of differential equations exists if the only possible solutions are functions which are themselves not continuously differentiable. All topological transformations must be described in terms of bridge functions which cannot be defined on the manifolds being transformed and so all topological transformations must be mediated from outside all manifolds of determinate topological structure taking part in the topological transformations. Since a metric presupposes an embedding topological

manifold, geometrodynamic fluctuations in spacetime topology cannot be described within general relativity theory. Nor should they collectively contribute to a single vacuum state possessing an inertial mass equivalence, which we then need to account for in our attempts to solve the cosmological constant riddle, i.e., “non-gravitating” quantum vacuum. Projections of topological transformations in a given space onto a subspace may present the appearance of non-topological transformations within the smaller space. If a chance event yields meaning and significance, it is only because of a common, underlying (concrete) ground of the two things connected. The truly concrete, that is, the ultimate ground of Being, cannot be divided, but can only appear so. To entertain the notion of two separate grounds, themselves possessing no underlying and still more ultimate ground connecting them in the sense of making them, one with the other, (substantially) continuous, is to set up definitions in a manner which invites self-contradiction. We know that the action by which the continuum of space and time are constituted presupposes a kind of temporality, but one without scale or direction in which the connectivity of the pre-phenomenal is internal but at once without boundaries. Just musing a little here. given a constant mass of particles in a volume, V with a collective mass, M in which this volume is uniformly expanding, the density of the volume should decrease with the inverse cube. But if the particles are themselves energy fluctuations continuously being created and destroyed and recreated and so on. . . , then we would expect that the number density of these fluctuations to decrease with the inverse cube as the wavelengths of the particles stretch in accordance with the changing length scale dictated by the uniform expansion of the space in which the fluctuations continually occur. These fluctuations collectively are the vacuum zero-point field, which thusly decreases with the inverse fourth power with uniform expansion of the volume containing this vacuum energy. Now if the vacuum energy constitutes the “calibration 0” against which

the collective mass of massive particles contained within the expanding volume is to always be reckoned, then the mass density (something we’re for the time being assuming is different from the vacuum energy density) should effectively decrease with the inverse square (just as in the case of an expanding black hole). To wit, the density of particles decreases with the inverse cube and the vacuum energy against which the mass of the massive particles is measured decreases with the inverse fourth power. Intuitively it is easy to see that a very long lived, long wavelength vacuum fluctuation shall be stretched by the expansion somewhat during the lifetime of the fluctuation and so when its energy is “paid back” to the collective vacuum state, not as much energy has to be paid back as was originally borrowed when the vacuum fluctuations began - in order to satisfy the Heisenberg uncertainty principle and energy conservation. Where did the component of energy go that didn’t have to be paid back? It went into the creation of additional mass of the massive particles participating in the overall cosmological expansion. This is how I reconcile the two types of mass increase so as to show that they are one and the same, just looked at from opposite ends of the telescope, if you will, quantum versus cosmological. The black hole mass-radius relationship then may be just the natural outcome, cosmologically of a closed expanding spacetime. Pushing together a lot of mass through the Pauli Exclusion Principle for fermions and the “Pauli Inclusion Principle” for bosons in the extreme case recapitulates this cosmological structure, when the increasing mass density (as more and more mass is piled together within smaller and smaller volume) causing the collapsing mass to effect a continual local reduction (within the decreasing volume of the collapsing mass) in the vacuum energy within the decreasing volume and against which the collapsing mass’ energy must be continually recalibrated so that the mass relativistically increases, eventually forming a local (as opposed to a global black hole). From: Daniel Van Gent [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2006 11:52 AM To: Russell S Clark; Ziad Fahd

Subject: Mobius loops and entanglement Hi Russ, Now, let's say that we "create" two entangled particles or photons. Must the two particles now "catch a ride" on two "chain-linked" Mobius loops, each heading off in different "directions?" Or do the particle potentials occupy the entire "linked" double Mobius loop? That is the only way I can see "quantum teleportation of state" to another particle across the universe. These linked Mobius loops would have to be in existence BEFORE the two photons happen to catch a ride on it in order to explain observed quantum entanglement phenomenon. This makes sense to me because the creation of local quantum entanglement probably comes about through tapping preexistent global quantum entanglement such that probability and quantum entanglement and information is conserved. However, information is not conserved for quantum entanglement involving superpositions of quantum states that are separated by more than a Planck mass – this would correspond to the superposition of distinct quantum vacua, which is absolutely ruled out in quantum field theory – you can only do this within the very limited boundary conditions set by the locally prevailing Heisenberg energy uncertainties. But within the bounds set by quantum uncertainty, I would agree that local quantum entanglement is created by borrowing from preexistent global quantum entanglement, i.e., quantum entanglement of states of the same vacuum state, i.e., of quantum entangled vacua with an energy spread smaller than a Planck mass. In this way, causality is exhaustively described in terms of quantum correlations of quantum fluctuations (within the self-same vacuum state). During noncoherent photon production by electron cascade, such as in an ordinary light bulb, only about 2 in 10^11 photons created by the light bulb are considered entangled with one another. Are these linked loops then relatively "rare" or must the lucky entangled photon pair have special properties in order to "catch a ride" on two linked Mobius loops? Maybe it is both of those possiblities!

The “special property” is both photons derived from the same vacuum state, i.e., they are entangled because they are both entangled with the same vacuum state to begin with. I suppose some kind of dimensionless ratio, say of two different vacuum energy densities (cosmological constant divided by Planck density in the extreme case!) might come into play in calculating the probability of two photons - of a given wavelength, separated by a certain spacetime interval between the two quantum uncertain spacetime points at which created, being 100% quantum correlated. Now, I imagine an atom. I can envision the atom as many nested fractal Mobius loops all interconnecting with one another so that everything in the atom is "self-entangled." Now, would the Pauli exclusion principle mean that only one loop can be occupied by two electrons at a time with opposite "spins?" In this case, the spin would just be a result of which of two directions the respective electrons are moving within the loop. Yes, that smacks of good common sense/intuition. I buy that idea. Now, spontaneous fission of the nucleus occurs and must surely cause a "breaking" of about half of the loops from one another (although fission products of the original nucleus are thought to remain entangled for a brief period of time). What makes the nucleus unstable? Is there a "loose end" of a broken Mobius loop flying in the vacuum flux breeze which when tugged causes the original nucleus to "unravel" into two nuclei? Distinct topologies cannot be “grounded” in the very same spacetime. Clearly open and closed loops possess distinct topology, just as twisted and non-twisted loops possess distinct topologies. Distinct topologies then cannot be superposed and any superposition of quantum states that threatens branching into to two or more topologies for the system shall collapse “under its own weight”, if you will. This is not an answer, but a consideration in relation to your question. Benni Reznik has a lot to say about vacuum nonlocality and Lorentz transformations of entanglement. Your diagram makes sense if, instead of Lorentz transformations, you think in terms of progressively greater accelerations, from say Hc (Hubble’s constant time the speed of light),

that is to say, the cosmological acceleration to the Planck acceleration. I’d really like to try the dowsing experiment, by the way. And make sure and borrow a timepiece tied to an atomic clock signal and establish some kind of synched up communication link with Dr. DeBrandes when you guys do your entanglement experiment. There should be an equivalence between the so called “one graviton” limit, i.e., Planck mass in the complexity of vacuum fluctuations and the complexity of what can be teleported nonlocally between points A and B. Since to escape the speed of light restriction on propagation of energy of the specific kind discussed by Einstein, which is to say energy that possesses inertia, we need a chain of merely correlated (though causally independent), that is, quantum correlated vacuum fluctuations along the entire trajectory to support the passage of the energy or information that shall therefore propagate without inertial effect. Each individual quantum fluctuation nonlocally correlated to its neighbor in the chain forming this trajectory would therefore be below the one graviton limit or cutoff. This would also serve as a natural limit on the degree of quantum correlation of one quantum fluctuation of the vacuum and its immediate neighbor within the trajectory of nonlocally propagating information/energy. The cosmological constant problem being solved on this view through both current density of quantum correlation and density of quantum coherence (of each individual quantum fluctuation) being held below this same Planck mass or Penrosian one graviton limit. Inertial mass is thus seen as being intimately related to a kind of symmetry breaking of the quantum vacuum involving fluctuations in this vacuum’s stress-momentum-energy becoming classically correlated on top of being maximally quantum correlated (or more generally, where the sum of the densities and current densities of classical + quantum information exceeding the one graviton limit in the cases of quantum fluctuation and quantum teleportation, respectively) and so inertial mass is then entirely a function of classical information and therefore exclusively an artifact of distinctly classical as opposed to distinctly quantum physics. There is a coincidence between the definition of a classical black hole (in terms of escape velocity of a body being equal to

the speed of light, c.f., LaPlacian black holes) with the definition of a quantum black hole in the sense of yielding identical Schwarzchild black hole equations. The quantum black hole must be analyzed in terms of this conservation of entanglement concept of ours. . . say where quantum entanglement shifts from a mixture of spacelike and timelike to being exclusively spacelike, c.f., spin-0 fermion-antifermionic fluctuations vs. spin-1 bosonic fluctuations. Don't know why I didn't realize this earlier, but a fermion rotated 360 degrees only goes round a Mobius loop once and has to go around *twice* in order to reach its original orientation. I believe the Mobius twist is in the four space that the universe is expanding into. Take a strip of paper and make a Mobius strip by doing a half twist of the ends and taping them together. If a cut out of a tracing of a hand, say a left hand is slid along the Mobius strip loop one cycle, it comes out mirror reversed and must be slid around one more cycle on the Mobius strip or loop to come back to its original orientation in *3 dimensions*, this even thought the cut out and strip are two dimensional. But the Mobius strip has to be twisted through 3 dimensions to be constructed. So by analogy (adding a dimension) the rotation of the fermion by 720 degrees is analogous, but one must add one dimension so that the rotation takes place in four space. So rotating a fermion with a magnetic field by only 360 degrees must secretly be taking the fermion through a Mobius twist in four dimensional space. I think in this way the timelike nature of the fermion-antifermion pair can be proven and such a spin 0 vacuum fluctuation proven to be also purely timelike. My google search link (above) demonstrates that no one has really remarked about this - as the link produced "0 hits". Seems so obvious now though, right? So the existence of 4d-spacetime can be seen as proof of a pure 4d space as well, once quantum statistics of fermions is taken into account. What do you think? (How your face looks in your driver's license picture, for example wouldn't match with how you look in a mirror unless you were sent through this same 320 Mobius loop, by the way - hehe!)

There is a camp of molecular biologists who claim that the DNA/RNA/Protein system that currently exists and even that of the earliest most primitive kind is/was possessed of an "irreducible complexity", e.g., mousetrap. Like the net of Indra there had to be a kind of simultaneously arising of the entire system at some critical level of initial complexity. This may seem to suggest that the complexity of simple coherent biochemical systems must be abstractions from the top down rather than "concretions" from the bottom up. July 2011 If the substrate of being and change is one composed of information rather than say, independently existing particles (which are indifferent to the irreversible passage of time), then using a bottom-up approach to explain the evolution of complex systems would appear to be a stubborn oversight. This is similar to the notion of how the mind of Man descended from the transcendent through progressive limitation rather than upward from the immanent through a building up from combinations of the simplest components of matter, C, H, O, N, etc. There should be some kind of simple trig function of the angle of alignment (such as cosine of a double angle, etc.) of the virtual electron and positron spins in the virtual Cooper pair that could be an index of the degree of quantum entanglement or anticorrelation of the two spin1/2's. @$

The fact of the orientation of spin of a spin-1/2 particle being dependent upon the observer's choice of reference frame (in the sense of the choice of magnetic field direction) and indeterminate otherwise (unless you happen to have some classical information bits from a previous incarnation of the system that is) is somehow importantly connected with relativity. We of course must not lose sight of the peculiarity of the antisymmetry

of the fermionic wavefunction when trying to picture the relative spatial orientation (in the sense of relative mutual rotation of the spin +/- 1/2 of the electron and positron composing the same Cooper pair.) That is, if we are going to look for some spatial analogue for entanglement of spins, what we have termed "magnetization entanglement". Remember that you must rotate a fermion 720 degrees to get back the wavefunction you started with. A positron is an electron moving backward in time, suppose. So what's the minimum spacetime rotation for the electron and the positron which gives back the composite spin-0 particle (Cooper pair) with which one started? Might the physical remains as mere vacuum field initial and boundary conditions become entangled with the general boundary conditions of the larger environemnt, while the spectrum of vacuum fields with which the deceased person's brain once typically resonated and quantum entanglement must simply continue in the absence of those specific boundary conditions constituted by the person's quantum microtubule network? We should associate the structures of consciousness with the particular spectra of vacuum fields, which themselves probably have always been entangled to some degree with the vacuum at large. Momentum-energy is conserved and there are quantum numbers for momentum and energy, but spacetime as the complementary quantity, I suspected has no quantum number, i.e., it's not a conserved quantity and so, without a quantum of spacetime, we should not expect gravitons (or gravity waves, for that matter) to exist. Besides, we have spin-1/2 and spin-1, which is all we need to make particles of spin-0, spin-3/2 and spin-2, etc. There's no need for a fundamental spin-2 particle. Nature's conservative in that way. Spacetime may turn out to be more than an elegant and merely convenient metaphor, since the spacetime interval is conserved due to conservation of momentum energy and the complementary relationship of 3-momentum/space and time/energy, but acts much like a “conserved fluid” just as momentum-energy does.

Well, it looks like the relationships of polarization, P, magnetization, M and permittivity and permeability are just right, if you assume 0 magnetic and electric field strengths for the vacuum, i.e., and = 0 for vacuum (which seems reasonable) to support the idea of fermionic and bosonic entanglement being two different forms of a generalized quantum entanglement which is conserved. Entanglement conservation is probably more fundamental than mere probability conservation, since the exact quantum mechanical analogue for classical probability is sqrt[Psi x Psi*] where Psi is pure state wavefunction, while the generalization of this quantity is of course the density matrix where the phase relations of the components of the density matrix (and their temporal evolution) represents the distribution of quantum entanglement in the statistically mixed system. By Noether's theorem prn=there should be an underlying symmetry for quantum entanglement (QE) as a conserved quantity as well as a quantum number uniquely associated with QE. The symmetry may turn out to be ordinary spacetime symmetry (but of a deeper kind than that pointed up by mere momentum-energy vector or, stress-momentumenergy tensor). And of course the quantum number associated with QE symmetry must be the inverse of von Neumann entropy, which we'll call von Neumann information (in contrast to classical, digital or "Shannon information"). "POLARIZATION VECTORS. In the theory of the electromagnetic field: two vectors, P and M, given by P = D - eE and M = B/u - H, where D is the displacement, E the electric field strength, B the magnetic induction, H the magnetic field strength, and e and u the permittivity and permeability respectively in empty space." cit= Dictionary of Physics (1980) I wonder if we can take as a general principle for making up gedanken experiments about possible analogue (i.e., mechanical) models of gravitation the following: prn=See what happens to physical quantities in the vacuum when transforming to an accelerated reference frame and invoke Einstein's equivalence principle (both principles, strong and

weak, inertial mass = gravitational mass and gravitation equivalent to acceleration) in order to propose just these types of changes to these vacuum physical quantities as the underlying mechanism for sustaining a gravitational field. Is the change in configuration energy of the vacuum fields that must adjust in some way when a particle, such as a proton or muon is removed from the region of the vacuum? This is like thinking of the particle's inertial mass in terms of the mass equivalence of the particle's vacuum enthalpy. Kind of like calculating the 1st order propagator/state of a particle as a 1st order manifestation of the underlying vacuum field, by summing up all the 2nd order and all higher order corrections to the propagator? I kind of imagine the atoms composing any bit of matter, any mass as dynamically grouping themselves into composite bosons and fermions through a continual mutual exchange of quantum entanglement between these virtual "cells" and "domains" formed of arbitrary groupings of entangled atoms that are continually reconstituting themselves so as to maintain a kind of entanglement equilibrium, i.e., continual avoidance of squeezed states while maintaining overall conservation of entanglement throughout the bulk of the mass. However, upon acceleration, squeezed states form but in accordance with a kind of action or minimization principle that maintains a shifted thermodynamic equilibrium within the mass, i.e., some entropy is inevitably produced by acceleration. (Reversibility of time-independent Schrodinger equation deterministic evolution, foreseeable by the cosmic quantum vacuum CPU must break down, necessitating decoherence processes) And the net bulk entanglement within the mass shifts from spin-0 to spin-1 through a shift in the distribution of entanglement, mimicking what would be expected for a vacuum with equivalent gravitational potential (in terms of equivalent acceleration). A Rindler horizon (as a generalization of an event horizon) forms and Davies-Unruh radiation is observed that is consistent with the entropy of the newly formed Rindler horizon . . .

whew! Of course, the permeability and permittivity within the bulk matter also transform so that the speed of light within the mass changes to reflect the new vacuum that the mass sees (i.e., for example, polarization and “magnetization” of the quantum vacuum electromagnetic field) while under acceleration, and so on. . . I've been looking at this idea of the vacuum not gravitating. Force may be characterized as either time rate of change in 3-momentum or as space rate of change in energy (timelike 4-momentum, if your will). Notice that when a photon either falls into a gravitational potential or "climbs out" of one that the ratios, /\p//\t and /\E//\x are constant, implying that the vacuum exerts no force on the infalling or escaping photon. Notice also that the photon's 4-momentum is unchanged though climbing out of a potential and reshifting in the process. This is because the increase in the local velocity of light (i.e., acceleration of the photon) as the photon reaches regions of decreased potential (as the photon climbs out) is exactly offset by the decrease in the photon's frequency these act in opposing senses so that the photon's 4-momentum is conserved. I've also been thinking that the notion of Heisenberg uncertainty should be related more directly to the idea of relative decoherence of the timelike, spin-0 (virtual Cooper pair creation-annihilation) and spacelike, spin-1 (virtual boson exchanges within 3-space) components of the fluctuating quantum vacuum in a changing gravitational potential. I think that an increased /\p (uncertainty in 3-momentum) governing the decreased density of creation-annihilation of virtual Cooper pairs within a strong gravitational potential could be interpreted as an increased internal decoherence of the Cooper pairs' wavefunction (or density matrix) and the decreased /\E (uncertainty in imaginary 4-momentum) governing the increased density of virtual boson exchanges in this strong potential could be interpreted as a decreased, i.e., increased coherence, hence entanglement of these virtual bosons. This seems elegant and

invites more systematic thought about H-uncertainty and its relation to decoherence and entanglement in a gravitational potential relative to free space spacetime. April 2011

Decreased energy uncertainty allows less room for entanglement of virtual fermion-antifermion pairs. Similarly, increased momentum uncertainty allows for greater mutual quantum entanglement of virtual bosons. Question: if an electron and a positron mutually annihilate, the pair of photons produced will have perfect correlation of their polarizations, provided that the spins of the electron and positron were perfectly entangled so as to be anti-parallel. If the entanglement of the + or _ 1/2 spin of the electron and positron is 0, then the polarizations of the photons produced in the mutual annihilation shall be completely decohered, correct? If I'm right, then wouldn't this support the idea of there being a close relationship between entanglement of virtual Cooper pairs and virtual photons in a gravitational field, at least in essence, you know, in terms of the whole conservation of entanglement concept as applied to bosonic and fermionic vacuum fluctuations of momentumenergy, c.f., http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron-positron_annihilation

A dielectric medium has a reduced velocity of light because of the continual absorption and reemission of the photons as the photon passes through the medium. The decreased velocity of light in a vacuum where a strong gravitational field is present might be understood in a similar manner – the electron-positron creation-annihilations are of lower density in a gravitational field and so a photon must compensate by possessing a greater momentum uncertainty to bridge the gap created by the reduced energy uncertainty of this gravitational potential infused vacuum.

Mathew Brzezinski New York Times article about Military’s resistance to introduction of new warfighter technology. ^^ indexes passages or equations of interest Can you grant that the ratio of the Heisenberg energy uncertainty to the Heisenberg momentum uncertainty, /\E//\p ~ c? How about that /\p and /\E together form a 4-vector of momentum-energy uncertainty, which is Lorentz-invariant? (Note: we would expect in a non-symmetric gravitational field for there to be a stress-momentum-energy uncertainty tensor, nicht wahr?) Can you grant that the exchange of virtual photons between two electrons constitutes a fluctuation in the vacuum’s 3-momentum? It is also a fluctuation in the vacuum’s energy, but not of its 3-momentum? In this sense, the collective spin-0 fluctuations in the vacuum’s momentum-energy are orthogonal to the spin-1 (3-vector) fluctuations in vacuum momentum-energy. But this orthogonality of spin-0 and spin-1 vacuum momentum-energy fluctuations only obtains for the case of the so-called free space vacuum and constitutes a kind of quantum statistical basis for spacetime symmetry. By the way, since /\Q = [ - 2] with the first term under the radical being the fluctuation term and the second the square of the expectation value of Q, it follows that in the absence of matter, i.e., in vacuum, the Heisenberg uncertainty in Q, /\Q is identical to the fluctuation in Q. Now lets ask what happens to the ratio, /\E//\p when viewed from an accelerated reference frame. /\t dilates and /\x (in the direction of motion) contracts.

Given that

/\E/\p = h and /\p/\x = h, it follows that from the perspective of an accelerated reference frame, /\E contracts and /\p dilates (gets larger) The hypothesis here is that /\E and /\p mutually change when viewed from an accelerated frame of reference so as to represent a spacetime rotation of /\E and /\p as components of a conserved 4-vector. Now if /\E relativistically shrinks (remember in vacuum /\E is the fluctuation in the vacuum’s energy) and the incompatible observable (parameter), /\t dilates, then this can be represented consistently, I believe as a density of creation-annihilations for virtual Cooper pairs being reduced and therefore the frequencies of temporal processes, which fundamentally depend upon Heisenberg energy uncertainty must take place at a slower rate. Since /\E relativistically shrinks, by what has already been said, /\p the fluctuation in the vacuum’s 3-momentum, must increase and the density of virtual boson exchanges taking place within matter contained within this transformed vacuum must therefore increase as well, leading to an increase in the binding energy density of the mass, which is associated relativistically with an increase in mass. The reason I identify /\E with timelike fluctuations is because /\t is an incompatible Heisenberg uncertainty relative to /\E. And I interpret spin-0 (scalar) to be a timelike oriented vector, i.e., it’s really spin-1 though oriented parallel to the local time axis. I interpret spin-1 (3vector) to be a spacelike vector, it’s really spin-0, but oriented parallel to a spatial direction. Therefore, the transformation of space and time, contraction and dilation, which occurs when moving to an accelerated frame is paralleled by a transformation of 3-momentum and energy (conceived of as timelike oriented momentum or “imaginary” momentum – because of the Minkowski (+,+,+,-) signature of spacetime). The transformation is

otherwise known as a Lorentz boost. Magnetic and electric fields mutually transform, magnetization and polarization transform and the Heisenberg uncertainties in p and E, /\p and /\E transform after the fashion of a spacetime rotation of 4-momentum (4-momentum uncertainty in this case). The bulk properties of matter such as magnetization and polarization are entanglement driven and so the transformation of entanglement caused by acceleration should cause a transformation of the magnetic permeability and electric permittivity of the quantum vacuum through transforming the equilibrium magnetization and polarization of the free space vacuum. This is suggested by reviewing the basic formulas for polarization and magnetization, P = D - ; M = B – H/ Notice that an increasing polarization, P and a decreasing magnetization, M, which is to be understood as a spacetime rotation (in accordance with the relativistic formulation of Maxwell’s Equations). The question arises whether the expectation values of D and B, and in free space vacuum are indeed 0.

The basis for the thermal temperature distribution for Davies-Unruh radiation is the increased density of virtual boson exchange taking place between the bubbling virtual cooper pairs. Is the source of the entropy associated with the Unruh temperature the increased disorder of the previously (almost) perfectly antiparallel electron-positrons of each virtual cooper pair? In perfectly flat spacetime, there would be no selfPauli blocking and no virtual boson exchanges and no initial and boundary conditions – eternal universe of infinite size. The limit on the size, i.e., “mass” of quantum fluctuations of the vacuum

should determine the limit on mass of quantum states that can be superposed. Vacuum boundary conditions, which produce “compound fluctuations”, which cannot occur in the free space vacuum as simple fluctuations may now be understood to be fluctuation structures “in” the vacuum and not simply “of” the vacuum. It is at this stage in complexity where the system must be supposed to possess some independent information content. April 2011 Information is a quantity relative to the state of knowledge of the quantum vacuum understood as primary nexus of information processes. The information content of a system of correlated vacuum energy fluctuations is related to the induced lag in cosmic time necessarily involved in the system’s updating of its own state, as well as the vacuum’s updating of its image of the state of this fluctuation-correlation structure, c.f., fluctuation-dissipation theorem and entanglement decay. Can an event occur for two or more unrelated reasons similar to degeneracy in quantum mechanics? The imagination prompts us to form conceptions of things we could have conceived despite not possessing the words, however not in order to describe, but to trigger the network of otherwise consciously inaccessible associations – changes in consciousness necessarily go along with this polymath of metaphor generation that is largely unconscious. Magnetization of virtual Cooper pairs may be considered internal entanglement. External entanglement of virtual pairs may be described in terms of polarization of the virtual photons of the quantum vacuum. There is a fundamental difference between command and execution that is not sufficiently understood by proponents of hard AI (artificial intelligence). If you count the number of Planck areas that fit on the surface of a black hole or radius, R and apply Boltzmann’s formula for entropy,

considering each of these Planck areas to constitute a single bit of information, then can you get the correct value for the Hawking temperature of the hole in this way? I tend to think that all of the black hole’s information is contained on its surface, where the timelike collective spin-0 imaginary momentum fluctuations (in the form of creation-annihilation of Cooper pairs) has been completely transformed into spacelike 3-momentum fluctuations in the form of virtual photons promoted to being real photons radiated from the hole’s shrinking surface as black body radiation. Each photon emitted from the hole is purely thermal because representing the mutual annihilation of positron-electron pairs whose mutual spin-1/2 orientations have become totally disentangled. Although the electromagnetic spectrum of the hole’s emission is that of a black body, i.e., perfectly thermal, all of the entanglement information lost from the total decoherence of the virtual electron-positron pairs created and annihilated at the hole’s event horizon is retained in the polarization entanglement of the photons emitted from the hole’s event horizon. (This is our idea of quantum entanglement in the vacuum being a conserved quantity, related via Noether’s theorem to some symmetry – I insist this symmetry is quantum statistical in nature and is closely connected with spacetime symmetry itself. This is consistent with maximal red-shifting of the black hole’s thermal photon emissions (Hawking radiation) as viewed at infinity (where the hole’s potential = 0) and also consistent with a photon falling into the hole from infinity being infinitely blueshifted. All of the entanglement of in-falling photons with the progressively more entangled virtual photons of the vacuum e/m fluctuations that lie ever closer to the hole’s event horizon – in the sense of DeBroglie wave contraction with progressive virtual photon entanglement in the vacuum progressively closer to the hole’s event horizon. Well look at the surface of a black hole as the extreme case where decoherence, entropy and time dilation all occur together. When a virtual Cooper pair is spontaneously created just this side of the event

horizon, one component of the pair, let’s say in this case a positron, falls into the hole and its partner, the leftover electron, must mutually annihilate with another positron from an altogether different virtual Cooper pair that is also spontaneously created locally (relative to the unpartnered electron) and just this side of the event horizon – this represents 100% decoherence of the original Cooper pair in the sense of all entanglement information seemingly having been lost with the partner fermion that fell into the black hole. The entanglement information is really conserved and comes out of the mutual annihilation of the leftover partner virtual electron with the new virtual positron that was created as part of the newly created virtual Cooper pair. If spin-0 in “free space” spacetime is understood as timelike spin-1, then this same spin-0 particle becomes spacelike spin-1 very near the surface of the black hole. This is because space and time axes actually “swap” with one another between infinity (free space) and the surface of the black hole. That magnetization entanglement gets encoded in the form of the photon-antiphoton pair that results from this new pair’s annihilation. The photon-antiphoton pair is 100% Bose condensed and is therefore really a single photon, which is also entangled with all of the virtual photons presently (within /\t, which is virtually infinite at the event horizon, c.f., holographic principle) radiated from the black hole’s surface (event horizon). I believe this because I believe that there is maximal virtual photon Bose condensation at the black hole’s surface. As the two photons (now condensed into a single photon) radiate thermally from the hole’s surface in the form of Hawking radiation, this polarization entanglement (of all the photons radiated from the hole’s surface along with our particular condensed photon – around which our discussion is centered) will eventually be returned to the vacuum as progressive magnetization entanglement of virtual electron-positron pairs along the photon’s trajectory from the hole’s surface to infinity. There will be a 90o spacetime rotation in the photon traveling from the

hole’s event horizon to infinity. The spin-1 photon becomes spin-0 at infinity and is once again a virtual Cooper pair being successively created and annihilated. Also at infinity all of the polarization entanglement of the propagating Hawking radiation photons has been lost back to the vacuum in the form of a trail of enhanced vacuum magnetization entanglement of the virtual Cooper pairs that composed the trajectory of the photons in the form of 2nd order propagators for the escaping photons. Note that in moving from the surface of a black hole to infinity, the light cone tips back from its time axis oriented towards the hole’s center to being oriented away from the hole’s center. This represents a rotation of 180 degrees in space, but is in fact only a mutual rotation of the light cone’s space and time axes of 90 degrees! The oscillating electric and magnetic fields which compose a photon are 90 degrees out of phase with one another. I’ve often thought that the fact that you have to rotate a fermion by 720 o to get the original fermion wavefunction back is connected with the fact that there is a 360o spacetime rotation of the photon’s spin in taking the photon from infinity to the surface of a black hole and back again. That magnetization entanglement gets encoded in the form of the photon-antiphoton pair that results from this new pair’s annihilation. The photon-antiphoton pair is 100% Bose condensed and is therefore really a single photon, which is also entangled with all of the virtual photons being at that moment radiated from the black hole’s surface (event horizon). I believe this because I believe that there is a maximal virtual photon Bose condensation at the black hole’s surface. As the two photons (now condensed into a single photon) radiate thermally from the hole’s surface in the form of Hawking radiation, this polarization entanglement (of all the photons radiated from the hole’s surface along with our particular condensed photon – around which our discussion is centered) will eventually be returned to the vacuum as progressive magnetization entanglement of virtual electron-positron

pairs along the photon’s trajectory from the hole’s surface to infinity. There will be a 90 degree spacetime rotation in the photon traveling from the hole’s event horizon to infinity (“free space” spacetime, or “vacuum”). The spin-1 photon becomes spin-0 at infinity and is once again a virtual Cooper pair being successively created and annihilated. I’ve often thought that the fact that you have to rotate a fermion 720 degrees to get the original fermion wavefunction back is connected with the fact that there is a 360 degree spacetime rotation of the photon’s spin in taking the photon from infinity to the surface of a black hole and back again?

By examining kinematic effects upon Heisenberg uncertainties and quantum entanglement of Lorentz transformations, i.e., special relativity, we can via application of Einstein’s equivalence principle make perhaps less than misguided guesses at the fluctuation-correlation structure of the gravitating quantum vacuum. We should measure the relative decoherence of the e+e-, i.e., spin-0 and , i.e., spin-1 components of the vacuum in terms of the relative magnitude of /\E and /\p. In a gravitational potential an in—falling or escaping photon feels no “force” because both ratios, /\E//\x and /\p//\t are unchanging along the photon’s trajectory. The ratios, /\E//\p and /\x/\t do however change in opposite sense. In other words, the changing local velocity of light increases as the photon climbs up the gravitational potential at the same time as the length in the direction of the photon’s propagation expands which the photon’s frequency (as opposed to period) dilates. The photon accelerates as its frequency decreases. In this manner is the photon’s 4momentum conserved though propagating through a change in gravitational potential. To relate relative decoherence to spin-0 and spin-1 vacuum fluctuations, we must examine the /\E of 3-momentum fluctuations vs. the /\p of energy fluctuations, i.e., timelike p-uncertainty

of spacelike momentum fluctuations and spacelike p-uncertainty of timelike momentum fluctuations. Instead of spin and angular momentum, J = L + S, lets look at the underlying phase space within which J is interpreted as a 1-form and relate spacetime curvature to curvature of phase space. What about the relationship of N-dimensional configuration space to phase space which is in turn related to entanglement distribution and squeezed states, say of an extended coupled harmonic oscillator/crystal? Look at helicity of annihilating e+e- pair and helicity of resulting  pair. Barry Setterfield proposes that the ZPE, zero-point energy of the vacuum is the residual energy from the Big Bang, inflation, etc. If there is some dynamic energetic process distributed throughout the cosmos, which is decaying or otherwise changing with time, and this process affects the manner of light’s propagation, then we are likely to incorrectly estimate the variables entering into the equation describing this process if indeed we depend on information about the nature of light that is our only observational indicator of how this process is unfolding. Davies-Unruh temperature is 0 for inertially in-falling particles such as photons. One kind of vacuum entanglement for inertial motion and another for non-inertial motion. How much energy does it take to convert a gas of spin-1 bosons, e.g., photons into a gas of collective spin-0 Cooper pairs (100% quantum anti-correlated spins)? Hyperentanglement – the superposition of all superpositions – the context of all possible superpositions. Hyperentanglement is quantum entanglement that cannot be decohered by even infinite acceleration. Heuristics are necessary because learning and communication, even memory is always constructs that involve a dialectical process, which is to say a process that is not ground-independent.

The converse of the proposition that the self is a social construct is the proposition that the other is a projection of the self, Kantian Copernican Revolution (in reverse). Don’t wait for the experience to be past before it becomes a memory. This is an almost incoherent maxim in English. But in common, it is quite an elegant expression. Classical information is a subset of quantum information. So when I receive information from someone and my brain processes the sensory data carrying this information, my brain as a quantum computer simply changes its state of quantum entanglement with the quantum vacuum field with which its neural microtubules are in continual interaction. In this way, it is realized that I haven’t actually received any information from the other person at all. I’ve just received a set of instructions for downloading, if you will the appropriate nonlocally encoded signals that we might suppose were already there in the vacuum for perhaps a very long time and the circuits of my microtubule network have only just now been returned so as to receive them. The question arises as to whether the signals had to be originally put there by anybody (maybe by the person from whom I received the communication). December 2011 “Abstract. Quantum entanglement is shown to be the only acceptable physical solution to the binding problem. The biological basis of interneuronal entanglement is described in the frames of the β-neurexin-neuroligin model developed by Georgiev (2002) and is proposed novel mechanism for control of the neurons that are temporarily entangled to produce every single conscious moment experienced as present”, c.f., cit=Solving the binding problem: cellular adhesive molecules and their control of the cortical quantum entangled network. (Georgiev, 2003) Viewing a dielectric slab from the standpoint of an accelerated reference frame, not only the polarization and magnetization of the slab, but also the electric permittivity and magnetic permeability transform.

Polarization and magnetization quantum entanglement of spontaneously created and annihilated virtual photons and virtual fermion-antifermion pairs also undergo a continuum of Lorentz transformations. http://phys.org/news/2011-08-dark-illusion-quantum-vacuum.html At the event horizon of the black hole, an 100% swap has occurred of quantum entanglement of spin-1/2 composite of virtual composite spin-0 Cooper pairs (what might be termed magnetization entanglement) into the 100% polarization entanglement of virtual photons (photon pairs?). Rotating Clock Puzzle – when an apparent paradox stems from logic that is not thorough-going enough (this, however turned out not to be the case where “Gödel’s Paradox” was concerned). What was Gödel’s paradox, c.f., Wikipedia.org. The square end table clock reads, “6:15”. Turn the clock 90o clockwise and it now reads “9:30”, then turn the clock clockwise another 90o and the clock reads “12:45”. Turning the clock another 90o clockwise and the clock reads 3:00. Turn it once more and the clock once again reads “6:15”. This gives us a total of 13 hours. This is the paradox, which is easily enough solved when you realize that the hour hand is accumulating a retardation in its clockwise progression around the clock face of 15 minutes per ¼ turn. Can an idea which has no author, e.g., is stumbled upon by many independently of one another be a valuable spiritual teaching? When the density of virtual Cooper pairs is produced and (to conserved entanglement the density of virtual bosons is relatively enhanced we have a case in which a smaller density of changes in energy in controlling a larger density of changes in 3-momentum responsible for binding forces accounting for matter’s rigidity and inertia). Except for masses approaching black hole density, most of the 4-momentum of the mass remains imaginary and timelike. Time dilation and relativistic mass can be seen to be intimately related in terms of this cellular automata (CA) analogue model for GR. Should this CA model best be simulated on a classical or quantum computer?

Develop a piece of software that randomly shuffles test questions and answers and assigns each answer key individually to a student. If one student gets the same answers as another, then this will be proof positive of cheating, the number of distinct answer sequences being 10! for a 10question exam. Research which subscriptions and service contracts are most difficult to cancel, e.g., AOL and offer a web-based service of canceling and documenting cancellation of said service contracts. Self-Pauli blocking of spontaneously created and annihilated virtual Cooper pairs (partially decohered in the sense of impaired magnetization entanglement) within the fluctuating quantum vacuum constitutes perhaps the suppression of timelike quantum correlations of otherwise pure imaginary 4-momentum fluctuations. In this way quantum entanglement of timelike fluctuations in vacuum momentum-energy is transferred to quantum entanglement of spacelike fluctuations in vacuum momentum-energy. By the way, the speed of light would be infinite in the case of 100% magnetization entanglement of the spontaneously created/annihilated virtual Cooper pairs. Magnetic permeability and permittivity represent the bulk electromagnetic properties of the quantum vacuum that are owing to the relative polarization and magnetization entanglement of virtual bosons and virtual Cooper pairs continually and spontaneously created within the vacuum on account of the Heisenberg momentum and energy principles. Look at polarization and magnetization in a dielectric/diamagnetic medium and ,  for this medium with regard to entanglement of P and M in the medium. Look at generalized Lorentz force in terms of relativistic transformation of timelike B-field (E-field) into spacelike Bfield. Look at collective spin states/density matrices for e +e- for full range of possible entanglement of e+ with e- from the same Cooper pair.

IvonNeumann – Ishannon = Iq – Ic = Ie Iq = Iquantum Ic = Iclassical Ie = Ientanglement DNA represents classically encoded quantum information and quantum encoded classical information. Classical information – information about initial and boundary conditions. Quantum information – information about nonlocal objects encoded through quantum entanglement of vacuum fluctuations Distinguish from November 2013 http://arxiv.org/find/quant-ph/1/au:+Olson_S/0/1/0/all/0/1 (Authors have written many papers concerning timelike vacuum entanglement) Classical quantum and “robust” information, i.e., information that cannot decohere, e.g., say due to infinite accelerations. Coherent meme complexes both possess or exhibit and are predatory upon other coherent meme complexes, CMC’s are entity like. What do distributed nonlocal effects of EPR in curved spacetime have to say about local EPR effects in curved spacetime. Human nature is a reflection of divine nature or divine nature is a reflection of human nature? But it takes consciousness to even come to know what human nature is! If the photon spends part of its time as an electron-positron pair, then we

might suppose that the wavefunction describing such electron-positron pairs is identical with the vector potential of the propagating photon. As the photon “falls” into a gravitational potential it is entering a vacuum of progressively greater density of 3-momentum fluctuations, i.e., virtual photons with which therefore the photon increasingly interacts, meaning also progressive decoherence of the wavefunction of the photon or of its vector potential Au. This decoherence is manifest as increased entanglement of the falling photon with the succession of virtual photons along the photon’s trajectory. There is an associated increased mutual disentanglement of the virtual electron-positron pairs (that is, of each virtual pair’s component electron and positron parts) along the photon’s trajectory (and which constitute the timelike component of the photon’s propagator.) This may be alternately seen as the photon encountering, as it falls within the gravitational potential, a quantum vacuum that is progressively more polarized and less magnetized. This leads us to believe that the photon falling into the gravitational potential also enters a vacuum of progressively decohered virtual Cooper-paired electronpositrons. Note that the more decohered are the virtual Cooper pairs (in the sense of loss of mutual quantum correlation of the pairs’ component electron and positron parts), the less do the virtual electron and positron components of the Cooper pair exist as pure collective spin-0 (the spins of the electrons and positrons belonging to the same Cooper pair are no longer precisely anti-parallel or 100% quantum anti-correlated) and so there should be an enhanced self-Pauli blocking of virtual fermions/antifermions continuously being created and annihilated (and recreated and re-annihilated) by the quantum vacuum (at each spacetime point along the photon’s trajectory), that is, relative to the case of the free space vacuum. The increased mutual entanglement of the virtual photons along the path of the in-falling photon’s trajectory, which accounts for the gravitational blueshift of the in-falling photon through the change in DeBroglie wavelength of the entangled virtual photons, by the way may be understood as Bose condensation. Increased Bose condensation of (spin-1) virtual photons in conjunction with increased Pauli blocking of (spin-0) virtual Cooper pairs goes hand in hand with a shift in the density of the vacuum’s momentum-energy fluctuations from less

timelike, imaginary momentum fluctuations toward more spacelike 3momentum fluctuations. You can also look at this shift in momentumenergy components of the vacuum’s momentum-energy fluctuation matrix along the path of increasing gravitational potential as the photon experiencing a vacuum of increasing polarization and decreasing magnetization. Hmmmm. . . Hypotheses of my theory, which are not established by prior art: Imaginary momentum fluctuations are collective spin-0 100% quantum anti-correlated virtual spin +/- ½ fermions. In free space these imaginary momentum fluctuations constitute the vacuum’s energy density (as opposed to its pressure) such that /\E vac2 - /\px2 - /\py2 - /\pz2 = /\pimaginary2. When /\E’ > /\E, then /\E’//\p’ < /\E//\p such that c’ < c vacuo means in terms of the quantum noise in photonics model that less imaginary momentum fluctuations control more real or 3-momentum fluctuations. A reduced speed of light locally means that, locally virtual bosons are becoming more highly correlated and imaginary momentum fluctuations, less correlated. Photon trajectories in a gravitational field represent a conserved quantum entanglement and hence, a conserved Heisenberg uncertainty. Maybe there is a quantum information treatment of the old LeSage analogue theory of gravity, which can explain the effect of bulk matter upon the vacuum in terms of disrupting the quantum entanglement of the spin +/- ½ components of virtual Cooper pairs, e.g., electrons, muons, neutrinos, etc. If the quantum correlation of say virtual e -e+’s within a given small volume of quantum vacuum is essentially nonlocal though at the same time this nonlocal quantum correlation were locally mediated, then we might expect some sort of inverse-square law of the distribution of these correlations in terms of the local distribution of matter. What should we expect to happen to the density matrix describing a real Cooper pair, which falls into a say neutron star’s gravitational potential? It is the belief here that what happens to this density matrix over time, as the pair falls toward the neutron star is just a reflection of changes that a

comoving observer would observe for the density matrix describing virtual Cooper pair creation-annihilation along the trajectory of the falling real Cooper pair. In other words, gravity does not alter the QM statistics of vacuum fluctuations, but rather matter does this, and the altered QM vacuum statistics is what itself constitutes the gravitational field. Tom Van Flandern notes the following in hisweb= http://www.metaresearch.org/cosmology/speed_of_gravity.asp that “The rubber sheet analogy is represented as a way of visualizing why bodies attract one another. However, in that regard, it is highly defective. A target body sitting on the side of an indentation would stay in place, with no tendency to roll downhill, unless there were already a force such as gravity underneath the rubber sheet pulling everything downhill. And this failure of the analogy helps us identify the precise problem with the curved space-time description of gravity – the lack of causality. Without consideration of why a target body is induced to accelerate through space, and how quickly it receives updates of information about how to accelerate through space, neither the space-time curvature explanation nor the rubber sheet analogy can help us understand why gravity appears to act so much faster than light.” If causality is a subset of correlation, just a particular structure of vacuum fluctuations and their quantum correlations/entanglement, then perhaps the transmission of all Shannon (classical) information is secretly encoded as Von Neumann (quantum) information in the form of quantum correlations, both timelike and spacelike. One who appears mad if acting alone almost assuredly is mad. But the seeming mad fellow may indeed be acting thus in concert with others and in support of some group purpose so that appearances can be deceiving.

If quantum entanglement is viewed as the lines of quantum communication/information flow (governing the spacelike and timelike quantum correlation of vacuum fluctuations in vacuum momentumenergy) when viewing matter + vacuum as a quantum computing simulation, then for example, time dilation due to gravity may be understood in terms of decrease in quantum entanglement in time with associated increase in quantum entanglement in 3-space such that entanglement in (3 + 1) spacetime is a conserved quantity, c.f., au=Sachs’ concept of prn=“conservation of interaction”. au=

Vico thought we could be certain about what we construct, e.g., Law, Mathematics, Theology, etc. But consider that we must manipulate elements over which we lack complete control anytime we develop such human constructs. There has to be a nucleus of nonlocally correlated fluctuations that can serve as the basis of the observer within accelerated frames. Discuss integro-differential version of Zeno’s paradox. @$

Discuss why the psychological maladies associated with leaving Earth’s gravitational field only affect certain persons, e.g., in relation to Searle’s notion of zombies and the doctrine of divine election (science fiction short story idea). November 2013

I think an interesting premise for a science fiction story, somewhat in line with the popular myth of “ancient aliens” might be one of an impending doomsday scenario, which mankind finds itself quite helpless to forestall, e.g., massive asteroid impact, but from which he is rescued almost at the last minute (for dramatic effect, of course), when ancient planetary defenses awaken and spring into action, defenses originally installed by our safety-minded and far-seeing ancient alien mentors, for example a subterranean battery of particle beam cannons, which, just in the nick of time, in concert blast the approaching space rock to harmless bits. The accompanying idea here is that of a “prime directive” a la Star Trek that comes complete with a built-in exception

for handling special cases such as an impending planetary disaster. Might Gödelian noncomputable components of mind lie with this component that is impervious to the effects of decoherence. The infinite potential barrier, impervious to decoherence component of mind’s nonlocal quantum fluctuations and divine election vs. zombiehood. Degeneracy pressure opposes the positive feedback of Bose condensation of force-mediating exchange particles in a gravitationally collapsing dust cloud. How does virtual boson entanglement scale with the cosmological expansion and could this have any bearing on a timevarying gravitational constant? Coupled harmonic oscillator model for fermion-boson, scalar-vector or rather scalar-spinor-vector system, i.e., spin +/- ½, 0, 1 system. Spin-2 or “tensor” comes into play by virtue of perturbations of the quantum correlations between the spin-1/2 and spin-1 components of the system. Spin-2 is thus always derivative, i.e., gravity is an “effective field” or a “parasitic force” not unlike the van der Waals force. August 2011 An induced gravity theory a la Volovik offers the path to further unification of physical phenomena, namely that of gravity, dark matter, dark energy, Pioneer-anomalous acceleration field, discrete cosmological redshift, etc. Why is it wrong-headed to suppose that the Universe might be a simulation (for the same reason that solipsism is wrong-headed or the idea that one’s whole existence has been nothing more than a dream.) What “breathes fire” into the equations of physics? Why the physics, itself of course! But where exactly does the “physics itself” reside? It resides in the noncomputable (non-quantum-computer-simulable) substrate of the quantum vacuum. October 2011 So this then is the Litmus test of the reality of the Universe in contradistinction to it’s being merely a manifestation of, e.g., an “ancestor simulation”, namely that some its “physical processes” are noncomputable. On the other hand,

uncomputable correlations that consistently behave as though they underly a causal connection/connectivity where no causal relationship can be sussed from the observable phenomena might suggest the opposite case of our world in fact being an ancestor simulation. 3-way vacuum nonlocality and the “polymonotheistic” metaphysics. , The component of quantum entanglement that is ineradicable, i.e., that component that does not vanish even under infinite accelerations, must be fundamentally different than the much larger component of entanglement that degrades under uniform accelerations. This ineradicable component of quantum entanglement is probably that which never enters into intersubjective processes, but is responsible for the binding of mental contents and of the integrity of the individual consciousness in general. It is also that component which can never be analyzed in terms of causal relations such that the class of fluctuations and correlations that were created at the Big Bang is necessarily larger than that class of fluctuations and correlations that became nonlocally connected at this beginning point. Each individual consciousness is grounded in its own spectrum of nonlocally connected vacuum fluctuations. But there are fundamentally two distinct types of quantum correlated vacuum fluctuations, those which provide the ground of subjectivity, i.e., consciousness and those that provide the underlying ground of causal relations or potential causal relations. It is in the realm of potential causal relations where we have this interdomain of the two types of nonlocally correlated fluctuations. Paradoxically, it is the fact of the Heisenberg uncertainty principle’s being an ontological rather than an epistemological principle, which grants quantum systems their ontological observer independence. Strict causality must be compromised within an expanding spacetime where either vacuum energy or phase space are not conserved quantities,

c.f., email to Dan Van Gent concerning origin of 05/12/06, c.f., cit=Quantum Gravity by au=Lee Smolin.

prn=

Unruh radiation,

E & M can be seen to be incompatible observables through application of /\x/\p >= h to the case of static charge electric field and charge current magnetic field. Static charge implies it seems that /\x for e - = 0. /\xe- < /\x and /\t’ > /\t and also /\p’ > /\p and /\E’ < /\E. So Lorentz transformation transforms /\p and /\E as components of a four vector [/\pi, /\E] = /\pu. April 2011 Conversely, /\p and /\x as well as /\E and /\t transform in accordance with the Lorentz transformation because E and M do. Random field of quantum fluctuations averages to zero, but what if correlations are introduced into this fluctuation field? Wouldn’t we then expect nonzero average for pi and E? /\x implies uncertainty in the E-field, just as /\p implies uncertainty in the B-field. Could the 2.7o CMB radiation be an artifact of quantum entanglement mediated Unruh radiation? After all, it has been determined of late that the cosmological expansion is not uniform, but rather is accelerating – so that at least some component of the CMB must be Unruh radiation, implying a systematic error in estimating the age and size of the Universe ( as well as its matter density). The artist’s urge to create trusts in there being many like himself though in latent form, asleep and waiting the proper stimulus (provided by the artist’s own creative expression) to awaken. In the case of inertial motion there is a symmetry that implies that creation annihilation are balanced. Here causal relations are based in coherent quantum correlations of vacuum fluctuations. In the case of non-inertial motion, there is some decoherence of quantum correlations (phase relations) of vacuum (fermionic) fluctuations.

Mass can be defined in terms of the distribution of angular momentum within spacetime  J = mr. & & “You can’t get a different vacuum by simply building a superconductor.” We may follow Parmenides and imagine that all change is the result of unsuccessful attempts by mind to grasp the being of indeterminate (or infinite, Apeiron), c.f., approximation errors as fluctuations, c.f., perturbation theory. When considering the validity or soundness of an idea always remember to treat the idea as if it had not originated with oneself. In this way one can limit the bewitchment factor. Bohm’s analysis of causation in terms of fluctuations and their correlations implies the Lorenz invariance of the quantum vacuum as well as the constancy, which is to say in this context the observer independence of the velocity of light. His analysis may also imply an asynchronous cellular automata model of the vacuum. “I would hope that we scholars are not the ones who are hyping the document”, c.f., Marvin Meyer interview on the Gospel of Judas. Not that he has or does “hope that. . .” Does the subjunctive mood or tense function in the same way for the 1st person as it does for the 2nd, 3rd, etc. persons? According to the Southern Baptist doctrine of election, man is not capable of choosing God for the right reasons – he can only choose God for the pleasures of heaven and/or in order to escape the agonies of hell. In the vein of modern psychology, this is to say that man’s choice of God is structured as mere stimulus-response born of a mechanical or instinctive animal program of minimizing pain and maximizing pleasure. Man cannot choose God for moral reasons. This leaves open the question of whether Man can reject God for moral reasons, that is, for reasons of conscience? The validity of the Bible as a message from the transcendent and wholly other – as not stemming from Man himself – is

vouchsafed by the doctrine of election. epi=fcbk=That is, if Man lacks the moral sense and capacity to choose God, then the message of the Bible could have hardly been crafted by humankind. If Man does possess this moral sense, then whence does it originate? Reflections on Vernor Vinge’s and Ray Kurzweil’s notions of “singularity” as threshold where AI exceeds the grasp of HI (human intelligence) in relation to a fundamental characteristic of consciousness. One of the demarcators of conscious vs. unconscious is just this emergence of positive feedback of intelligence upon itself in terms of the boundary conditions to the consciousness altered by this field in the direction of the level of the individual. The point at which AI outstrips “HI” constitutes the emergence of this positive feedback (between intelligence and the conditions for intelligence) in Vinge’s “singularity”, i.e., this emergence at the level of the collective. February 2013 There is a new term in the lexicon of AI known as kwd=“Artificial General Intelligence” or AGI. It is likely that there is a contradiction at the heart of this new “concept” in terms of its inconsistency with respect to Gödel’s incompleteness theorems, the radically open-ended and creative nature of biological evolution (group rather than individual selection) and @$the notable absence of a concept of consciousness (in terms of general property attribution as the basis of abstract category construction). Platonist mathematics, perhaps further motivated by Gödel’s Consistency and Incompleteness Theorems suggests that @$there may indeed be a concept of consciousness, but not by construction. A concept, class or general category of consciousness may be an inborn feature of being so to speak wherein the various instances of consciousness automatically and concretely self-identify as instantiations of the concept. This is consistent with the notion that consciousness as inherently subjective, cannot be intersubjectively defined (@$note the contradiction in terms of defining the infrasubjective in terms of the inter-subjective). (related to the “déjà vu” experience)  Birds and Bunnies hippy  modern day hippy girl. Common sounding phrase that is on

everyones tongue in some parallel universe. There is choice in how consciousness abstracts from its own dynamic substance. As in all abstraction, subtler linkages of dynamic control (linking existent abstract entities to their engendering/supporting ground) are disrupted, and yet we are supposed to accept the possibility of, not to mention the formal/relational boundedness of) the artificial or abstract entity being reconstituted by its own artifacts complete with those artifacts’ collection of less subtle interactions – this is what lies at the heart of the notion of our one day engineering a conscious AI. The emergence of consciousness within slowly evolving primate brains must then be considered the . . . “Déjà vu” happens “when they change something in the Matrix” – there may indeed be a kernel of insight here that goes beyond the classical explanation of the “misfiling” of a short term memory into long term memory, where this memory possesses no cross-referencing with other memories filed in short term memory which possess the same or similar “time stamp”. Paranoia and quantum solipsism (“quantum immortality”) – as the individual’s subjective consciousness moves from one parallel universe to the next, the discontinuities in his memory find no support in the discontinuities of intersubjective memory (see analogy of military/corporate “brat” who was forced while growing up to move frequently from one neighborhood and school system to the next) (How one’s biography conditions one’s contributions to philosophy, c.f., biography of Eric Erickson). “A chameleon’s eyeballs swivel on two different axes as we can’t even remotely imagine what a flower looks like to a chameleon,” c.f., Google. A good philosophical essay topic would be goo=scribd=“why I am not a brain in a vat.” ^^ indexes passages or equations of interest

/\P x /\Q >/= h and P, δQ < /\P, /\Q are not measurable. This is equivalent to saying that δP and δQ cannot be causally manipulated, that is, in accordance with a computable program. Back-reaction upon the field cannot be in intersubjective terms. Do noncomputable processes underlie all computable processes? Computable as the boundary/boundary condition to/upon the noncomputable. Can abstract or formal symbols evoke the fundamentally open-ended process by which they were abstracted from noncomputable processes? And would something like this be the only way that the project of “hard AI” has any real prospects? Types of quantum correlations of fluctuations composing the spectra of /\P and /\Q where /\P/\Q >/= h. /\P   /\P, /\P  /\Q, /\Q   /\Q Anti-self-correlations? We must depart from strict conservation of momentum-energy when stress becomes significant and must be taken into account: p   T. Does a shift in the correlation-fluctuation spectrum underlie the transition, p  T? Discuss the impersonal nature of mutual attraction of prospective mates. ^^Essay idea: “The Lesson of the Wavefunction” The individual particle behaves just like the statistical ensemble. September 2013 (This is likely an artifact, if you will, of the quantum principle of the indistinguishability of fundamental (or, more generally, “quantum” particles). Real particles sufficiently isolated behave as though virtual until placed under continual observation.

The vacuum becomes progressively more electrically polarized and less magnetized, but can this be understood in terms of increases in both the magnetic permeability and electric permittivity and not due to specific electromagnetic action but as a side effect of changing the timelike and spacelike components of quantum correlations in bosonic and fermionic quantum fluctuations? @$

If experimentally measured particle masses are due to the energies of these particles as excitations of the vacuum Hamiltonian, then particle mass defined in this manner may only be consistent with the inertial mass of the particle (as reluctance of the vacuum Hamiltonian to become progressively excited along a spacetime trajectory), if the unperturbed vacuum possessing spacetime symmetry be composed of bosonic and fermionic fluctuations which together cancel out to some vanishingly small value for a cosmological constant, representing the local effect upon the vacuum of global gravitation. What follows is a reprint from elsewhere in this document: “Ziad, I thought that on a Friday, I'd give you something to puzzle over.” “OK, you begin accelerating in a spaceship along the x-direction. Question: does this affect the velocity of the ship along the y- or zdirections? Well, normally in a "vacuum" the answer is "no." However, imagine for a moment that the spaceship is accelerating through what we might term here an "active medium", say a medium able to induce drag where the amount of drag is governed by a kind of stress-strain-shear medium resistance tensor. And how the medium is interconnected between x- with y- and z-directions would determine the resistance put up by the medium as a result of a body's acceleration through the medium along the x-direction. Well, think about how as an object accelerates, it travels ever slower through time, the faster it moves through space. Space and time in socalled "free space" are mutually perpendicular so how can accelerating along the x-direction in space cause a deceleration along the ictdirection?

(Just think about how the range of a projectile can be calculated without explicit reference to the acceleration of gravity which is always perpendicular to the forward momentum of the projectile down range. ) Unless "free space" isn't "free" at all, but is part of an intrinsically "warped" spacetime. This is a Machian idea of course that in genuinely free space, i.e., within a truly "flat" 4-dimensional spacetime, objects should not be expected to present any resistance to our attempt to accelerate them! “The Machian idea is basically this: inertia in "free space" (flat spacetime) is a manifestation of the interaction of bodies interaction with the gravitational field of the Universe.” There has to be some kind of tensor field (of at least 2 nd rank), which connects the 3momentum and imaginary 4-momentum fluctuations of the vacuum in order to connect the orthogonal space and time axes to enable changes in imaginary 4-momentum in response to changes in 3-momentum. In this way increases in relativistic mass and time dilation are seen to be “opposite sides” of the same physical process underlying the reaction of spacetime or its vacuum to accelerations, i.e., increase in /\p in conjunction with decrease in /\E such that the density of vector boson exchanges (mediating binding energy and hence mass) increases, while the density of scalar boson (virtual Cooper pair) creation-annihilations decrease (mediating changes in energy and hence time). In light of developments in “induced gravity theory” @$it might be more appropriate to think of Machian gravitation as caused by the mass’ interaction with the quantum vacuum so as to produce a gravitational field when the mass is in inertial motion and an inertial field when the mass is in noninertial motion. (Or we can consider changing mixtures of inertial and gravitational mass, depending upon the dynamics). @$

Of course, if local gravitational fields are present, then the body must also interact with this local field in addition to the Universe's g-field and hence the effective inertial mass of the body would be expected to be larger for a mass present near a massive body (and general relativity can

predict

just

how

large

this

effect

is).

Otherwise, I just @$can't see how acceleration along "x" can affect motion along "ict" without such an intrinsic coupling of time and space as befits a universal/global gravitational field. What Russell”

do

you

think?

Whenever there opens up a break in the causal chain and one at some level realizes this, there lies one’s true moral responsibility. Also, even without such a break in the chain of deterministic action, if one merely has inside knowledge, e.g., awareness of the sensitivity in initial conditions, c.f., awareness of the sensitivity in initial conditions, c.f., chaos theory, catastrophe theory, etc. there too does one bear the burden of moral responsibility, e.g., “I saw the bus coming from my vantage point around the corner from where you were about to cross the street and I did not warn you!” If you are hit by the bus is my culpability as great as if I had pushed you into the bus’ path, to with, are sins of omission as great as those of commission, if the responsible party in both instances, if equally aware of the harmful outcome and equally able to intervene? The argument could be made that, in the case of the oncoming bus, the culpability is actually greater for the person who failed to act – as the person who to the positive action to cause harm must have been at that time under the grip of a powerful impulse or compulsion. But society and its ethical mores and legal system do not understand the distinction between omission and commission in this way. Why not? What kind of blindness is at work here, c.f., the moral blindness that prevents most people nowadays from glimpsing the horror of abortion in the United States. We know that there can be no genuine creativity in evolution. For otherwise this would imply that the self-organizing properties of atoms and molecules are back-reacted upon and change by the progress of

complexity of life forms. Initial and boundary condition as well as causal relationships cannot be merely constraints upon quantum fluctuations and their conditions. ^^ indexes passages or equations of interest

The artist’s urge to create trusts in there being many like himself though in latent form, asleep and waiting the proper stimulus (provided by the artist’s own creative expression) to awaken. In the case of inertial motion there is a symmetry that implies that creation an annihilation are balanced. Here causal relations are based in coherent quantum relations are based in coherent quantum correlations of vacuum fluctuations. In the case of non-inertial motion, there is some decoherence of quantum correlations (phase relations) of vacuum (fermionic) fluctuations. Mass can be defined in terms of the distribution of angular momentum within spacetime  J = mr. & & “You can’t get a different vacuum by simply building a superconductor.” We may follow Parmenides and imagine that all change is the result of unsuccessful attempts by mind to grasp the being of indeterminate (or infinite, Apeiron), c.f., approximation errors as fluctuations, c.f., perturbation theory. When considering the validity or soundness of an idea always remember to treat the idea as if it had not originated with oneself. In the way one can limit the bewitchment factor. Bohm’s analysis of causation in terms of fluctuations and their correlations implies the Lorenz invariance of the quantum vacuum as well as the constancy, which is to say in this context the observer independence of the velocity of light. His analysis may also imply an asynchronous

cellular automata model of the vacuum. “I would hope that we scholars are not the ones who are hyping the document”, c.f., Marvin Meyer interview on the Gospel of Judas. Not that he has or does “hope that. . .” Does the subjunctive mood or tense function in the same way for the 1st person as it does for the 2nd, 3rd, etc. persons? According to the Southern Baptist doctrine of election, man is not capable of choosing God for the right reasons – he can only choose God for the pleasures of heaven and/or in order to escape the agonies of hell. In the vein of modern psychology, this is to say that man’s choice of God is structured as mere stimulus-response born of a mechanical or instinctive animal program of minimizing pain and maximizing pleasure. Man cannot choose God for moral reasons. This leaves open the question of whether Man can reject God for moral reasons, that is, for reasons of conscience? The validity of the Bible as a message from the transcendent and wholly other – as not stemming from Man himself – is vouchsafed by the doctrine of election. That is, if Man lacks the moral sense and capacity to choose God, then the message of the Bible could have hardly been crafted by humankind. If Man does possess this moral sense, then whence does it originate? Reflections on Vernor Vinge’s notion of “singularity” as threshold where AI exceeds the grasp of HI (human intelligence) in relation to a fundamental characteristic of consciousness. One of the demarcators of conscious vs. unconscious is just this emergence of positive feedback of intelligence upon itself in terms of the boundary conditions to the consciousness altered by this field in the direction of at the level of the individual. The point at which AI outstrips “HI” is the emergence of this positive feedback (between intelligence and the conditions for intelligence) in Vinge’s “singularity”, i.e., this emergence at the level of the collective. (related to the “déjà vu” experience)  Birds and Bunnies hippy 

modern day hippy girl. Common sounding phrase that is on everyones tongue in some parallel universe. There is choice in how consciousness abstracts from its own dynamic substance. As in all abstraction, subtler linkages of dynamic control (linking existent abstract entities to their engendering/supporting ground) are disrupted, and yet we are supposed to accept the possibility of not to mention formal/relational boundedness) being reconstituted by its own artifacts complete with those artifacts’ collection of less subtle interactions – this is what lies at the heart of the notion of our one day engineering a conscious AI. The emergence of consciousness within slowly evolving primate brains must then be considered the . . . “Déjà vu” happens “when they change something in the Matrix” – there may indeed be a kernel of insight here that goes beyond the classical explanation of “the mis-filing” of a short term memory into long term memory” where this memory must possess no cross-referencing with other memories filed in short term memory with the same or similar “time stamp”. Paranoia and quantum solipsism (“quantum immortality”) – as the individual’s subjective consciousness moves from one parallel universe to the next the discontinuities in his memory find no support in discontinuities of intersubjective memory (see analogy of military/corporate “brat” who was forced while growing up to move frequently from one neighborhood and school system to the next) (How one’s to biography conditions one’s contributions to philosophy, c.f., biography of Eric Erickson). “A chameleon’s eyeballs swivel on two different axes as we can’t even remotely imagine what a flower looks like to a chameleon,” c.f., Google. A good philosophical essay topic would be “why I am not a brain in a vat.” /\P x /\Q >/= h and P, δQ < /\P, /\Q are not measurable. This is equivalent to saying that δP and δQ cannot be causally manipulated, that is, in accordance with a computable program. Back-reaction upon the field cannot be in intersubjective terms. Do noncomputable processes

underlie all computable processes? Computable as the boundary/boundary condition to/upon the noncomputable. Can abstract or formal symbols evoke the fundamentally open-ended process by which they were abstracted from noncomputable processes? And would something like this be the only way that the project of “hard AI” has any real prospects? Types of quantum correlations of fluctuations composing the spectra of /\P and /\Q where /\P/\Q >/= h. /\P   /\P, /\P  /\Q, /\Q   /\Q Anti-self-correlations? We must depart from strict conservation of momentum-energy when stress becomes significant and must be taken into account: p   T. Does a shift in the correlation-fluctuation spectrum underlie the transition, p  T? Discuss the impersonal nature of mutual attraction of prospective mates. ^^Essay idea: “The Lesson of the Wavefunction” The individual particle behaves just like the statistical ensemble. Real particles sufficiently isolated behave as though virtual until placed under continual observation. The vacuum becomes progressively more electrically polarized and less magnetized, but can this be understood in terms of increases in both the magnetic permeability and electric permittivity and not due to specific electromagnetic action but as a side effect of changing the timelike and spacelike components of quantum correlations in bosonic and fermionic quantum fluctuations? If experimentally measured particle masses are due to the energies of these particles as excitations of the vacuum Hamiltonian, then particle

mass defined in this manner may only be consistent with the inertial mass of the particle (as reluctance of the vacuum Hamiltonian to become progressively excited along a spacetime trajectory) if the unperturbed vacuum possessing spacetime symmetry be composed of bosonic and fermionic fluctuations which together cancel out to some vanishingly small value for a cosmological constant representing the local effect upon the vacuum of global gravitation. What follows is a reprint from elsewhere in this document: “Ziad, I thought that on a Friday, I'd give you something to puzzle over. OK, you begin accelerating in a spaceship along the x-direction. Question: does this affect the velocity of the ship along the y- or zdirections? Well, normally in a "vacuum" the answer is "no." However, imagine for a moment that the spaceship is accelerating through what we might term here an "active medium", say a medium able to induce drag where the amount of drag is governed by a kind of stress-strain-shear medium resistance tensor. And how the medium is interconnected between x- with y- and z-directions would determine the resistance put up by the medium as a result of a body's acceleration through the medium along the x-direction. Well, think about how as an object accelerates, it travels ever slower through time, the faster it moves through space. Space and time in socalled "free space" are mutually perpendicular so how can accelerating along the x-direction in space cause a deceleration along the ictdirection? (Just think about how the range of a projectile can be calculated without explicit reference to the acceleration of gravity which is always perpendicular to the forward momentum of the projectile down range. ) Unless "free space" isn't "free" at all, but is part of an intrinsically "warped" spacetime. This is a Machian idea of course that in genuinely free space, i.e., within a truly "flat" 4-dimensional spacetime, objects should not be expected to present any resistance to our attempt to accelerate them! “The Machian idea is basically this: inertia in "free

space" (flat spacetime) is a manifestation of the interaction of bodies interaction with the gravitational field of the Universe.” In light of developments in “induced gravity theory” it might be more appropriate to think of Machian gravitation as caused by the mass’ interaction with the quantum vacuum so as to produce a gravitational field when the mass is in inertial motion and an inertial field when the mass is in noninertial motion. Of course, if local gravitational fields are present, then the body must also interact with this local field in addition to the Universe's g-field and hence the effective inertial mass of the body would be expected to be larger for a mass present near a massive body (and general relativity can predict just how large this effect is). Otherwise, I just can't see how acceleration along "x" can affect motion along "ict" without such an intrinsic coupling of time and space as befits a universal/global gravitational field. What Russell

do

you

think?

Whenever there opens up a break in the causal chain ad one at some level realizes this, there lies one’s true moral responsibility. Also, even without such a break in the chain of deterministic action, if one merely has inside knowledge, e.g., awareness of the sensitivity in initial conditions, c.f., awareness of the sensitivity in initial conditions, c.f., chaos theory, catastrophe theory, etc. there too does one bear the burden of moral responsibility, e.g., “I saw the bus coming from my vantage point around the corner from where you were about to cross the street and I did not warn you!” If you are hit by the bus is my culpability as great as if I had pushed you into the bus’ path, to wit, are sins of omission as great as those of commission, if the responsible party in both instances, if equally aware of the harmful outcome and equally able

to intervene? The argument could be made that, in the case of the oncoming bus, the culpability is actually greater for the person who failed to act – as the person who committed the positive action to cause harm must have been at that time under the grip of a powerful impulse or compulsion. But society and its ethical mores and legal system do not understand the distinction between omission and commission in this way. Why not? What kind of blindness is at work here, c.f., the moral blindness that prevents most people nowadays from glimpsing the horror of abortion in the United States. We know that there can be no genuine creativity in evolution. For otherwise this would imply that the self-organizing properties of atoms and molecules are back-reacted upon and change by the progress of complexity of life forms. Initial and boundary condition as well as causal relationships cannot be merely constraints upon quantum fluctuations and their conditions. April 2011 This would prevent the possibility for the genuine emergence of order as opposed to the revealing or enabling of preexistent latent order. Suppose the universe is a black hole (is of critical density so that spacetime is considered “flat”) that is undergoing cosmological expansion. The mass of the universe must then increase as you pointed out ( I suppose this increase is reckoned from infinity). If the density of the zero-point energy inside the hole is decreasing while in interaction with the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, then during the time that an energy fluctuation lasts the zero-point has every so slightly decreased and so not all of the energy borrowed from the vacuum during the lifetime of the fluctuation need be paid back. So here to is a mass generation mechanism. We now have the basis for a new equation of two time rates of change in mass – one cosmological and the other quantum. So the zero-point energy of the vacuum doesn’t possess any inertial mass until something is done with this energy (within the context of a curved spacetime, expanding or contracting). This equation may perhaps point to some new physics or at least help reassure us that it is only

differences in vacuum energy density that are gravitational and inertially significant. How is a series of vacuum fluctuations nonlocally connected fundamentally distinct from a series which is simultaneous (the components of the series, one to another) only in a unique Lorentz frame? Does causal connection transcend mere quantum correlation (somewhat contrary to the spirit of David Bohm’s observations on the subject, perhaps). . . rather than being merely a subclass thereof – in the sense of exceeding the one-graviton, Planck mass virtual black hole limit? In other words, can a set of nonlocally-connected quantum fluctuations only successfully model causality up to but not including the onegraviton limit? The riddle of the would-be gravity and inertia of the quantum vacuum, i.e., the cosmological constant riddle is intimately bound up with this consideration. Perturbation of the action of the vacuum state that cannot be treated pertubatively, i.e., as a summation of plane waves (non-interacting particles) is precisely the point at which spacetime is obliged to curve. Note that “particle” is an ill-defined notion in strongly curved spacetimes. Rather than decoherence being an effect of gravitation, it seems more logical to suppose that gravity is a special case of decoherence processes within the quantum vacuum. Because causal relationships are always describable in terms of sets of differential equations, these relationships must be supposed to inhere within a continuously differentiable manifold of determinate topological structure. Alterations in the topology of a continuously differentiable manifold cannot be described by a set of differential equations definable on the original manifold. This is why we do not expect that the energies of the submicroscopic topological fluctuations comprise a contribution to a gravitational source term in the Einstein field equations. A supermanifold must ground the transformation of one topology into another nonequivalent topology such that this topological inequivalence

is ultimately reducible within the supermanifold of higher order topological structure which remains constant throughout the lower order topological transformation. The formalism of General Relativity is not equipped to describe such a topological supermanifold. This reminds us of attempts to ground the discontinuous change in the wavefunction which in between measurements evolves deterministically according to the Schrödinger equation of motion in terms of some nonlinear time-dependent version of the S-eqn. Notice that the transformation of one topology into a nonequivalent one necessitates a breaching of the original topological manifold introducing discontinuities which prevent the existence of any bridge functions being defined mediating the transformation which possess continuous differentiability. No consistent solutions to a given set of differential equations exists if the only possible solutions are functions which are themselves not continuously differentiable. All topological transformations must be described in terms of bridge functions which cannot be defined on the manifolds being transformed and so all topological transformations must be mediated from outside all manifolds of determinate topological structure taking part in the topological transformations. Since a metric presupposes an embedding topological manifold, geometrodynamic fluctuations in spacetime topology cannot be described within general relativity theory. Nor should they collectively contribute to a single vacuum state possessing an inertial mass equivalence, which we then need to account for in our attempts to solve the cosmological constant riddle, i.e., “non-gravitating” quantum vacuum. Projections of topological transformations in a given space onto a subspace may present the appearance of non-topological transformations within the smaller space. If a chance event yields meaning and significance, it is only because of a common, underlying (concrete) ground of the two things connected. The truly concrete, that is, the ultimate ground of Being, cannot be divided, but can only appear so. To entertain the notion of two separate grounds, themselves possessing no underlying and still more ultimate ground connecting them in the sense

of making them, one with the other, (substantially) continuous, is to set up definitions in a manner which invites self-contradiction. We know that the action by which the continuum of space and time are constituted presupposes a kind of temporality, but one without scale or direction in which the connectivity of the pre-phenomenal is internal but at once without boundaries. Just musing a little here. given a constant mass of particles in a volume, V with a collective mass, M in which this volume is uniformly expanding, the density of the volume should decrease with the inverse cube. But if the particles are themselves energy fluctuations continuously being created and destroyed and recreated and so on. . . , then we would expect that the number density of these fluctuations to decrease with the inverse cube as the wavelengths of the particles stretch in accordance with the changing length scale dictated by the uniform expansion of the space in which the fluctuations continually occur. These fluctuations collectively are the vacuum zero-point field, which thusly decreases with the inverse fourth power with uniform expansion of the volume containing this vacuum energy. Now if the vacuum energy constitutes the “calibration 0” against which the collective mass of massive particles contained within the expanding volume is to always be reckoned, then the mass density (something we’re for the time being assuming is different from the vacuum energy density) should effectively decrease with the inverse square (just as in the case of an expanding black hole). To wit, the density of particles decreases with the inverse cube and the vacuum energy against which the mass of the massive particles is measured decreases with the inverse fourth power. Intuitively it is easy to see that a very long lived, long wavelength vacuum fluctuation shall be stretched by the expansion somewhat during the lifetime of the fluctuation and so when its energy is “paid back” to the collective vacuum state, not as much energy has to be paid back as was originally borrowed when the vacuum fluctuations began - in order to satisfy the Heisenberg uncertainty principle and energy conservation.

Where did the component of energy go that didn’t have to be paid back? It went into the creation of additional mass of the massive particles participating in the overall cosmological expansion. This is how I reconcile the two types of mass increase so as to show that they are one and the same, just looked at from opposite ends of the telescope, if you will, quantum versus cosmological. The black hole mass-radius relationship then may be just the natural outcome, cosmologically of a closed expanding spacetime. Pushing together a lot of mass through the Pauli Exclusion Principle for fermions and the “Pauli Inclusion Principle” for bosons in the extreme case recapitulates this cosmological structure, when the increasing mass density (as more and more mass is piled together within smaller and smaller volume) causing the collapsing mass to effect a continual local reduction (within the decreasing volume of the collapsing mass) in the vacuum energy within the decreasing volume and against which the collapsing mass’ energy must be continually recalibrated so that the mass relativistically increases, eventually forming a local (as opposed to a global black hole). From: Daniel Van Gent [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2006 11:52 AM To: Russell S Clark; Ziad Fahd Subject: Mobius loops and entanglement Hi Russ, Now, let's say that we "create" two entangled particles or photons. Must the two particles now "catch a ride" on two "chain-linked" Mobius loops, each heading off in different "directions?" Or do the particle potentials occupy the entire "linked" double Mobius loop? That is the only way I can see "quantum teleportation of state" to another particle across the universe. These linked Mobius loops would have to be in existence BEFORE the two photons happen to catch a ride on it in order to explain observed quantum entanglement phenomenon. This makes sense to me because the creation of local quantum entanglement probably comes about through tapping preexistent global quantum entanglement such that probability and quantum entanglement and information is conserved. However, information is

not conserved for quantum entanglement involving superpositions of quantum states that are separated by more than a Planck mass – this would correspond to the superposition of distinct quantum vacua, which is absolutely ruled out in quantum field theory – you can only do this within the very limited boundary conditions set by the locally prevailing Heisenberg energy uncertainties. But within the bounds set by quantum uncertainty, I would agree that local quantum entanglement is created by borrowing from preexistent global quantum entanglement, i.e., quantum entanglement of states of the same vacuum state, i.e., of quantum entangled vacua with an energy spread smaller than a Planck mass. April 2012 (This implies a means of reconciling conservation of quantum information with leaving room for emergence in the sense of the creation of genuinely new information, which may indeed be already included in the component of the vacuum that is constitutive of causal spacetime and so never locally or intersubjectively accessible. What is the term we should use to designate that component of the objective, which is not intersubjective, i.e., includes but always “transcends” the intersubjective? ). In this way, causality is exhaustively described in terms of quantum correlations of quantum fluctuations (within the self-same vacuum state). We consider the long standing problem in field theories of bosons that the boson vacuum does not consist of a `sea', unlike the fermion vacuum, c.f, http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0312302 April 2012 “We show with the help of supersymmetry considerations that the boson vacuum indeed does also consist of a sea in which the negative energy states are all “filled”, analogous to the Dirac sea of the fermion vacuum, and that a hole produced by the annihilation of one negative energy boson is an anti-particle. Here, we must admit that it is only possible if we allow —as occurs in the usual formalism anyway— that the “Hilbert space” for the single particle bosons is not positive definite. This might be formally coped with by introducing the notion of a double harmonic oscillator, which is obtained by extending the condition imposed on the wave function. This double harmonic oscillator includes not only positive energy states but also negative energy states. We utilize

this method to construct a general formalism for a boson sea analogous to the Dirac sea, irrespective of the existence of supersymmetry. The physical result is consistent with that of the ordinary second quantization formalism”, c.f., au= cit= Habara, Nielsen, Ninomiya, http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0312302v3. During noncoherent photon production by electron cascade, such as in an ordinary light bulb, only about 2 in 10^11 phtons created by the light bulb are considered entangled with one another. Are these linked loops then relatively "rare" or must the lucky entangled photon pair have special properties in order to "catch a ride" on two linked Mobius loops? Maybe it is both of those possiblities! The “special property” is both photons derived from the same vacuum state, i.e., they are entangled because they are both entangled with the same vacuum state to begin with. I suppose some kind of dimensionless ratio, say of two different vacuum energy densities (cosmological constant divided by Planck density in the extreme case!) might come into play in calculating the probability of two photons - of a given wavelength, separated by a certain spacetime interval between the two quantum uncertain spacetime points at which created, being 100% quantum correlated. Now, I imagine an atom. I can envision the atom as many nested fractal Mobius loops all interconnecting with one another so that everything in the atom is "self-entangled." Now, would the Pauli exclusion priciple mean that only one loop can be occupied by two electrons at a time with opposite "spins?" In this case, the spin would just be a result of which of two directions the respective electrons are moving within the loop. Yes, that smacks of good common sense/intuition. I buy that idea. Now, spontaneous fission of the nucleus occurs and must surely cause a "breaking" of about half of the loops from one another (although fission products of the original nucleus are thought to remain entangled for a brief period of time). What makes the nucleus unstable? Is there a "loose end" of a broken Mobius loop flying in the vacuum flux breeze which when tugged causes the original nucleus to "unwravel" into two nuclei?

Distinct topologies cannot be “grounded” in the very same spacetime. Clearly open and closed loops possess distinct topology, just as twisted and non-twisted loops possess distinct topologies. Distinct topologies then cannot be superposed and any superposition of quantum states that threatens branching into to two or more topologies for the system shall collapse “under its own weight”, if you will. This is not an answer, but a consideration in relation to your question. Benni Reznik has a lot to say about vacuum nonlocality and Lorentz transformations of entanglement. You diagram makes sense if, instead of Lorentz transformations, you think in terms of progressively greater accelerations, from say Hc (Hubble’s constant times the speed of light), that is to say, the cosmological acceleration to the Planck acceleration. I’d really like to try the dowsing experiment, by the way. And make sure and borrow a timepiece tied to an atomic clock signal and establish some kind of synched up communication link with Dr. DeBrandes when you guys do your entanglement experiment. There should be an equivalence between the so called “one graviton” limit, i.e., Planck mass in the complexity of vacuum fluctuations and the complexity of what can be teleported nonlocally between points A and B. Since to escape the speed of light restriction on propagation of energy of the specific kind discussed by Einstein, which is to say energy that possesses inertia, we need a chain of merely correlated (though causally independent), that is, quantum correlated vacuum fluctuations along the entire trajectory to support the passage of the energy or information that shall therefore propagate without inertial effect. Each individual quantum fluctuation nonlocally correlated to its neighbor in the chain forming this trajectory would therefore be below the one graviton limit or cutoff. This would also serve as a natural limit on the degree of quantum correlation of one quantum fluctuation of the vacuum and its immediate neighbor within the trajectory of nonlocally propagating information/energy. The cosmological constant problem being solved on this view through both current density of quantum correlation and density of quantum coherence (of each individual quantum fluctuation) being held below this same Planck mass or Penrosian one graviton limit.

Inertial mass is thus seen as being intimately related to a kind of symmetry breaking of the quantum vacuum involving fluctuations in this vacuum’s stress-momentum-energy becoming classically correlated on top of being maximally quantum correlated (or more generally, where the sum of the densities and current densities of classical + quantum information exceeding the one graviton limit in the cases of quantum fluctuation and quantum teleportation, respectively) and so inertial mass is then entirely a function of classical information and therefore exclusively an artifact of distinctly classical as opposed to distinctly quantum physics. There is a coincidence between the definition of a classical black hole (in terms of escape velocity of a body being equal to the speed of light, c.f., LaPlacian black holes) with the definition of a quantum black hole in the sense of yielding identical Schwarzchild black hole equations. The quantum black hole must be analyzed in terms of this conservation of entanglement concept of ours. . . say where quantum entanglement shifts from a mixture of spacelike and timelike to being exclusively spacelike, c.f., spin-0 fermion-antifermionic fluctuations vs. spin-1 bosonic fluctuations. Don't know why I didn't realize this earlier, but a fermion rotated 360 degrees only goes round a Mobius loop once and has to go around *twice* in order to reach its originally orientation. I believe the Mobius twist is in the four space that the universe is expanding into. Take a strip of paper and make a Mobius strip by doing a half twist of the ends and taping them together. If a cut out of a tracing of a hand, say a left hand is slid along the Mobius strip loop one cycle, it comes out mirror reversed and must be slid around one more cycle on the Mobius strip or loop to come back to its original orientation in *3 dimensions*, this even thought the cut out and strip are two dimensional. But the Mobius strip has to be twisted through 3 dimensions to be constructed. So by analogy (adding a dimension) the rotation of the fermion by 720 degrees is analogous, but one must add one dimension so that the rotation takes place in four space. So rotating a fermion with a magnetic field by only 360 degrees must secretly be taking the fermion through a Mobius twist

in four dimensional space. I think in this way the timelike nature of the fermion-antifermion pair can be proven and such a spin 0 vacuum fluctuation proven to be also purely timelike. My google search link (above) demonstrates that no one has really remarked about this - as the link produced "0 hits". Seems so obvious now though, right? So the existence of 4d-spacetime can be seen as proof of a pure 4d space as well, once quantum statistics of fermions is taken into account. What do you think? (How your face looks in your driver's license picture, for example wouldn't match with how you look in a mirror unless you were sent through this same 320 Mobius loop, by the way - hehe!)

There is a camp of molecular biologists who claim that the DNA/RNA/Protein system that currently exists ad even that of the earliest most primitive kind is/was possessed of an "irreducible complexity", e.g., mousetrap. Like the net of Indra there had to be a kind of simultaneously arising of the entire system at some critical level of initial complexity. This may seem to suggest that the complexity of simple coherent biochemical systems must be abstractions from the top down rather than "concretions" from the bottom up. This is similar to the notion of how the mind of Man descended from the transcendent through progressive limitation rather than upward from the immanent through a building up from combinations of the simplest components of matter, C, H, O, N, etc. There should be some kind of simple trig function of the angle of alignment (such as cosine of a double angle, etc.) of the virtual electron and positron spins in the virtual Cooper pair that could be an index of the degree of quantum entanglement of anticorrelation of the two spin1/2's. The fact of the orientation of spin of a spin-1/2 particle being dependent upon the observer's choice of reference frame (in the sense of the choice

of magnetic field direction) and indeterminate otherwise (unless you happen to have some classical information bits from a previous incarnation of the system, that is) is somehow importantly connected with relativity. We of course must not lose sight of the peculiarity of the antisymmetry of the fermionic wavefunction when trying to picture the relative spatial orientation ( in the sense of relative mutual rotation of the spin +/- 1/2 of the electron and positron composing the same Cooper pair.) That is, if we are going to look for some spatial analogue for entanglement of spins, what we have termed "magnetization entanglement". Remember that you must rotate a fermion 720 degrees to get back the wavefunction you started with. A positron is an electron moving backward in time, suppose. So what's the minimum spacetime rotation for the electron and the positron which gives back the composite spin-0 particle (Cooper pair) with which one started? Might the physical remains as mere vacuum field initial and boundary conditions become entangled with the general boundary conditions of the larger environment, while the spectrum of vacuum fields with which the deceased person's brain once typically resonated and quantum entanglement must simply continue in the absence of those specific boundary conditions constituted by the person's quantum microtubule network? We should associate the structures of consciousness with the particular spectra of vacuum fields, which themselves probably have always been entangled to some degree with the vacuum at large. Momentum-energy is conserved and there are quantum numbers for momentum and energy, but spacetime as the complementary quantity, I suspected has no quantum number, i.e., it's not a conserved quantity and so, without a quantum of spacetime, we should not expect gravitons (or gravity waves, for that matter) to exist. Besides, we have spin-1/2 and spin-1, which is all we need to make particles of spin-0, spin-3/2 and

spin-2, etc. There's no need for a fundamental spin-2 particle. Nature's conservative in that way. Well, it looks like the relationships of polarization, P, magnetization, M and permittivity and permeability are just right, if you assume 0 magnetic and electric field strengths for the vacuum, i.e., and = 0 for vacuum (which seems reasonable) to support the idea of fermionic and bosonic entanglement being two different forms of a generalized quantum entanglement which is conserved. Entanglement conservation is probably more fundamental than mrere probability conservation, since the exact quantum mechanical analogue for classical probability is sqrt[Psi x Psi*] where Psi is pure state wavefunction, while the generalization of this quantity is of course the density matrix where the phase relations of the components of the density matrix (and their temporal evolution) represents the distribution of quantum entanglement in the statistically mixed system. By Noether's theorem there should be an underlying symmetry for quantum entanglement (QE) as a conserved quantity as well as a quantum number uniquely associated with QE. The symmetry may turn out to be ordinary spacetime symmetry (but of a deeper kind than that pointed up by mere momentum-energy vector or, stress-momentumenergy tensor). And of course the quantum number associated with QE symmetry must be the inverse of von Neumann entropy, which we'll call von Neumann information (in contrast to classical, digital or "Shannon information"). "POLARIZATION VECTORS. In the theory of the electromagnetic field: two vectors, P and M, given by P = D - eE and M = B/u - H, where D is the displacement, E the electric field strength, B the magnetic induction, H the magnetic field strength, and e and u the permittivity and permeability respectively in empty space." Dictionary of Physics (1980) I wonder if we can take as general principle for making up Gedanken experiments about possible analogue (i.e., mechanical) models of gravitation the following: See what happens to physical quantities in the

vacuum when transforming to an accelerated reference frame and invoke Einstein's equivalence principle (both principles, strong and weak, inertial mass = gravitational mass and gravitation equivalent to acceleration) in order to propose just these types of changes to these vacuum physical quantities as the underlying mechanism for sustaining a gravitational field. Is the change in configuration energy of the vacuum fields that must adjust in some way when a particle, such as a proton or muon is removed from the region of the vacuum? This is like thinking of the particle's inertial mass in terms of the mass equivalence of the particle's vacuum enthalpy. Kind of like calculating the 1st order propagator/state of a particle as a 1st order manifestation of the underlying vacuum field, by summing up all the 2nd order and all higher order corrections to the propagator? I kind of imagine the atoms composing any bit of matter, any mass as dynamically grouping themselves into composite bosons and fermions through a continual mutual exchange of quantum entanglement between these virtual "cells" and "domains" formed of arbitrary groupings of entangled atoms that are continually reconstituting themselves so as to maintain a kind of entanglement equilibrium, i.e., continual avoidance of squeezed states while maintaining overall conservation of entanglement throughout the bulk of the mass. However, upon acceleration, squeezed states form but in accordance with a kind of action or minimization principle that maintains a shifted thermodynamic equilibrium within the mass, i.e., some entropy is inevitably produced by acceleration. (Reversibility of time-independent Schrodinger equation deterministic evolution, foreseeable by the cosmic quantum vacuum CPU must break down, necessitating decoherence processes) And the net bulk entanglement within the mass shifts from spin-0 to spin-1 through a shift in the distribution of entanglement, mimicking what would be expected for a vacuum with equivalent gravitational potential (in terms of equivalent acceleration). A Rindler horizon (as a generalization of an

event horizon) forms and Davies-Unruh radiation is observed that is consistent with the entropy of the newly formed Rindler horizon . . . whew! Of course, the permeability and permittivity within the bulk matter also transform so that the speed of light within the mass changes to reflect the new vacuum that the mass sees while under acceleration, and so on. . . I've been looking at this idea of the vacuum not gravitating. Force may be characterized as either time rate of change in 3-momentum or as space rate of change in energy (timelike 4-momentum, if your will). Notice that when a photon either falls into a gravitational potential or "climbs out" of one that the ratios, /\p//\t and /\E//\x are constant, implying that the vacuum exerts no force on the infalling or escaping photon. Notice also that the photon's 4-momentum is unchanged though climbing out of a potential and reshifting in the process. This s because the increase in the local velocity of light (i.e., acceleration of the photon) as the photon reaches regions of decreased potential (as the photon climbs out) is exactly by the decrease in the photon's frequency - these act in opposing senses so that the photon's 4-momentum is conserved. I've also been thinking that the notion of Heisenberg uncertainty should be related more directly to the idea of relative decoherence of the timelike, spin-0 (virtual Cooper pair creation-annihilation) and spacelike, spin-1 (virtual boson exchanges within 3-space) components of the fluctuating quantum vacuum in a changing gravitational potential. I think that an increased /\p (uncertainty in 3-momentum) governing the decreased density of creation-annihilation of virtual Cooper pairs within a strong gravitational potential could be interpreted as an increased internal decoherence of the Cooper pairs' wavefunction (or density matrix) and the decreased /\E (uncertainty in imaginary 4-momentum) governing the increased density of virtual boson exchanges in this strong potential could be interpreted as a decreased, i.e., increased coherence, hence entanglement of these virtual bosons. This seems elegant and

invites more systematic thought about H-uncertainty and its relation to decoherence and entanglement in a gravitational potential relative to free space spacetime. Question: if an electron and a positron mutually annihilate, the pair of photons produced will have perfect correlation of their polarizations, provided that the spins of the electron and positron were perfectly entangled so as to be anti-parallel. If the entanglement of the + or _ 1/2 spin of the electron and positron is 0, then the polarizations of the photons produced in the mutual annihilation shall be completely decohered, correct? If I'm right, then wouldn't this support the idea of there being a close relationship between entanglement of virtual Cooper pairs and virtual photons in a gravitational field, at least in essence, you know, in terms of the whole conservation of entanglement concept as applied to bosonic and fermionic vacuum fluctuations of momentumenergy, c.f., http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron-positron_annihilation A dielectric medium has a reduced velocity of light because of the continual absorption and reemission of the photons as the photon passes through the medium. The decreased velocity of light in a vacuum where a strong gravitational field is present might be understood in a similar manner – the electron-positron creation-annihilations are of lower density in a gravitational field and so a photon must compensate by possessing a greater momentum uncertainty to bridge the gap created by the reduced energy uncertainty of this gravitational potential infused vacuum. ********************************************************** ****************** 10-15-2006 ********************************************************** ************************************************* The mitochondrion is now thought to have once been an independent bacterium that "gave up too many genes" after which it could only survive in symbiosis with a eukaryote cell. This inexplicably suggested

to me the contrast between "sin" and "grace" as being complementary entities. When spin has been determined to be in the + x-direction, say with state, S(x), then the values of S(y) and S(z) are indeterminate, i.e., there is a total of 360 degrees of uncertainty, you might say because of 180 degrees of /\S(y) + 180 degrees of /\S(z). Could it be that the 180 degree rotation of a spin-1/2 particle in the x-y plane, for example (rather than in the x-z plane - both rotations representing a change from s = S(x) to s = -S(x), by the way) is secretly accompanied by rotations in the Heisenberg uncertainties in the spin in other orthogonal directions? We should not here that the antiparticle to particle with spin, +S(z) must have an opposite spin of -S(z), which is apparently part and parcel to the antiparticle's interpretation (originally by Feynman) as the same particle, though moving backward in time. I supposed that the spin uncertainties were rotated along with the determinate component of the particle's spin being rotated because, when the state Q of a particle is teleported, the Heisenberg uncertainty in Q, /\Q is also teleported. This way, interpreting particle propagation as the continuous teleportation of the particle implies that a Lorentz boost not only transforms Q, but also transforms /\Q. Confirmed that the "prior art" literature asserts that the speed of light in vacuum is increased in a Casimir vacuum and that this is on account of a decrease in the number density of scattering virtual electron-positron pairs in the path of a propagating photon, which must be interpreted as a decrease in /\p relative to /\E for the quantum system of conducting plates and vacuum between the plates. The polarization of light rotates as it passes through dielectric medium (Faraday rotation). , Electrons have DeBroglie wavelengths because of the 1-loop propagation via continual substitution within e+e- virtual pairs, which are timelike fluctuations and so, by Fourier's theorem must be represented by a wavepacket of frequency domain functions. Collective spin-1 and spin-0 are in competition in supporting the propagation of photons and electron/positron pairs, i.e., e+e-, e-e+, e+e+, e-e-.

When /\s(x), /\s(y), and /\s(z) are nonzero, then does this imply that /\s(w) = 0, i.e., the spin is pointing in a timelike direction? During a Lorentz boost, spin and momentum degrees of freedom become entangled, c.f., Wigner's "Little Groups". Cooper pairs have 100% anti-correlated spins, +/- S(i)'s (where i = 1,2, or 3 or superposition of 1,2 and 3 and the +/- /\S(i)'s cancel because of the entanglement of the +/-S(i)'s.) In the same way that we might ask whence comes the energy liberated by a matter-antimatter annihilation reaction we might also ask, "whence comes the extra 3-angular momentum that we can't account for from Newtonian mechanics which appears as perihelion precession of the planet Mercury's orbit and which is predicted by the General Theory of Relativity?" Could the anomalous boost in Mercury's 3-angular momentum stem from the transformation of the planet's 4-angular momentum through a cyclic continuum of accelerated frames? In which case there msut be a hidden component of timelike angular momentum possessed by the planet, which becomes more and more spacelike as the planet orbits closer to the Sun. This hidden timelike component of angular momentum resides with the collective elementary spin-0 of the planet's bulk material, the properties of which are determined by hidden quantum entanglement of all particles composing the planet's mass. Causality, simultaneity and spin1/2 measurement: In one reference frame, Alice measures her particle's spin 1st; in another reference frame, Bob measures his particle's spin 1st. "Bohm's Law" only applies when certain entanglement conditions obtain. Probability against a certain self-decohering system doesn't necessarily increase moving backward in time (even taking emergence into account). Decoherence is in opposition to emergence. During propagation, what is the relationship between the net angular momentum vector and the linear momentum?, e.g., the photon's spin is . If spin-1/2 is to be associated with timelike angular momentum that is

directed parallel or anti-parallel to the direction of timelike propagation, then the equation of a complete wavefunction phaseshift with a 720 degree (rather than 360 degree) rotation of the spin-1/2 particle can be intuitively understood in terms of 4-rotations of the particle within spacetime. If a spin-1/2 particle, say s(z) = +/- 1/2 is Lorentz boosted to near "c", then, as reckoned from the original laboratory reference frame, what is the direction of the particle's spin, s(z)' in terms of s(z)? The spin of an elementary particle cannot be altered, only the direction in which the spin of the particle points. Does this suggest that when /\S(x), /\S(y), and /\S(z) are nonzero that the spin must be determined to be +/- 1/2 in some orthogonal directions that is "incompatible" with "x", "y" and "z"? The "incompatibility" woudl perhaps be indirect, e.g., /\x(i) is incompatible with /\p(i), /\t is incompatible with /\E and /\x(i) and /\t form a 4-vector while /\p(i) and /\E form a four vector. Talent is sublimated rather than the motive lying with appreciation or enjoyment of the specific subject matter. The "no-cloning" theorem is essentially a statement of the principle of the conservation of entanglement, which supplants the classical physical notion of "stuff conservation". Without the activity of substance, which is irreducible to form, (implying an nonconserved quantity) there can be no legitimate temporality. "Stuff" is actually a quantum construct that is not conserved, though indeed, perhaps quantum entanglement is. In the way, decoherence becomes a physical necessity! It's not the momentum of the photon (Heisenberg's light microscope thought experiment), but the state of knowledge of the observer (or mere "knowledgeability" of some hypothetical/possible observer?) that reduces Psi? @$201404

"/\Q about", i.e., /\Q in context-collapsed by the mere possibility

of measurement/knowledge. "/\Q of", i.e., /\Q out of context - can only be collapsed by actual measurement/knowledge of observer (which we are assuming here can only be gotten by measurement, but there are socalled "non-demolition" measurements that exploit Bell nonlocality. Environmental decoherence is related to consciousness' role in collapsing Psi. What about when information embodied in /\Q is tied to a microscopic state?, c.f., 2-states superposition, environmental decoherence has the same effect as observation, i.e., binary opposition. This is not the case of systems of sufficient complexity. But such systems can start out context-free and binary opposition-reducible, but lose this character due to environmental entanglement. The structure of spin decoherence show that under sufficiently large accelerations, spin possesses the property of timelike angular momentum. Investigate the quantity, J = L + S in a Lorentz-boosted context. Propagation may perhaps be interpreted a la Bohm's Law/Principle in terms of . Not knowing what information was teleported - just that the state, Q was transmitted is suggestive of a . April 2011 Perhaps decoherence occurs when the system’s state space can no longer contain the spectrum of possibilities for the system’s behavior or, still more, the quantum vacuum as the ground of being for the system is no longer adequate to encompass the real time possibilities of the system. Here is the connection between gravitation and decoherence, gravitational time dilation in which the system requires more time to temporally evolve than is available to it locally. ********************************************************** ****************** 10-15-2006 ********************************************************** ************************************************* ******************************************** 10-07-2006 ********************************************************** ***********

The complementarity relation between nonlocal and local (classical) information in addition to evidence that entanglement is a conserved quantity (quantum # = quantity of von Neumann information) suggests that all information-bearing structures distill von Neumann information from quantum entanglement that ultimately exists within the vacuum, i.e., all entanglement derives from vacuum entanglement. How do we distinguish uncertainty of from uncertainty about and are they sometimes the same thing, e.g., intentionality of consciousness. Vedral's notion of how photons appear to take on mass in a superconductor that is manifesting the Meissner effect due to quantum entanglement between electrons that have formed Cooper pairs seems closely interrelated to mine and Volovik's dual superfluid vacuum model for induced gravity, c.f., Vedral's paper on entanglement underlying the bulk properties of matter such as the complementarity between magnetization and magnetic susceptibility. This was suggested to me when I chanced upon the New Scientist article, "Quantum quirk may give objects mass." Teleportation involves transmission of immeasurable quantities, /\Q and states protected by the no-cloning theorem. Classical information packaged as quantum information, e.g., turn around time for correlations of heated LiF chips with metastable states. November 2011 Is it possible for uninterpreted yes/no data to be transmitted using quantum entangled LiF chips? “Hitachi has sold a device based on optical topography that monitors brain optical topography that monitors brain activity in paralyzed patients so they can answer simple questions. For example, by doing mental calculations to indicate "yes" or thinking of nothing in particular to indicate "no"”, c.f., Brain Device Moves Objects by Thought Objects by Thought, http://www.scribd.com/doc/5324094/move-device-using-brain. DeBroglie wavefunction as wavelength of a physical wave versus as a wavelength for a Psi. Planck cutoff for energy of highest frequency DeBroglie matter wave implies such a cut off for most dense encoding of quantum information, i.e., vacuum information saturation. Tie this in to the two distinct interpretations of grounds for decoherence.

, Local realism is false and quantum decoherence necessitates inertia and the reality of classical information embodied in the local systems and states. Reality of nonlocal "stuff". A deterministic chaotic system could not be modeled in terms of correlated quantum fluctuations, which would be a linear description. Is the turn around time the classical information that must be sent along with the teleported information? Continuity of boundary conditions in the electron two slit experiment. The no-cloning theorem is essentially a statement of the principle of entanglement conservation, which supplants the notion of "stuff conservation" from classical physics. "Stuff" is actually a quantum construct that is not conserved, though entanglement is - so decoherence becomes a necessity. It's not the momentum of the photon (Heisenberg's light microscope thought experiment), but the state of knowledge of the observer (knowledgeability of hypothetical observer?) that collapses Psi. Of course, one simple approach to the cosmological constant problem is to suppose that the vast bulk of the quantum vacuum is in a Bosecondensed "zero state" where the Bose particles make no contribution to the vacuum's energy density or pressure, c.f., p. 74, McGraw Hill Concise Encyclopedia of Physics. "Lines of induction due to a conductor of any shape" must form a closed path about the conductor. How do you form a "closed path" about a conductor that happens to be an event horizon? The electron's spinning about its axis" is not to be understood literally as in the days of the old quantum theory but merely figuratively. However, the question nonetheless arises as to which axis, if indeed not a spatial one, about which the electron does in fact literally turn. Gregory Benford's SF short story, "Anomalies" gives a good intuitive insight into the causes of quantum decoherence. A "quantum substance" isn't identified until you have specified all possible quantum numbers. Observations of quantum systems of

fermions specified in terms of a particular list of quantum numbers shall instantiate the Pauli Principle, provided that the specified list of the quantum numbers constitutes a complete set of quantum numbers. If one quantum is left undetermined, then the system remains capable of behaving as though insubstantial. *See relationship of cellular automata (CA) theory with theory of entanglement and quantum decoherence. Interpret principle of equivalence, motion of test bodies, event horizon, gravitational redshift, perihelion precession, deflection of starlight, and radio time delay in terms of Volovik dual superfluid vacuum theory. Look at causal structure in special relativity in terms of Bohm's Principle and then the departure from this principle necessitated by the theory of general relativity. Perturbations of quantum statistics of the vacuum by real particles and fields that can be processed by the vacuum + matter's nonlocal connectivity, i.e., processed (as though by a cosmic CPU) while Bohm's Principle remains inviolate do not contribute to inertial or gravitational mass or, for that matter, to decoherence of the nonlocally connected vacuum fields and no irreversible or time-asymmetric processing occurs, i.e., no entropy is generated. The twin paradox is revolved by noting that O and O' have different notions of simultaneity in comparing their clock readings. How can the field equations of GR be truly nonlinear if the tensor equations of GR are coordinate system independent. Maybe the pesky non-gravitating vacuum component of the cosmological constant secretly appears within all three terms of the field equations and so cancels out. The solution to the cosmological constant problem would then be trivial. The (-) sign occurring in the expression for the spacetime interval, which serves to distinguish time from space, to the (-) sign that serves to distinguish fermionic or asymmetric wavefunction from bosonic or symmetric wavefunction. This was first suggested to me by the equation, |Psi| = |Psi(s) + iPsi(a)| = (Psi(s) + i Psi(a))x(Psi(s) - iPsi(a)) = Psi(s)**2

+ Psi(a)**2 = |Psi(s)| + |Psi(a)| There are spatial rotations and spacetime rotations (aka Lorentz transformations), so it seems reasonable to suppose that the motion of "time rotation" is a valid number. We must distinguish rotations of the time axis from rotations "about" the time axis. So fermions may be interpreted most broadly as substance/figure and bosons as insubstantial/ground. "Ground" as merely hidden figure, that is, as merely complementary to ground shuts out the dynamics by which figure transforms itself into its complement given certain boundary conditions (discrete quantum transitions) or continuous transformations (through continuous change in the quantum field boundary conditions?) (See Leggett (1987), especially chapters 5 and 6.) "Interactionism" theory of mind is most compatible with the Copenhagen "Collapse Model" of the quantum measurement problem. One solution to the quantum measurement problem might be to involve (1) interference between quantum superposed states of the system under observation with superpositions of an observer's perceptions of the system, in addition to invoking (2) nonlocal connectivity of the quantum brains of multiple simultaneous observers of the system. The nonlocal connectivity of the vacuum is not uniform but is comprised by cells or domains of greater nonlocal connectivity. Temporality implies that the system is not in an energy eigenstate. When Bohm's Principle is violated and entanglement is not conserved, a dynamics as opposed to a merely kinematic process is ongoing, and of course a certain amount of entropy (von Neumann or Shannon?) is generated. Entanglement non-conservation forms the basis of temporal evolution and is fundamentally non-computable. Classical information constitutes the boundary conditions for quantum information. The reverse of this is true as well, i.e., quantum information constituting the boundary conditions for classical information, though only up to a threshold. This threshold is situated at the onset of irreversibility in the system's changes in state. When quantum information capacity of a system is outstripped by the system's classical information, it is here that the system begins to undergo decoherence.

As the rate of increase in classical information begins to outstrip the quantum information processing power of the system, then it is here where the system experiences a relativistic increase in mass. Associated with this is a relativistic increase in momentum acting in the opposite sense to the vector of the impressed acceleration, which is the origin of inertia. Conservation of quantum entanglement may be demonstrated through analysis of the generalized uncertainty relations for so called squeezed states. In the equation for the derivation of E = mc**2, interpreting the term under the integral, mv/sqrt[1 - v**2/c**2] as the product of an invariant "m" with a relativistic velocity, v' = v/sqrt[1 - v**2/c**2] appears to yield an energy of mc**2 long before v reaches the value of "c" in the upper bound of the integral. Why? SQUIDS may be used to measure quantum scale changes in magnetic susceptibility, which in turn could be used to measure magnetization entanglement in bulk material. SQUIDs could measure small changes in susceptibility at different gravitational potentials as well as changes in quantum gravitational noise in vacuum. Dirac's equation really calls for creation and annihilation of 4 spin-1/2 particles in vacuum, or rather, a/a+ of superposition states of 4 spin-1/2 particles. Can a particular Lorentz frame be associated with a particular possibility for a quantum measurement? Instead of using M, the magnetization as an index of entanglement, it might be better in light of the paper, "Magnetic Susceptibility as a Macroscopic Entanglement Witness", Vedral et al. to utilize mu the permeability and chi the susceptibility as such an index. Hopefully another similar paper shall be published soon in which it is shown that electric susceptibility can be a witness of electric dipole entanglement. We have free will in the sense of our brains being able to outstrip the quantum computing capacity of the local vacuum, but it is still for working out our character, which is also our fate - but a fate that can change if caught up with that of others.

Bohm's principle/law is transcendental across the temporal horizon where causal law becomes too complex to be modeled by a matrix of correlated quantum fluctuations - this is the idea of historical determinism within but not between historical moments, c.f., Gibb's phenomenon, edge effects of electromagnetic fields at boundary surfaces, etc. Discuss: locally versus globally mediated causality, Rindler horizons, Bohm's Law and decoherence of quantum information. ********************************************************** ************************** 11-07-06 ********************************************************** ******************************************** The electric and magnetic field strengths are mutually incompatible through the incompatibility of position and momentum applied to electric charges and currents. Specifying the position of an electric charge more precisely permits more precise specification of the charge's static electric field, but at the price of an uncertain charge momentum, which must be associated with a corresponding uncertainty in the electric current and hence in the magnetic field strength. Similarly, the more accurately is the magnetic field specified, the more precisely is the charge momentum specified, which by the uncertainty principle, the less precisely can the charge position be measured, leading to a less precisely measurable electric field. The loss of magnetization entanglement of fermion-antifermion pairs is driven by the increased uncertainty in the local magnetic field vector. This should be concomitant with the reduced uncertainty in the local electric field vector and the increase in polarization entanglement. In Feynman's parton quark model the interaction between quarks (partons) becomes time dilated so that the binding energy of partons (making up a single hadron) decreases as v approaches c. Like any other accelerating mass, if binding energy is the basis of inertia and is lost with acceleration and as a function of relative velocity, in

accordance with the correct functional relationship F(Eb) (v, a), then the amount of binding energy given upon the mass reaching c must be mc**2. However, as a hadron falls into a gravitational field it enters a region of vacuum where energy fluctuations, embodied in the vacuum's /\E are progressively transferred into 3-momentum fluctuations, embodied in the /\p of the vacuum. The magnetization of the quantum vacuum in the form of the quantum entanglement of electrons and positrons with in virtual Cooper pairs, created and annihilated spontaneously in accordance with the magnitude of the density of the vacuum's Heisenberg uncertain energy is progressively degraded in ever stronger gravitational fields; the virtual e+'s and e-'s become progressively more independent and the molecular bosonic character of the spontaneously created virtual Cooper pairs is progressively degraded, which may be understood as decoherence and breaking of spontaneous symmetry (of spacetime, which includes the electromagnetic gauge?); in this way the Pauli Principle acts ever more strongly upon the constituent fermions of the spontaneously created and annihilated virtual Cooper pairs. And this is the mechanism by which matter's effect upon the quantum statistics of the vacuum is strengthened in progressively more intense gravitational fields. http://phys.org/news/2011-08-dark-illusion-quantum-vacuum.html ********************************************************** ************************** 11-04-06 ********************************************************** ******************************************** In terms of our current and natural scheme of categories, the "that which creates" is also "that which sustains" of Leibniz' Principle are understood as distinct, externally by Darwinian Theory, internally by theologians. To successfully remove both "Deus" as well as God by extension, i.e., "Deus ex Machina" from the naturalistic world view of cosmogony, one has to see the creative principle within the sustainment principle (after all, according to naturalism, the Universe has always been here) while at once letting go of the tendency to wish to see this principle the other

way round. A tenuous application of this new understanding of Leibniz' Principle might be within the debate between Machian and classical relativists' understanding of Einstein’s Equivalence Principle, e.g., must we treat equivalent Lorentz frames as possessing a common origin, say, either through vacuum entanglement or via cosmological initial conditions? or would we treat them thus on purely formal grounds?, that is, is Einstein's Equivalence a kinematic or a dynamic principle? If the so-called stuff of which the world is made was not created and "has just always been here," then Leibniz' Principle must break down though perhaps only within the understanding, c.f., Kan't notion of "the understanding". In other words the dynamics is "squeezed out" by the kinematics. Simultaneous reinterpretation along metaphorical axes while forging a line of literal exposition behaves akin to multi-temporal process. At root of all quantum interference phenomena is self-interference of the field, which can manifest itself as particles though only when this selfinterference loop becomes short circuited, either by an observer or potential observer. My review of the spin and orbital angular momentum theory suggests that these two quantities are separately conserved just like the separate components of 3-momentum are conserved, well at least for the case where v/c 1. The separate conservation of S and L seems to imply that S doesn't exchange J with L in an analogous way to how say, colliding gyroscopes (with rough surfaces) might exchange angular momentum between like components of L (in such a manner tha Lx = Lx1 + Lx2 = constant; same for Ly, Lz, etc. One might expect that for the relativistic case that there would be a break down in the separate conservation of components of not only 3momentum, but 3-angular momentum, 3-spin, etc., c.f., reinterpretation of Einstein's perihelion precession problem, origin of inertia in gyroscopic resistance to acceleration, an so on.

Hawking radiation shows the extreme case where entanglement of spins has been 100% transformed into /\p manifested as the 3-momentum fluctuations at the event horizon surface. Is there a deep connection between the two basic varieties of information non-conservation vis a vis continuous vs. discrete decoherence of the density matrix, that is, loss of quantum information across a Rindler horizon vs. collapsing of Psi by a freely willed interaction of an observer with a quantum system? ********************************************************** ************************** 10-27-06 ********************************************************** ******************************************** Magnetization (spin polarization) of virtual Cooper pairs may be considered internal entanglement. External entanglement of virtual pairs may be described in terms of polarization of the quantum vacuum. The bondage to decay as described in the Book of Romans. Waxing old and wearing out. If the Universe were secretly a computational system, then we couldn't really have an entropy flow/gradient without a complementary information flow/gradient. In the same way that Einstein deduced spontaneous emission from purely thermodynamic considerations, we may be able to deduce nonlocality from the necessity of a thermodynamic ground (thermal vacuum states(s)) for enabling flows of entropy and conversely, transmission of information. ChaosCosmos; Complex-->Simple An example of multiple copy of a context-sensitive content of information. The only way to side step the 2nd Law is to receive input from outside spacetime. Clearly the vacuum must be in a "prepped state" for order to arise spontaneously. When spin has been determined to be in the + x-direction with eigenstate Sx, then values of Sy and Sz are indeterminate. So what then if no spin measurement had been performed? Then all three spins would be indeterminate (in the sense of "+" and "-" and "up" and "down") - and so the spin must be determined secretly to be Sw or timelike. (Does this

imply absolute direction of time - no - because orthogonal Si's are indeterminate. Like Leibniz' clock whose ticking was only noticed once it had stopped, one's bizarre metaphysical assumption, i.e., more or less that life is not real, was exploded by the devastating critique of the Schrodinger's Cat Paradox. Entanglement entropy is not covariant. Vacuum supports superposition so superposition of distinct vacua is no allowed. Superposition principle vs. principle of equivalence. The fact that perfect isolation of a quantum system does not prevent environmental decoherence implies that the vacuum fluctuation field induces decoherence. The mind allegedly does this as well through the action of its consciousness. The mind concentrates quantum entanglement and so observation enhances the effect of vacuum-based environmental decoherence. But then part of what discomfits the quantum vacuum is the unanticipated will of the conscious observer, implying that the brain of the observer is somehow altogether outside "the environment". It is the indistinguishability of quantum particles that leads to teleportation and substance-like properties of quantum information which defy context-sensitivity, up to a point, that is. EPR's position was that a measurement must be predetermined if it can be known with certainty. But the decision whether or not to make this measurement is not predetermined. The less well correlated (via quantum entanglement) are the, e.g., electron and position making up a virtual Cooper pair, the less does the pair behave as a collective spin-0 particle, i.e., boson and the more do the particles of the pair behave as independent fermions to which the Pauli Principle is completely democratic, not making distinction between virtual and so-called real particles. Henceforth we will term this notion of the radically democratic Pauli Principle. Feynman's Pauli Principle or, "Feynman's Principle" for short. /\E is decreasing all the while e+ and e- are becoming more mutually independent, which should normally imply a greater /\E. ???

e+e+e-e-e+e+ --> +1, +0, -1, -0, +1. . . How do we interpret "+" and "-" in "0+" and "0-" ?

********************************************************** ************************** 10-07-2006 ********************************************************** ***************************************** How do we characterize what happens to the psyche of a young bureaucrat who is at first forced but then with time less and less forced to rationalize the directives of his so-called superiors as being in accord with his own personal judgment? How is a series of vacuum fluctuations nonlocally connected fundamentally distinct from a series which is simultaneous (the components of the series, one to another) only in a unique Lorentz frame? Does causal connection transcend mere quantum correlation rather than being merely a subclass thereof? - in the sense of exceeding the one-graviton Planck mass virtual black hole limit? And wouldn't the transcendence of quantum information by classical information, paradoxically enough play an important role in explicating decoherence and collapse phenomena? In other words, can a set of nonlocally connected up to but not including the one-graviton limit? The riddle of the would-be gravity and inertia of the quantum vacuum, i.e., the cosmological constant riddle is intimately bound up with this consideration. Perturbation of the action of the vacuum state cannot be treated perturbatively, i.e., as a summation of plane waves (non-interacting particles) is precisely the point at which spacetime is obliged to curve. Note that "particle" is an ill-defined notion in strongly curved spacetimes. Rather than decoherence being an effect of gravitation, it seems more logical to suppose that gravity is a special case of decoherence processes within the quantum vacuum.

Volovik's suspicion that the cosmological constant tracks the cosmological (average) mass density of the Universe combined with the fact that in GR gravitational energy (to include gravitational binding energy) is nonlocal leads us to a possible mechanism for Volovik's equating of the two energy densities, cosmological constant and average mass density of the Universe. web= www.cornponeflicks.org/RAGAD.html - review of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are dead. The Anti-Gnosticism of E. M. Cioran - essay in Probe magazine/Ezine. A Short History of Decay, E. M. Cioran. "A thumbprint doesn't open the door of perception, it blows it off the hinges. You melt into eternity. You let go and die into the moment which is all. There is no you anymore at all. The intensity of this can't be described, but you realize as you're slipping away that it's familiar". If consciousness truly exists and is not an illusion (if there's something left over once all mental contents have been removed), then the self would be truly at home in and a citizen of so to speak the realm of Being, which is to say, eternal being. Polonium Halos: Unrefuted Evidence for Earth's Instant Creation, c.f., Earth Science Associates, P. O. Box 12067, Knoxville, TN 37912, c.f., That medium which serves as the "ground of being" cannot be fully reconstituted through a cobbling together of entities originally abstracted from this dynamic, creative and sustaining medium. Some embedding and enabling context would be needed to fill in (flesh out, if you will) the aboriginally suppressed details that constituted the original categories (read: "things") that one is seeking to cobble together into a coherent whole. If we are always in time and never separate in our being from its flow, that is, composed of this very flow that also comprises the temporality of the outside world, then how indeed do we subjectively reckon time; how is it possible for us to experience temporality at all, unless there is some

component in us that itself resists this flow? Self-organization of matter is a symptom of the feedback of quantum entanglement in time. Multidimensional temporality is experienced by the quantum uncertainties or by the virtual processes composing them, and it is within Heisenberg uncertainty that timelike quantum entanglement has the degree of freedom to act. Philip K. Dick might have speculated that we are all robots persisting in the fantasy that we are human. In a sense this is the implication of the works of Baudrillard and Lacan, etc. When listening to intelligible speech one is simultaneously subject and object, meaning that one reacts simultaneously in two distinct ways, mechanical (and moronically) and insightfully. How are both responses to speech reconciled on many distinct scales of behavior and action (in the sense of spatiotemporal scale)? The function of this opposition is best understood through the concept of discourse - like Campbell's religious images, discourse both limits and facilitates thought and experience. Institutions and bureaucracies so utterly transcend the subjective rationality of the individual. Institutional wisdom is both necessary and not necessary to the survival and vitality of a bureaucratic organization, c.f., Bohr's remarks about death of the previous generation of physicists being necessary to the "advancement" of physics. The nature of language as nexus of otherwise irreconcilable contemporaneous speakers/ authors or generations of practitioners must account for the open-ness of institutionalized knowledge (as all knowledge must be) to its being endlessly reprocessed without reaching exhaustion of its content, which is both context-dependent and context-determinative. All of the subjects of knowledge must be recast as the interpretation of these subjects of knowledge, e.g., history = interpretation of history, etc. The distinction between "real" and "virtual" breaks down at the Planck scale. Spacetime is conjugate to momentum-energy in QM and so it only makes sense that there should be this intimate connection between space, time, matter and energy.

Concrete reality as interdimensional nexus. Because of consciousness, reality is necessarily simulation. When you stop and think about it, interpersonal communication, particularly human speech is a bizarre process based as it is on what can easily be made to appear a far fetched metaphysics. Suppose the universe is a black hole (is of critical density so that spacetime is considered “flat”) that is undergoing cosmological expansion. The mass of the universe must then increase as you pointed out ( I suppose this increase is reckoned from infinity). If the density of the zero-point energy inside the hole is decreasing while in interaction with the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, then during the time that an energy fluctuation lasts the zero-point has every so slightly decreased and so not all of the energy borrowed from the vacuum during the lifetime of the fluctuation need be paid back. So here to is a mass generation mechanism. We now have the basis for a new equation of two time rates of change in mass – one cosmological and the other quantum. So the zero-point energy of the vacuum doesn’t possess any inertial mass until something is done with this energy (within the context of a curved spacetime, expanding or contracting). This equation may perhaps point to some new physics or at least help reassure us that it is only difference in vacuum energy density that are gravitational and inertially significant. How is a series of vacuum fluctuations nonlocally connected fundamentally distinct from a series which is simultaneous (the components of the series, one to another) only in a unique Lorentz frame? Does causal connection transcend mere quantum correlation (somewhat contrary to the spirit of David Bohm’s observations on the subject, perhaps). . . rather than being merely a subclass thereof – in the sense of exceeding the one-graviton, Planck mass virtual black hole limit? In other words, can a set of nonlocally-connected quantum fluctuations only successfully model causality up to but not including the onegraviton limit? The riddle of the would-be gravity and inertia of the quantum vacuum, i.e., the cosmological constant riddle is intimately

bound up with this consideration. Perturbation of the action of the vacuum state that cannot be treated pertubatively, i.e., as a summation of plane waves (non-interacting particles) is precisely the point at which spacetime is obliged to curve. Note that “particle” is an ill-defined notion in strongly curved spacetimes. Rather than decoherence being an effect of gravitation, it seems more logical to suppose that gravity is a special case of decoherence processes within the quantum vacuum. Because causal relationships are always describable in terms of sets of differential equations, these relationships must be supposed to inhere within a continuously differentiable manifold of determinate topological structure. Alterations in the topology of a continuously differentiable manifold cannot be described by a set of differential equations definable on the original manifold. This is why we do not expect that the energies of the submicroscopic topological fluctuations may comprise a contribution to a gravitational source term in the Einstein field equations. A supermanifold must ground the transformation of one topology into another nonequivalent topology such that this topological inequivalence is ultimately reducible within the supermanifold of higher order topological structure which remains constant throughout the lower order topological transformation. The formalism of General Relativity is not equipped to describe such a topological supermanifold. This reminds us of attempts to ground the discontinuous change in the wavefunction which in between measurements evolves deterministically according to the Schrödinger equation of motion in terms of some nonlinear time-dependent version of the S-eqn. Notice that the transformation of one topology into a nonequivalent one necessitates a breaching of the original topological manifold introducing discontinuities which prevent the existence of any bridge functions being defined mediating the transformation which possess continuous differentiability. No consistent solutions to a given set of differential equations exists if the only possible solutions are functions which are themselves not continuously differentiable. All topological transformations must be described in terms of bridge functions which cannot be defined on the manifolds being transformed and so all

topological transformations must be mediated from outside all manifolds of determinate topological structure taking part in the topological transformations. Since a metric presupposes an embedding topological manifold, geometrodynamic fluctuations in spacetime topology cannot be described within general relativity theory. Nor should they collectively contribute to a single vacuum state possessing an inertial mass equivalence, which we then need to account for in our attempts to solve the cosmological constant riddle, i.e., “non-gravitating” quantum vacuum. Projections of topological transformations in a given space onto a subspace may present the appearance of non-topological transformations within the smaller space. If a chance event yields meaning and significance, it is only because of a common, underlying (concrete) ground of the two things connected. The truly concrete, that is, the ultimate ground of Being, cannot be divided, but can only appear so. To entertain the notion of two separate grounds, themselves possessing no underlying and still more ultimate ground connecting them in the sense of making them, one with the other, (substantially) continuous, is to set up definitions in a manner which invites self-contradiction. We know that the action by which the continuum of space and time are constituted presupposes a kind of temporality, but one without scale or direction in which the connectivity of the pre-phenomenal is internal but at once without boundaries. Just musing a little here. given a constant mass of particles in a volume, V with a collective mass, M in which this volume is uniformly expanding, the density of the volume should decrease with the inverse cube. But if the particles are themselves energy fluctuations continuously being created and destroyed and recreated and so on. . . , then we would expect that the number density of these fluctuations to decrease with the inverse cube as the wavelengths of the particles stretch in accordance with the changing length scale dictated by the uniform expansion of the space in which the fluctuations continually occur. These fluctuations collectively are the vacuum zero-point field, which thusly decreases with the inverse fourth power with uniform expansion of the volume containing this vacuum

energy. Now if the vacuum energy constitutes the “calibration 0” against which the collective mass of massive particles contained within the expanding volume is to always be reckoned, then the mass density (something we’re for the time being assuming is different from the vacuum energy density) should effectively decrease with the inverse square (just as in the case of an expanding black hole). To wit, the density of particles decreases with the inverse cube and the vacuum energy against which the mass of the massive particles is measured decreases with the inverse fourth power. Intuitively it is easy to see that a very long lived, long wavelength vacuum fluctuation shall be stretched by the expansion somewhat during the lifetime of the fluctuation and so when its energy is “paid back” to the collective vacuum state, not as much energy has to be paid back as was originally borrowed when the vacuum fluctuations began - in order to satisfy the Heisenberg uncertainty principle and energy conservation. Where did the component of energy go that didn’t have to be paid back? It went into the creation of additional mass of the massive particles participating in the overall cosmological expansion. This is how I reconcile the two types of mass increase so as to show that they are one and the same, just looked at from opposite ends of the telescope, if you will, quantum versus cosmological. The black hole mass-radius relationship then may be just the natural outcome, cosmologically of a closed expanding spacetime. Pushing together a lot of mass through the Pauli Exclusion Principle for fermions and the “Pauli Inclusion Principle” for bosons in the extreme case recapitulates this cosmological structure, when the increasing mass density (as more and more mass is piled together within smaller and smaller volume) causing the collapsing mass to effect a continual local reduction (within the decreasing volume of the collapsing mass) in the vacuum energy within the decreasing volume and against which the collapsing mass’ energy must be continually recalibrated so that the mass relativistically increases, eventually forming a local (as opposed to a global black hole). From: Daniel Van Gent [mailto:[email protected]]

Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2006 11:52 AM To: Russell S Clark; Ziad Fahd Subject: Mobius loops and entanglement Hi Russ, Now, let's say that we "create" two entangled particles or photons. Must the two particles now "catch a ride" on two "chain-linked" Mobius loops, each heading off in different "directions?" Or do the particle potentials occupy the entire "linked" double Mobius loop? That is the only way I can see "quantum teleportation of state" to another particle across the universe. These linked Mobius loops would have to be in existence BEFORE the two photons happen to catch a ride on it in order to explain observed quantum entanglement phenomenon. This makes sense to me because the creation of local quantum entanglement probably comes about through tapping preexistent global quantum entanglement such that probability and quantum entanglement and information is conserved. However, information is not conserved for quantum entanglement involving superpositions of quantum states that are separated by more than a Planck mass – this would correspond to the superposition of distinct quantum vacua, which is absolutely ruled out in quantum field theory – you can only do this within the very limited boundary conditions set by the locally prevailing Heisenberg energy uncertainties. But within the bounds set by quantum uncertainty, I would agree that local quantum entanglement is created by borrowing from preexistent global quantum entanglement, i.e., quantum entanglement of states of the same vacuum state, i.e., of quantum entangled vacua with an energy spread smaller than a Planck mass. In this way, causality is exhaustively described in terms of quantum correlations of quantum fluctuations (within the self-same vacuum state). During noncoherent photon production by electron cascade, such as in an ordinary light bulb, only about 2 in 10^11 photons created by the light bulb are considered entangled with one another. Are these linked loops then relatively "rare" or must the lucky entangled photon pair have special properties in order to "catch a ride" on two linked Mobius loops?

Maybe it is both of those possibilities! The “special property” is both photons derived from the same vacuum state, i.e., they are entangled because they are both entangled with the same vacuum state to begin with. I suppose some kind of dimensionless ratio, say of two different vacuum energy densities (cosmological constant divided by Planck density in the extreme case!) might come into play in calculating the probability of two photons - of a given wavelength, separated by a certain spacetime interval between the two quantum uncertain spacetime points at which created, being 100% quantum correlated. Now, I imagine an atom. I can envision the atom as many nested fractal Mobius loops all interconnecting with one another so that everything in the atom is "self-entangled." Now, would the Pauli exclusion principle mean that only one loop can be occupied by two electrons at a time with opposite "spins?" In this case, the spin would just be a result of which of two directions the respective electrons are moving within the loop. Yes, that smacks of good common sense/intuition. I buy that idea. Now, spontaneous fission of the nucleus occurs and must surely cause a "breaking" of about half of the loops from one another (although fission products of the original nucleus are thought to remain entangled for a brief period of time). What makes the nucleus unstable? Is there a "loose end" of a broken Mobius loop flying in the vacuum flux breeze which when tugged causes the original nucleus to "unravel" into two nuclei? Distinct topologies cannot be “grounded” in the very same spacetime. Clearly open and closed loops possess distinct topology, just as twisted and non-twisted loops possess distinct topologies. Distinct topologies then cannot be superposed and any superposition of quantum states that threatens branching into to two or more topologies for the system shall collapse “under its own weight”, if you will. This is not an answer, but a consideration in relation to your question. Benni Reznik has a lot to say about vacuum nonlocality and Lorentz transformations of entanglement. You diagram makes sense if, instead of Lorentz transformations, you think in terms of progressively greater

accelerations, from say Hc (Hubble’s constant time the speed of light), that is to say, the cosmological acceleration to the Planck acceleration. I’d really like to try the dowsing experiment, by the way. And make sure and borrow a timepiece tied to an atomic clock signal and establish some kind of synched up communication link with Dr. Desbrandes when you guys do your entanglement experiment. There should be an equivalence between the so called “one graviton” limit, i.e., Planck mass in the complexity of vacuum fluctuations and the complexity of what can be teleported nonlocally between points A and B. Since to escape the speed of light restriction on propagation of energy of the specific kind discussed by Einstein, which is to say energy that possesses inertia, we need a chain of merely correlated (though causally independent), that is, quantum correlated vacuum fluctuations along the entire trajectory to support the passage of the energy or information that shall therefore propagate without inertial effect. Each individual quantum fluctuation nonlocally correlated to its neighbor in the chain forming this trajectory would therefore be below the one graviton limit or cutoff. This would also serve as a natural limit on the degree of quantum correlation of one quantum fluctuation of the vacuum and its immediate neighbor within the trajectory of nonlocally propagating information/energy. The cosmological constant problem being solved on this view through both current density of quantum correlation and density of quantum coherence (of each individual quantum fluctuation) being held below this same Planck mass or Penrosian one graviton limit. Inertial mass is thus seen as being intimately related to a kind of symmetry breaking of the quantum vacuum involving fluctuations in this vacuum’s stress-momentum-energy becoming classically correlated on top of being maximally quantum correlated (or more generally, where the sum of the densities and current densities of classical + quantum information exceeding the one graviton limit in the cases of quantum fluctuation and quantum teleportation, respectively) and so inertial mass is then entirely a function of classical information and therefore exclusively an artifact of distinctly classical as opposed to distinctly quantum physics. There is a coincidence between the definition of a

classical black hole (in terms of escape velocity of a body being equal to the speed of light, c.f., LaPlacian black holes) with the definition of a quantum black hole in the sense of yielding identical Schwarzchild black hole equations. The quantum black hole must be analyzed in terms of this conservation of entanglement concept of ours. . . say where quantum entanglement shifts from a mixture of spacelike and timelike to being exclusively spacelike, c.f., spin-0 fermion-antifermionic fluctuations vs. spin-1 bosonic fluctuations. Don't know why I didn't realize this earlier, but a fermion rotated 360 degrees only goes round a Mobius loop once and has to go around *twice* in order to reach its originally orientation. I believe the Mobius twist is in the four space that the universe is expanding into. Take a strip of paper and make a Mobius strip by doing a half twist of the ends and taping them together. If a cut out of a tracing of a hand, say a left hand is slid along the Mobius strip loop one cycle, it comes out mirror reversed and must be slid around one more cycle on the Mobius strip or loop to come back to its original orientation in *3 dimensions*, this even thought the cut out and strip are two dimensional. But the Mobius strip has to be twisted through 3 dimensions to be constructed. So by analogy (adding a dimension) the rotation of the fermion by 720 degrees is analogous, but one must add one dimension so that the rotation takes place in four space. So rotating a fermion with a magnetic field by only 360 degrees must secretly be taking the fermion through a Mobius twist in four dimensional space. I think in this way the timelike nature of the fermion-antifermion pair can be proven and such a spin 0 vacuum fluctuation proven to be also purely timelike. My google search link (above) demonstrates that no one has really remarked about this - as the link produced "0 hits". Seems so obvious now though, right? So the existence of 4d-spacetime can be seen as proof of a pure 4d space as well, once quantum statistics of fermions is taken into account. What do you think? (How your face looks in your driver's license picture, for example wouldn't match with how you look in a mirror unless you were sent through this same 320 Mobius loop, by the way - hehe!)

There is a camp of molecular biologists who claim that the DNA/RNA/Protein system that currently exists ad even that of the earliest most primitive kind is/was possessed of an "irreducible complexity", e.g., mousetrap. Like the net of Indra there had to be a kind of simultaneously arising of the entire system at some critical level of initial complexity. This may seem to suggest that the complexity of simple coherent biochemical systems must be abstractions from the top down rather than "concretions" from the bottom up. This is similar to the notion of how the mind of Man descended from the transcendent through progressive limitation rather than upward from the immanent through a building up from combinations of the simplest components of matter, C, H, O, N, etc. There should be some kind of simple trig function of the angle of alignment (such as cosine of a double angle, etc.) of the virtual electron and positron spins in the virtual Cooper pair that could be an index of the degree of quantum entanglement of anticorrelation of the two spin1/2's. The fact of the orientation of spin of a spin-1/2 particle being dependent upon the observer's choice of reference frame (in the sense of the choice of magnetic field direction) and indeterminate otherwise (unless you happen to have some classical information bits from a previous incarnation of the system, that is) is somehow importantly connected with relativity. We of course must not lose sight of the peculiarity of the antisymmetry of the fermionic wavefunction when trying to picture the relative spatial orientation ( in the sense of relative mutual rotation of the spin +/- 1/2 of the electron and positron composing the same Cooper pair.) That is, if we are going to look for some spatial analogue for entanglement of spins, what we have termed "magnetization entanglement". Remember that you must rotate a fermion 720 degrees to get back the wavefunction you started with.

A positron is an electron moving backward in time, suppose. So what's the minimum spacetime rotation for the electron and the positron which gives back the composite spin-0 particle (Cooper pair) with which one started? Mighte the physical remains as mere vacuum field initial and boundary conditions become entangled with the general boundary conditions of the larger environemnt, while the spectrum of vacuum fields with which the deceased person's brain once typically resonated and quantum entanglement must simply continue in the absence of those specific boundary conditions contituted by the person's quantum microtubule network? We should associate the structures of consciousness with the particular spectra of vacuum fields, which themselves probably have always been entangled to some degree with the vacuum at large. Momentum-energy is conserved and there are quantum numbers for momentum and energy, but spacetime as the complementary quantitiey, I suspected has no quantum number, i.e., it's not a conserved quantity and so, without a quantum of spacetime, we should not expect gravitons (or gravity waves, for that matter) to exist. Besides, we have spin-1/2 and spin-1, which is all we need to maek particles of spin-0, spin-3/2 and spin-2, etc. There's no need for a fundamental spin-2 particle. Nature's conservative in that way. Well, it looks like the relationships of polarization, P, magnetization, M and permittivity and permeability are just right, if you assume 0 magnetic and electric field stengths for the vacuum, i.e., and = 0 for vacuum (which seems reasonable) to support the idea of fermionic and bosonic entanglement being two different forms of a generalized quantum entanglement which is conserved. Entanglement conservation is probably more fundamental than mrere probability conservation, since the exact quantum mechanical analogue for classical probability is sqrt[Psi x Psi*] where Psi is pure state wavefunction, while the generalization of this quantity is of course the density matrix where the

phase relations of the components of the density matrix (and their temporal evolution) represents the distribution of quantum entanglement in the statistically mixed system. By prn=Noether's theorem there should be an underlying symmetry for quantum entanglement (QE) as a conserved quantity as well as a quantum number uniquely associated with QE. The symmetry may turn out to be ordinary spacetime symmetry (but of a deeper kind than that pointed up by mere momentum-energy vector or, stress-momentumenergy tensor). And of course the quantum number associated with QE symmetry must be the inverse of von Neumann entropy, which we'll call von Neumann information (in contrast to classical, digital or "Shannon information"). "POLARIZATION VECTORS. In the theory of the electromagnetic field: two vectors, P and M, given by P = D - eE and M = B/u - H, where D is the displacement, E the electric field strength, B the magnetic induction, H the magnetic field strength, and e and u the permittivity and permeability respectively in empty space." Dictionary of Physics (1980) July 2013

The equating of information with a reduction in uncertainty (Shannon information) does not fully capture the nature of information as our uncertainty, which is intentional in nature, i.e., it’s uncertainty about something. How might we interpret a reduction in uncertainty that is not intentional, say when we learn about something that we previously knew nothing about? That is new information, but does not represent a reduction in any uncertainty about something in particular. Is the past robust against two-dimensional temporal fluctuations? Imagine that the blind spot of the eye is directly over the fovea. What are the metaphorical philosophical implications of this thought experiment? The acquisition of a first language by an infant or small child necessarily involves a bootstrapping process. This is because the funny sounds made by the people which the infant hears do not contain any information in and of themselves. The neo-darwinian mechanism of evolution is formed of two components one is strictly critical in nature and the other random. Creativity can be founded on neither, however

we're supposed to believe that acting together these two components of the evolutionary mechanisms are sufficient to produce new genetic information. What is the primary distinction between new information existing information which appears new because it has been reprocessed? The fine tuning of physical constants is so terribly exact and precise that the object of this tuning could only be that which is the most specific thing possible. This brings up the intriguing question whether or not selection for a spectrum or array of distinct consciousness’s constitutes a more precise target for the Mixmaster universe to hit than is a specific individual consciousness? It is difficult to imagine that our conception of the universe is nothing more than a projection made from a standpoint of abysmally limited knowledge. We mistakenly and subconsciously conceive of the unknown as the totality of what we know that we don't know. I wonder if we can take as general principle for making up gedanken experiments about possible analogue (i.e., mechanical) models of gravitation the following: See what happens to physical quantities in the vacuum when transforming to an accelerated reference frame and invoke Einstein's equivalence principle (both principles, strong and weak, inertial mass = gravitational mass and gravitation equivalent to acceleration) in order to propose just these types of changes to these vacuum physical quantities as the underlying mechanism for sustaining a gravitational field. Is the change in configuration energy of the vacuum fields that must adjust in some way when a particle, such as a proton or muon is removed from the region of the vacuum? This is like thinking of the particle's inertial mass in terms of the mass equivalence of the particle's vacuum enthalpy. Kind of like calculating the 1st order propagator/state of a particle as a 1st order manifestation of the underlying vacuum field, by summing up all the 2nd order and all higher order corrections to the propagator?

I kind of imagine the atoms composing any bit of matter, any mass as dynamically grouping themselves into composite bosons and fermions through a continual mutual exchange of quantum entanglement between these virtual "cells" and "domains" formed of arbitrary groupings of entangled atoms that are continually reconstituting themselves so as to maintain a kind of entanglement equilibrium, i.e., continual avoidance of squeezed states while maintaining overall conservation of entanglement throughout the bulk of the mass. However, upon accleration, squeezed states form but in accordance with a kind of action or minimization principle that maintains a shifted thermodynamic equilibrium within the mass, i.e., some entropy is inevitably produced by acceleration. (Reversibility of time-independent Schrodinger equation deterministic evolution, forseable by the cosmic quantum vacuum CPU must break down, necessitating decoherence processes) And the net bulk entanglement within the mass shifts from spin-0 to spin-1 through a shift in the distrubution of entanglement, mimicking what would be expected for a vacuum with equivalent gravitational potential (in terms of equivalent acceleration). A Rindler horizon (as a generalization of an event horizon) forms and Davies-Unruh radiation is observed that is consistent with the entropy of the newly formed Rindler horizon . . . whew! Of course, the permeability and permittivity within the bulk matter also transform so that the speed of light within the mass changes to reflect the new vacuum that the mass sees while under acceleration, and so on. . . I've been looking at this idea of the vacuum not gravitating. Force may be characterized as either time rate of change in 3-momentum or as space rate of change in energy (timelike 4-momentum, if your will). Notice that when a photon either falls into a gravitational potential or "climbs out" of one that the ratios, /\p//\t and /\E//\x are constant, implying that the vacuum exerts no force on the infalling or escaping photon. Notice also that the photon's 4-momentum is unchanged though climbing out of a potential and reshifting in the process. This s because

the increase in the local velocity of light (i.e., acceleration of the photon) as the photon reaches regions of decreased potential (as the photon climbs out) is exactly by the decrease in the photon's frequency - these act in opposing senses so that the photon's 4-momentum is conserved. I've also been thinking that the notion of Heisenberg uncertainty should be related more directly to the idea of relative decoherence of the timelike, spin-0 (virtual Cooper pair creation-annihilation) and spacelike, spin-1 (virtual boson exchanges within 3-space) components of the fluctuating quantum vacuum in a changing gravitational potential. I think that an increased /\p (uncertainty in 3-momentum) governing the decreased density of creation-annihilation of virtual Cooper pairs within a strong gravitational potential could be interpreted as an increased internal decoherence of the Cooper pairs' wavefunction (or density matrix) and the decreased /\E (uncertainty in imaginary 4-momentum) governing the increased density of virtual boson exchanges in this strong potential could be interpreted as a decreased, i.e., increased coherence, hence entanglement of these virtual bosons. This seems elegant and invites more systematic thought about H-uncertainty and its relation to decoherence and entanglement in a gravitational potential relative to free space spacetime. Question: if an electron and a positron mutually annihilate, the pair of photons produced will have perfect correlation of their polarizations, provided that the spins of the electron and positron were perfectly entangled so as to be anti-parallel. If the entanglement of the + or _ 1/2 spin of the electron and positron is 0, then the polarizations of the photons produced in the mutual annihilation shall be completely decohered, correct? If I'm right, then wouldn't this support the idea of there being a close relationship between entanglement of virtual Cooper pairs and virtual photons in a gravitational field, at least in essence, you know, in terms of the whole conservation of entanglement concept as applied to bosonic and fermionic vacuum fluctuations of momentumenergy, c.f., http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron-positron_annihilation

A dielectric medium has a reduced velocity of light because of the continual absorption and reemission of the photons as the photon passes through the medium. The decreased velocity of light in a vacuum where a strong gravitational field is present might be understood in a similar manner – the electron-positron creation-annihilations are of lower density in a gravitational field and so a photon must compensate by possessing a greater momentum uncertainty to bridge the gap created by the reduced energy uncertainty of this gravitational potential infused vacuum. Mathew Brzezinski New York Times article about Military’s resistance to introduction of new warfighter technology. ^^ indexes passages or equations of interest Can you grant that the ratio of the Heisenberg energy uncertainty to the Heisenberg momentum uncertainty, /\E//\p ~ c? How about that /\p and /\E together form a 4-vector of momentum-energy uncertainty, which is Lorentz-invariant? (Note: we would expect in a non-symmetric gravitational field for there to be a stress-momentum-energy uncertainty tensor, nicht wahr?) Can you grant that the exchange of virtual photons between two electrons constitutes a fluctuation in the vacuum’s 3-momentum? It is also a fluctuation in the vacuum’s energy, but not of its 3-momentum? In this sense, the collective spin-0 fluctuations in the vacuum’s momentum-energy are orthogonal to the spin-1 (3-vector) fluctuations in vacuum momentum-energy. But this orthogonality of spin-0 and spin-1 vacuum momentum-energy fluctuations only obtains for the case of the so-called free space vacuum and constitutes a kind of quantum statistical basis for spacetime symmetry. By the way, since /\Q = [ - 2] with the first term under the

radical being the fluctuation term and the second the square of the expectation value of Q, it follows that in the absence of matter, i.e., in vacuum, the Heisenberg uncertainty in Q, /\Q is identical to the fluctuation in Q. Now lets ask what happens to the ratio, /\E//\p when viewed from an accelerated reference frame. /\t dilates and /\x (in the direction of motion) contracts. Given that /\E/\p = h and /\p/\x = h, it follows that from the perspective of an accelerated reference frame, /\E contracts and /\p dilates (gets larger) The hypothesis here is that /\E and /\p mutually change when viewed from an accelerated frame of reference so as to represent a spacetime rotation of /\E and /\p as components of a conserved 4-vector. Now if /\E relativistically shrinks (remember in vacuum /\E is the fluctuation in the vacuum’s energy) and the incompatible observable (parameter), /\t dilates, then this can be represented consistently, I believe as a density of creation-annihilations for virtual Cooper pairs being reduced and therefore the frequencies of temporal processes, which fundamentally depend upon Heisenberg energy uncertainty must take place at a slower rate. Since /\E relativistically shrinks, by what has already been said, /\p the fluctuation in the vacuum’s 3-momentum, must increase and the density of virtual boson exchanges taking place within matter contained within this transformed vacuum must therefore increase as well, leading to an increase in the binding energy density of the mass, which is associated with a relativistically increase in mass. The reason I identify /\E with timelike fluctuations is because /\t is an incompatible Heisenberg uncertainty relative to /\E. And I interpret spin-0 (scalar) to be a timelike oriented vector, i.e., it’s really spin-1

though oriented parallel to the local time axis. I interpret spin-1 (3vector) to be a spacelike vector, it’s really spin-0, but oriented parallel to a spatial direction. Therefore, the transformation of space and time, contraction and dilation, which occurs when moving to an accelerated frame is paralleled by a transformation of 3-momentum and energy (conceived of as timelike oriented momentum or “imaginary” momentum – because of the Minkowski (+,+,+,-) signature of spacetime). The transformation is otherwise known as a Lorentz boost. Magnetic and electric fields mutually transform, magnetization and polarization transform and the Heisenberg uncertainties in p and E, /\p and /\E transform after the fashion of a spacetime rotation of 4-momentum (4-momentum uncertainty in this case). The bulk properties of matter such as magnetization and polarization are entanglement driven and so the transformation of entanglement caused by acceleration should cause a transformation of the magnetic permeability and electric permittivity of the quantum vacuum through transforming the equilibrium magnetization and polarization of the free space vacuum. This is suggested by reviewing the basic formulas for polarization and magnetization, P = D - ; M = B – H/ Notice that an increasing polarization, P and a decreasing magnetization, M, which is to be understood as a spacetime rotation (in accordance with the relativistic formulation of Maxwell’s Equations). The question arises whether the expectation values of D and B, and in free space vacuum are indeed 0. The basis for the thermal temperature distribution for Davies-Unruh radiation is the increased density of virtual boson exchange taking place between the bubbling virtual cooper pairs. Is the source of the entropy

associated with the Unruh temperature the increased disorder of the previously (almost) perfectly antiparallel electron-positrons of each virtual cooper pair? In perfectly flat spacetime, there would be no selfPauli blocking and no virtual boson exchanges and no initial and boundary conditions – eternal universe of infinite size. The limit on the size, i.e., “mass” of quantum fluctuations of the vacuum should determine the limit on mass of quantum states that can be superposed. Vacuum boundary conditions, which produce “compound fluctuations”, which cannot occur in the free space vacuum as simple fluctuations may now be understood to be fluctuation structures “in” the vacuum and not simply “of” the vacuum. It is at this stage in complexity where the system must be supposed to possess some independent information content. Can an event occur for two or more unrelated reasons similar to degeneracy in quantum mechanics? The imagination prompts us to form conceptions of things we could however conceived had we not possessed the words not to describe but to trigger the network of otherwise consciously inaccessible associations – changes in consciousness necessarily go along with this polymath of metaphor generation that is largely unconscious. Magnetization of virtual Cooper pairs may be considered internal entanglement. External entanglement of virtual pairs may be described in terms of polarization of the virtual photons of the quantum vacuum. There is a fundamental difference between command and execution that is not sufficiently understood by proponents of hard AI (artificial intelligence). If you count the number of Planck areas that fit on the surface of a black hole or radius, R and apply Boltzmann’s formula for entropy, considering each of these Planck areas to constitute a single bit of

information, then can you get the correct value for the Hawking temperature of the hole in this way? I tend to think that all of the hole’s information content is contained on its surface, where the timelike collective spin-0 imaginary momentum fluctuations (in the form of creation-annihilation of Cooper pairs) has been completely transformed into spacelike 3-momentum fluctuations in the form of virtual photons promoted to being real photons radiated from the hole’s shrinking surface as black body radiation. Each photon emitted from the hole is purely thermal because representing the mutual annihilation of positron-electron pairs whose mutual spin-1/2 orientations have become totally disentangled. Although the electromagnetic spectrum of the hole’s emission is that of a black body, i.e., perfectly thermal, all of the entanglement information lost from the total decoherence of the virtual electron-positron pairs created and annihilated at the hole’s event horizon is retained in the polarization entanglement of the photons emitted from the hole’s event horizon. (This is our idea of quantum entanglement in the vacuum being a conserved quantity, relating via Noether’s theorem to some symmetry – I insist this symmetry is quantum statistical in nature and is closely connected with spacetime symmetry itself. This is consistent with maximal red-shifting of the hole’s thermal photon emissions (Hawking radiation) as viewed at infinity (where the hole’s potential = 0) and also consistent with a photon falling into the hole from infinity being infinitely blue-shifted. All of the entanglement of in-falling photons with the progressively more entangled virtual photons of the vacuum e/m fluctuations that lie ever closer to the hole’s event horizon – in the sense of DeBroglie wave contraction with progressive virtual photon entanglement in the vacuum progressively closer to the hole’s event horizon. Well look at the surface of a black hole as the extreme case where decoherence, entropy and time dilation all occur together. When a virtual Cooper pair is spontaneously created just this side of the event horizon, one component of the pair, let’s say in this case a positron, falls

into the hole and its partner, the leftover electron, must mutually annihilate with another positron from an altogether different virtual Cooper pair that is also spontaneously created locally (relative to the unpartnered electron) and just this side of the event horizon – this represents 100% decoherence of the original Cooper pair in the sense of all entanglement information seemingly having been lost with the partner fermion that fell into the black hole. The entanglement information is really conserved and comes out of the mutual annihilation of the leftover partner virtual electron with the new virtual positron that was created as part of the newly created virtual Cooper pair. If spin-0 in “free space” spacetime is understood as timelike spin-1, then this same spin-0 particle becomes spacelike spin-1 very near the surface of the black hole. This is because space and time axes actually “swap” with one another between infinity (free space) and the surface of the black hole. That magnetization entanglement gets encoded in the form of the photon-antiphoton pair that results from this new pair’s annihilation. The photon-antiphoton pair is 100% Bose condensed and is therefore really a single photon, which is also entangled with all of the virtual photons presently (within /\t, which is virtually infinite at the event horizon, c.f., holographic principle) radiated from the black hole’s surface (event horizon). I believe this because I believe that there is maximal virtual photon Bose condensation at the black hole’s surface. As the two photons (now condensed into a single photon) radiate thermally from the hole’s surface in the form of Hawking radiation, this polarization entanglement (of all the photons radiated from the hole’s surface along with our particular condensed photon – around which our discussion is centered) will eventually be returned to the vacuum as progressive magnetization entanglement of virtual electron-positron pairs along the photon’s trajectory from the hole’s surface to infinity. There will be a 90o spacetime rotation in the photon traveling from the hole’s event horizon to infinity. The spin-1 photon becomes spin-0 at

infinity and is once again a virtual Cooper pair being successively created and annihilated. Also at infinity all of the polarization entanglement of the propagating Hawking radiation photons has been lost back to the vacuum in the form of a trail of enhanced vacuum magnetization entanglement of the virtual Cooper pairs that composed the trajectory of the photons in the form of 2nd order propagators for the escaping photons. Note that in moving from the surface of a black hole to infinity, the light cone tips back from its time axis oriented towards the hole’s center to being oriented away from the hole’s center. This represents a rotation of 180 degrees in space, but is in fact only a mutual rotation of the light cone’s space and time axes of 90 degrees! The oscillating electric and magnetic fields which compose a photon are 90 degrees out of phase with one another. I’ve often thought that the fact that you have to rotate a fermion by 720 o to get the original fermion wavefunction back is connected with the fact that there is a 360o spacetime rotation of the photon’s spin in taking the photon from infinity to the surface of a black hole and back again? That magnetization entanglement gets encoded in the form of the photon-antiphoton pair that results from this new pair’s annihilation. The photon-antiphoton pair is 100% Bose condensed and is therefore really a single photon, which is also entangled with all of the virtual photons being at that moment radiated from the black hole’s surface (event horizon). I believe this because I believe that there is a maximal virtual photon Bose condensation at the black hole’s surface. As the two photons (now condensed into a single photon) radiate thermally from the hole’s surface in the form of Hawking radiation, this polarization entanglement (of all the photons radiated from the hole’s surface along with our particular condensed photon – around which our discussion is centered) will eventually be returned to the vacuum as progressive magnetization entanglement of virtual electron-positron pairs along the photon’s trajectory from the hole’s surface to infinity.

There will be a 90 degree spacetime rotation in the photon traveling from the hole’s event horizon to infinity (“free space” spacetime, or “vacuum”). The spin-1 photon becomes spin-0 at infinity and is once again a virtual Cooper pair being successively created and annihilated. I’ve often thought that the fact that you have to rotate a fermion 720 degrees to get the original fermion wavefunction back is connected with the fact that there is a 360 degree spacetime rotation of the photon’s spin in taking the photon from infinity to the surface of a black hole and back again? By examining kinematic effects upon Heisenberg uncertainties and quantum entanglement of Lorentz transformations, i.e., special relativity, we can via application of Einstein’s equivalence principle make perhaps less than misguided guesses at the fluctuation-correlation structure of the gravitating quantum vacuum. We should measure the relative decoherence of the e+e-, i.e., spin-0 and , i.e., spin-1 components of the vacuum in terms of the relative magnitude of /\E and /\p. In a gravitational potential an in—falling or escaping photon feels no “force” because both ratios, /\E//\x and /\p//\t are unchanging along the photon’s trajectory. The ratios, /\E//\p and /\x/\t do however change along two ratios change in opposite sense. In other words, the changing local velocity of light increases as the photon climbs up the gravitational potential at the same time as the length in the direction of the photon’s propagation expands which the photon’s frequency (as opposed to period) dilates. The photon accelerates as its frequency decreases. In this manner is the photon’s 4momentum conserved though propagating through a change in gravitational potential. To relate relative decoherence to spin-0 and spin-1 vacuum fluctuations, we must examine the /\E of 3-momentum fluctuations vs. the /\p of energy fluctuations, i.e., timelike p-uncertainty of spacelike momentum fluctuations and spacelike p-uncertainty of timelike momentum fluctuations.

Instead of spin and angular momentum, J = L + S, lets look at the underlying phase space within which J is interpreted as a 1-form and relate spacetime curvature to curvature of phase space. What about the relationship of N-dimensional configuration space to phase space which is in turn related to entanglement distribution and squeezed states, say of an extended coupled harmonic oscillator/crystal? Look at helicity of annihilating e+e- pair and helicity of resulting  pair. Barry Setterfield proposes that the ZPE, zero-point energy of the vacuum is the residual energy from the Big Bang, inflation, etc. If there is some dynamic energetic process distributed throughout the cosmos, which is decaying or otherwise changing with time, and this process affects the manner of light’s propagation, then we are likely to incorrectly estimate the variables entering into the equation describing this process if indeed we depend on information about the nature of light that is our only observational indicator of how this process is unfolding. Davies-Unruh temperature is 0 for inertially in-falling particles such as photons. One kind of vacuum entanglement for inertial motion and another for non-inertial motion. How much energy does it take to convert a gas of spin-1 bosons, e.g., photons into a gas of collective spin-0 Cooper pairs (100% quantum anti-correlated spins)? Hyperentanglement – the superposition of all superpositions – the context of all possible superpositions. Hyperentanglement is quantum entanglement that cannot be decohered by even infinite acceleration. Heuristics are necessary because learning and communication, even memory are always constructs that involve a dialectical process, which is to say a process that is not ground-independent. The converse of the proposition that the self is a social construct is the proposition that the other is a projection of the self, Kantian Copernican

Revolution (in reverse). Don’t wait for the experience to be past before it becomes a memory. This is an almost incoherent maxim in English. But in common, it is quite an elegant expression. Classical information is a subset of quantum information. So when I receive information from someone and my brain processes the sensory data carrying this information, my brain as a quantum computer simply changes its state of quantum entanglement with the quantum vacuum field with which its neural microtubules are in continual interaction. In this way, it is realized that I haven’t actually received any information from the other person at all. I’ve just received a set of instructions for downloading, if you will the appropriate nonlocally encoded signals that we might suppose were already there in the vacuum for perhaps a very long time and the circuits of my microtubule network have only just now been returned so as to receive them. The question arises as to whether the signals had to be originally put there by anybody (maybe by the person from whom I received the communication). Viewing a dielectric slab from the standpoint of an accelerated reference frame, not only the polarization and magnetization of the slab, but also the electric permittivity and magnetic permeability transform. Polarization and magnetization quantum entanglement of spontaneously created and annihilated virtual photons and virtual fermion-antifermion pairs also undergo a continuum of Lorentz transformations. http://phys.org/news/2011-08-dark-illusion-quantum-vacuum.html At the event horizon of the black hole, an 100% swap has occurred of quantum entanglement of spin-1/2 composite of virtual composite spin-0 Cooper pairs (what might be termed magnetization entanglement) into the 100% polarization entanglement of virtual photons (photon pairs?). Rotating Clock Puzzle – when an apparent paradox stems from logic that is not thorough-going enough (this, however turned out not to be the

case where “Gödel’s Paradox” was concerned). What was Gödel’s paradox, c.f., Wikipedia.org. The square end table clock reads, “6:15”. Turn the clock 90o clockwise and it now reads “9:30”, then turn the clock clockwise another 90o and the clock reads “12:45”. Turning the clock another 90o clockwise and the clock reads 3:00. Turn it once more and the clock once again reads “6:15”. This gives us a total of 13 hours. This is the paradox, which is easily enough solved when you realize that the hour hand is accumulating a retardation in its clockwise progression around the clock face of 15 minutes per ¼ turn. Can an idea which has no author, e.g., is stumbled upon by many independently of one another be a valuable spiritual teaching? When the density of virtual Cooper pairs is produced and (to conserved entanglement the density of virtual bosons is relatively enhanced we have a case in which a smaller density of changes in energy in controlling a larger density of changes in 3-momentum responsible for binding forces accounting for matter’s rigidity and inertia). Except for masses approaching black hole density, most of the 4-momentum of the mass remains imaginary and timelike. Time dilation and relativistic mass can be seen to be intimately related in terms of this cellular automata (CA) analogue model for GR. Should this CA model best be simulated on a classical or quantum computer? Develop a piece of software that randomly shuffles test questions and answers and assigns each answer key individually to a student. If one student gets the same answers as another, then this will be proof positive of cheating, the number of distinct answer sequences being 10! for a 10question exam. Research which subscriptions and service contracts are most difficult to cancel, e.g., AOL and offer a web-based service of canceling and documenting cancellation of said service contracts. Self-Pauli blocking of spontaneously created and annihilated virtual Cooper pairs (partially decohered in the sense of impaired magnetization

entanglement) within the fluctuating quantum vacuum constitutes perhaps the suppression of timelike quantum correlations of otherwise pure imaginary 4-momentum fluctuations. In this way quantum entanglement of timelike fluctuations in vacuum momentum-energy is transferred to quantum entanglement of spacelike fluctuations in vacuum momentum-energy. By the way, the speed of light would be infinite in the case of 100% magnetization entanglement of the spontaneously created/annihilated virtual Cooper pairs. Magnetic permeability and permittivity represent the bulk electromagnetic properties of he quantum vacuum that are owing to the relative polarization and magnetization entanglement of virtual bosons and virtual Cooper pairs continually and spontaneously created within the vacuum on account of the Heisenberg momentum and energy principles. Look at polarization and magnetization in a dielectric/diamagnetic medium and ,  for this medium with regard to entanglement of P and M in the medium. Look at generalized Lorentz force in terms of relativistic transformation of timelike B-field (E-field) into spacelike Bfield. Look at collective spin states/density matrices for e +e- for full range of possible entanglement of e+ with e- from the same Cooper pair. IvonNeumann – Ishannon = Iq – Ic = Ie Iq = Iquantum Ic = Iclassical Ie = Ientanglement DNA represents classically encoded quantum information and quantum encoded classical information. Classical information – information about initial and boundary conditions. Quantum information – information about nonlocal objects encoded through quantum entanglement of vacuum fluctuations

Distinguish from Classical quantum and “robust” information, i.e., information that cannot decohere, e.g., say due to infinite accelerations. Coherent meme complexes both possess or exhibit and are predatory upon other coherent meme complexes, CMC’s are entity like. What do distributed nonlocal effects of EPR in curved spacetime have to say about local EPR effects in curved spacetime. Human nature is a reflection of divine nature or divine nature is a reflection of human nature? But it takes consciousness to even come to know what human nature is! If the photon spends part of its time as an electron-positron pair, then we might suppose that the wavefunction describing such electron-positron pairs is identical with the vector potential of the propagating photon. As the photon “falls” into a gravitational potential it is entering a vacuum of progressively greater density of 3-momentum fluctuations, i.e., virtual photons with which therefore the photon increasingly interacts, meaning also progressive decoherence of the wavefunction of the photon or of its vector potential Au. This decoherence is manifest as increased entanglement of the falling photon with the succession of virtual photons along the photon’s trajectory. There is an associated increased mutual disentanglement of the virtual electron-positron pairs (that is, of each virtual pair’s component electron and positron parts) along the photon’s trajectory (and which constitute the timelike component of the photon’s propagator.) This may be alternately seen as the photon encountering, as it falls within the gravitational potential, a quantum vacuum that is progressively more polarized and less magnetized. This leads us to believe that the photon falling into the gravitational potential also enters a vacuum of progressively decohered virtual Cooper-paired electronpositrons. Note that the more decohered are the virtual Cooper pairs (in

the sense of loss of mutual quantum correlation of the pairs’ component electron and positron parts), the less do the virtual electron and positron components of the Cooper pair exist as pure collective spin-0 (the spins of the electrons and positrons belonging to the same Cooper pair are no longer precisely anti-parallel or 100% quantum anti-correlated) and so there should be an enhanced self-Pauli blocking of virtual fermions/antifermions continuously being created and annihilated (and recreated and re-annihilated) by the quantum vacuum (at each spacetime point along the photon’s trajectory), that is, relative to the case of the free space vacuum. The increased mutual entanglement of the virtual photons along the path of the in-falling photon’s trajectory, which accounts for the gravitational blueshift of the in-falling photon through the change in DeBroglie wavelength of the entangled virtual photons, by the way may be understood as Bose condensation. Increased Bose condensation of (spin-1) virtual photons in conjunction with increased Pauli blocking of (spin-0) virtual Cooper pairs goes hand in hand with a shift in the density of the vacuum’s momentum-energy fluctuations from less timelike, imaginary momentum fluctuations toward more spacelike 3momentum fluctuations. You can also look at this shift in momentumenergy components of the vacuum’s momentum-energy fluctuation matrix along the path of increasing gravitational potential as the photon experiencing a vacuum of increasing polarization and decreasing magnetization. Hmmmm. . . Hypotheses of my theory, which are not established by prior art: Imaginary momentum fluctuations are collective spin-0 100% quantum anti-correlated virtual spin +/- ½ fermions. In free space these imaginary momentum fluctuations constitute the vacuum’s energy density (as opposed to its pressure) such that /\E vac2 - /\px2 - /\py2 - /\pz2 = /\pimaginary2. When /\E’ > /\E, then /\E’//\p’ < /\E//\p such that c’ < c vacuo means in terms sf the quantum noise in photonics model that less imaginary momentum fluctuations control more real or 3-momentum fluctuations. A reduced speed of light locally means that, locally virtual bosons are becoming more highly correlated and imaginary momentum

fluctuations, less correlated. Photon trajectories in a gravitational field represent a conserved quantum entanglement and hence, a conserved Heisenberg uncertainty. Maybe there is a quantum information treatment of the old LeSage analogue theory of gravity, which can explain the effect of bulk matter upon the vacuum in terms of disrupting the quantum entanglement of the spin +/- ½ components of virtual Cooper pairs, e.g., electrons, muons, neutrinos, etc. If the quantum correlation of say virtual e -e+’s within a given small volume of quantum vacuum is essentially nonlocal though at the same time this nonlocal quantum correlation were locally mediated, then we might expect some sort of inverse-square law of the distribution of these correlations in terms of the local distribution of matter. What should we expect to happen to the density matrix describing a real Cooper pair, which falls into a say neutron star’s gravitational potential? It is the belief here that what happens to this density matrix over time, as the pair falls toward the neutron star is just a reflection of changes that a comoving observer would observe for the density matrix describing virtual Cooper pair creation-annihilation along the trajectory of the falling real Cooper pair. In other words, gravity does not alter the QM statistics of vacuum fluctuations, but rather matter does this, and the altered QM vacuum statistics is what itself constitutes the gravitational field. Tom Van Flandern notes the following in his http://www.metaresearch.org/cosmology/speed_of_gravity.asp that “The rubber sheet analogy is represented as a way of visualizing why bodies attract one another. However, in that regard, it is highly defective. A target body sitting on the side of an indentation would stay in place, with no tendency to roll downhill, unless there were already a force such as gravity underneath the rubber sheet pulling everything downhill. And this failure of the analogy helps us identify the precise problem with the curved space-time description of gravity – the lack of causality. Without consideration of why a target body is induced to accelerate through space, and how quickly it receives updates of information about how to

accelerate through space, neither the space-time curvature explanation nor the rubber sheet analogy can help us understand why gravity appears to act so much faster than light.” July 2011 Spacetime curvature must be interpreted in terms of differential rates of cosmological expansion of a four dimensional Euclidean spatial manifold. The the question arises of how we describe the cosmological expansion of this 4d manifold from observation vantage points represented by different inertial frames of reference? Would this additional consideration necessitate a treatment of the problem in terms of a five dimensional absolute spacetime? If causality is a subset of correlation, just a particular structure of vacuum fluctuations and their quantum correlations/entanglement, then perhaps the transmission of all Shannon (classical) information is secretly encoded as Von Neumann (quantum) information in the form of quantum correlations, both timelike and spacelike. One who appears mad if acting alone almost assuredly is mad. But the seeming mad fellow may indeed be acting thus in concert with others and in support of some group purpose so that appearances can be deceiving. If quantum entanglement is viewed as the lines of quantum communication/information flow (governing the spacelike and timelike quantum correlation of vacuum fluctuations in vacuum momentumenergy) when viewing matter + vacuum as a quantum computing simulation, then for example, time dilation due to gravity may be understood in terms of decrease in quantum entanglement in time with associated increase in quantum entanglement in 3-space such that entanglement in (3 + 1) spacetime is a conserved quantity, c.f., Sachs’ concept of “conservation of interaction”. Vico thought we could be certain about what we construct, e.g., Law, Mathematics, Theology, etc. But consider that we must manipulate elements over which we lack complete control anytime we develop such human constructs.

There has to be a nucleus of nonlocally correlated fluctuations that can serve as the basis of the observer within accelerated frames. Discuss integro-differential version of Zeno’s paradox. Discuss why the psychological maladies associated with leaving Earth’s gravitational field only affect certain persons, e.g., in relation to Searle’s notion of zombies and the doctrine of divine election (science fiction short story idea). Might Gödelian noncomputable components of mind lie with this component that is impervious to the effects of decoherence. The infinite potential barrier, impervious to decoherence component of mind’s nonlocal quantum fluctuations and divine election vs. zombiehood. Degeneracy pressure opposes the positive feedback of Bose condensation of force-mediating exchange particles in a gravitationally collapsing dust cloud. How does virtual boson entanglement scale with the cosmological expansion and could this have any bearing on a timevarying gravitational constant? July 2011Are the latest ad hoc innovations of astrophysics represented by dark matter and dark energy better understood in terms of Dirac’s or Dicke’s notion of a spatiotemporally varying gravitational “constant”? Actually, a good theory of induced gravity should provide a unified explanation of all of the astrophysical/cosmological anomalies, e.g., dark matter, dark energy, discrete cosmological redshift, vanishing cosmological constant, Pioneer anomaly, the Black Hole Information Paradox, time-varying speed of light and gravitational “constant”, in addition to explaining what is fast becoming the embarrassing failure to detect gravitational waves, the persistent failure to quantize gravity, i.e., no spin-2 graviton, as well as demonstrating that the search for a particular exchange boson as the basis for particle masses/inertia is a fundamentally misguided one. And a theoretical explanation for a small neutrino mass should fall out of the theory as an unintended bonus. Whether such a theory could shed light on Van Flandern’s “speed of gravity” conundrum is another matter.

Such an induced gravity theory has to be spin- or quantum statisticsbased, we think, because quantum statistics is in fact the broadest possible basis for describing fundament physical processes. We say this because Bohm’s causal principle (which states that all causal connections may be equivalently recast as correlations of quantum vacuum fluctuations) would in this case allow us to explain the dynamics of all change, both local and nonlocal. Of course, as alluded to already, Bohm’s causal principle is actually a special case of a broader quantum fluctuation-correlation principle. Needed are ArXiv papers on quantum entanglement and DeBroglie wavelength, time varying vacuum energy density, composite spin-2 gravitons, unification of Pauli-blocking and Bose-enhancement as applied to real vs. virtual particles, Lorentz transformations applied to Heisenberg energy uncertainties, WKB approximation applied to the “universe wavefunction”, conservation of 4-angular momentum and Mercury’s perihelion precession, and so on… cont=

May 2014

Quantum Correlations which Imply Causation http://lanl.arxiv.org/pdf/1302.2731.pdf Abstract: “In ordinary, nonrelativistic, quantum physics, time enters only as a parameter and not as an observable [1]: a state of a physical system is specified at a given time and then evolved according to the prescribed dynamics. While the state can, and usually does, extend across all space, it is only defined at one instant of time, in conflict with special relativity where space and time are treated on an equal footing. Here we ask what would happen if we defined the notion of the quantum density matrix for multiple spatial and temporal measurements. We introduce the concept of a pseudodensity matrix which treats space and time indiscriminately. This matrix in general fails to be positive for timelike separated measurements, motivating us to define a measure of causality that discriminates between spacelike and timelike correlations. Important properties of this measure, such as monotonicity under local operations, are proved. Two qubit NMR experiments are presented that illustrate how a temporal

pseudo-density matrix approaches a genuinely allowed density matrix as the amount of decoherence is increased between two consecutive measurements.” Coupled harmonic oscillator model for fermion-boson, scalar-vector or rather scalar-spinor-vector system, i.e., spin +/- ½, 0, 1 system. Spin-2 or “tensor” comes into play by virtue of perturbations of the quantum correlations between the spin-1/2 and spin-1 components of the system. Spin-2 is thus always derivative, i.e., gravity is an “effective field” or a “parasitic force” not unlike the van der Waals force. Why is it wrong-headed to suppose that the Universe might be a simulation (for the same reason that solipsism is wrong-headed or the idea that one’s whole existence has been nothing more than a dream.) What “breathes fire” into the equations of physics? Why the physics, itself of course! But where exactly does the “physics itself” reside? It resides in the noncomputable (non-quantum-computer-simulable) substrate of the quantum vacuum. 3-way vacuum nonlocality and the “polymonotheistic” metaphysics. , The component of quantum entanglement that is ineradicable, i.e., that component that does not vanish even under infinite accelerations, must be fundamentally different than the much larger component of entanglement that degrades under uniform accelerations. This ineradicable component of quantum entanglement is probably that which never enters into intersubjective processes, but is responsible for the binding of mental contents and of the integrity of the individual consciousness in general. It is also that component which can never be analyzed in terms of causal relations such that the class of fluctuations and correlations that were created at the Big Bang is necessarily larger than that class of fluctuations and correlations that became nonlocally connected at this beginning point. Each individual consciousness is

grounded in its own spectrum of nonlocally connected vacuum fluctuations. But there are fundamentally two distinct types of quantum correlated vacuum fluctuations, those which provide the ground of subjectivity, i.e., consciousness and those that provide the underlying ground of causal relations or potential causal relations. It is in the realm of potential causal relations where we have this interdomain of the two types of nonlocally correlated fluctuations. Paradoxically, it is the fact of the Heisenberg uncertainty principle’s being an ontological rather than an epistemological principle, which grants quantum systems their ontological observer independence. Strict causality must be compromised within an expanding spacetime where either vacuum energy or phase space are not conserved quantities, c.f., email to Dan Van Gent concerning origin of Unruh radiation, 05/12/06, c.f., Quantum Gravity by Lee Smolin. E & M can be seen to be incompatible observables through application of /\x/\p >= h to the case of a static charge electric field and a charge current magnetic field. Static charge implies it seems that /\x for e - = 0. /\xe- < /\x and /\t’ > /\t and also /\p’ > /\p and /\E’ < /\E. So Lorentz transformation transforms /\p and /\E as components of a four vector [/\pi, /\E] = /\pu. Random field of quantum fluctuations averages to zero, but what if correlations are introduced into this fluctuation field? Wouldn’t we then expect nonzero average for pi and E? /\x implies uncertainty in the E-field, just as /\p implies uncertainty in the B-field. Could the 2.7o CMB radiation be an artifact of quantum entanglement mediated Unruh radiation? After all, it has been determined of late that the cosmological expansion is not uniform, but rather is accelerating – so that at least some component of the CMB

must be Unruh radiation, implying a systematic error in estimating the age and size of the Universe ( as well as its matter density). The artist’s urge to create trusts in there being many like himself though in latent form, asleep and waiting the proper stimulus (provided by the artist’s own creative expression) to awaken. In the case of inertial motion there is a symmetry that implies that creation and annihilation are balanced. Here causal relations are based in coherent quantum relations and are based in coherent quantum correlations of vacuum fluctuations. In the case of non-inertial motion, there is some decoherence of quantum correlations (phase relations) of vacuum (fermionic) fluctuations. Higher order noninertial motions would appear as though originating altogether from outside spacetime. Irreducible complexity of noninertial motions within spacetime would have this appearance of originating from outside the spacetime. Collapse of Psi may be mediated via a “guessing algorithm”. Mass can be defined in terms of the distribution of angular momentum within spacetime  J = mr. & & “You can’t get a different vacuum by simply building a superconductor.” We may follow au=Parmenides and imagine that all change is the result of unsuccessful attempts by mind to grasp the being of indeterminate (or infinite, Apeiron), c.f., approximation errors as fluctuations, c.f., perturbation theory. When considering the validity or soundness of an idea always remember to treat the idea as if it had not originated with oneself. In this way one can limit the bewitchment factor. Bohm’s analysis of causation in terms of fluctuations and their correlations implies the Lorenz invariance of the quantum vacuum as well as the constancy, which is to say in this context the observer independence of the velocity of light. His analysis may also imply an asynchronous cellular automata model of the vacuum.

“I would hope that we scholars are not the ones who are hyping the document”, c.f., au=Marvin Meyer interview on the cit=Gospel of Judas. Not that he has or does “hope that. . .” Does the subjunctive mood or tense function in the same way for the 1 st person as it does for the 2nd, 3rd, etc. persons? According to the Southern Baptist doctrine of election, man is not capable of choosing God for the right reasons – he can only choose God for the pleasures of heaven and/or in order to escape the agonies of hell. In the vein of modern psychology, this is to say that man’s choice of God is structured as mere stimulus-response born of a mechanical or instinctive animal program of minimizing pain and maximizing pleasure. Man cannot choose God for moral reasons. This leaves open the question of whether Man can reject God for moral reasons, that is, for reasons of conscience, e.g., a conscientious objector in war. The validity of the Bible as a message from the transcendent and wholly other, that is, as not stemming from Man himself – is vouchsafed by the doctrine of election. @$That is, if Man lacks the moral sense and capacity to choose God, then the message of the Bible could have hardly been crafted by humankind. If Man does possess this moral sense, then whence does it originate? Reflections on au=Vernor Vinge’s notion of “singularity” as threshold where AI exceeds the grasp of HI (human intelligence) in relation to a fundamental characteristic of consciousness. One of the demarcators of conscious vs. unconscious is just this emergence of positive feedback of intelligence upon itself in terms of the boundary conditions to the consciousness altered by this field in the direction of at the level of the individual. The point at which AI outstrips “HI” is the emergence of this positive feedback (between intelligence and the conditions for intelligence) in Vinge’s “singularity”, i.e., this emergence at the level of the collective. (related to the “déjà vu” experience)  Birds and Bunnies hippy 

modern day hippy girl. Common sounding phrase that is on everyones tongue in some parallel universe. There is choice in how consciousness abstracts from its own dynamic substance. As in all abstraction, subtler linkages of dynamic control (linking existent abstract entities to their engendering/supporting ground) are disrupted, and yet we are supposed to accept the possibility of not to mention formal/relational boundedness) being reconstituted by its own artifacts complete with those artifacts’ collection of less subtle interactions – this is what lies at the heart of the notion of our one day engineering a conscious AI. The emergence of consciousness within slowly evolving primate brains must then be considered the . . .contd= “Déjà vu” happens “when they change something in the Matrix” – there may indeed be a kernel of insight here that goes beyond the classical explanation of “the mis-filing” of a short term memory into long term memory” where this memory must possess no cross-referencing with other memories filed in short term memory with the same or similar “time stamp”. Paranoia and quantum solipsism (“quantum immortality”) – as the individual’s subjective consciousness moves from one parallel universe to the next the discontinuities in his memory find no support in discontinuities of intersubjective memory (see analogy of military/corporate “brat” who was forced while growing up to move frequently from one neighborhood and school system to the next) (How one’s biography conditions one’s contributions to philosophy, c.f., biography of Eric Erickson). “A chameleon’s eyeballs swivel on two different axes as we can’t even remotely imagine what a flower looks like to a chameleon,” c.f., Google. A good philosophical essay topic would be “why I am not a brain in a vat.” /\P x /\Q >/= h and P, δQ < /\P, /\Q are not measurable. This is equivalent to saying that δP and δQ cannot be causally manipulated, that is, in accordance with a computable program. Back-reaction upon the field cannot be in intersubjective terms. Do noncomputable processes

underlie all computable processes? Computable as the boundary/boundary condition to/upon the noncomputable. Can abstract or formal symbols evoke the fundamentally open-ended process by which they were abstracted from noncomputable processes? And would something like this be the only way that the project of “hard AI” has any real prospects? Types of quantum correlations of fluctuations composing the spectra of /\P and /\Q where /\P/\Q >/= h. /\P   /\P, /\P  /\Q, /\Q   /\Q Anti-self-correlations? We must depart from strict conservation of momentum-energy when stress becomes significant and must be taken into account: p   T. Does a shift in the correlation-fluctuation spectrum underlie the transition, p  T? Discuss the impersonal nature of mutual attraction of prospective mates. @$

Essay idea: “The Lesson of the Wavefunction”

The individual particle behaves just like the statistical ensemble. Real particles sufficiently isolated behave as though virtual until placed under continual observation. The vacuum becomes progressively more electrically polarized and less magnetized, but can this be understood in terms of increases in both the magnetic permeability and electric permittivity and not due to specific electromagnetic action but as a side effect of changing the timelike and spacelike components of quantum correlations in bosonic and fermionic quantum fluctuations? If experimentally measured particle masses are due to the energies of these particles as excitations of the vacuum Hamiltonian, then particle

mass defined in this manner may only be consistent with the inertial mass of the particle (as reluctance of the vacuum Hamiltonian to become progressively excited along a spacetime trajectory) if the unperturbed vacuum possessing spacetime symmetry be composed of bosonic and fermionic fluctuations which together cancel out to some vanishingly small value for a cosmological constant representing the local effect upon the vacuum of global gravitation. What follows is a reprint from elsewhere in this document: “Ziad, I thought that on a Friday, I'd give you something to puzzle over. OK, you begin accelerating in a spaceship along the x-direction. Question: does this affect the velocity of the ship along the y- or zdirections? Well, normally in a "vacuum" the answer is "no." However, imagine for a moment that the spaceship is accelerating through what we might term here an "active medium", say a medium able to induce drag where the amount of drag is governed by a kind of stress-strain-shear medium resistance tensor. And how the medium is interconnected between x- with y- and z-directions would determine the resistance put up by the medium as a result of a body's acceleration through the medium along the x-direction. Well, think about how as an object accelerates, it travels ever slower through time, the faster it moves through space. Space and time in socalled "free space" are mutually perpendicular so how can accelerating along the x-direction in space cause a deceleration along the ictdirection? (Just think about how the range of a projectile can be calculated without explicit reference to the acceleration of gravity which is always perpendicular to the forward momentum of the projectile down range. ) Unless "free space" isn't "free" at all, but is part of an intrinsically "warped" spacetime. This is a Machian idea of course that in genuinely free space, i.e., within a truly "flat" 4-dimensional spacetime, objects should not be expected to present any resistance to our attempt to accelerate them! “The Machian idea is basically this: inertia in "free

space" (flat spacetime) is a manifestation of the interaction of bodies interaction with the gravitational field of the Universe.” In light of developments in “induced gravity theory” it might be more appropriate to think of Machian gravitation as caused by the mass’ interaction with the quantum vacuum so as to produce a gravitational field when the mass is in inertial motion and an inertial field when the mass is in noninertial motion. Of course, if local gravitational fields are present, then the body must also interact with this local field in addition to the Universe's g-field and hence the effective inertial mass of the body would be expected to be larger for a mass present near a massive body (and general relativity can predict just how large this effect is). Otherwise, I just can't see how acceleration along "x" can affect motion along "ict" without such an intrinsic coupling of time and space as befits a universal/global gravitational field. What Russell

do

you

think?

Whenever there opens up a break in the causal chain ad one at some level realizes this, there lies one’s true moral responsibility. Also, even without such a break in the chain of deterministic action, if one merely has inside knowledge, e.g., awareness of the sensitivity in initial conditions, c.f., awareness of the sensitivity in initial conditions, c.f., chaos theory, catastrophe theory, etc. there too does one bear the burden of moral responsibility, e.g., “I saw the bus coming from my vantage point around the corner from where you were about to cross the street and I did not warn you!” If you are hit by the bus is my culpability as great as if I had pushed you into the bus’ path, to with, are sins of omission as great as those of commission, if the responsible party in both instances, if equally aware of the harmful outcome and equally able

to intervene? The argument could be made that, in the case of the oncoming bus, the culpability is actually greater for the person who failed to act – as the person who to the positive action to cause harm must have been at that time under the grip of a powerful impulse or compulsion. But society and its ethical mores and legal system do not understand the distinction between omission and commission in this way. Why not? What kind of blindness is at work here, c.f., the moral blindness that prevents most people nowadays from glimpsing the horror of abortion in the United States. We know that there can be no genuine creativity in evolution. For otherwise this would imply that the self-organizing properties of atoms and molecules are back-reacted upon and change by the progress of complexity of life forms. Initial and boundary condition as well as causal relationships cannot be merely constraints upon quantum fluctuations and their correlations.

Quantum entanglement must be maintained between fluctuations of incompatible observables of the same system in order for the system to obey the Heisenberg uncertainty principle (HUP) for the incompatible observables. Does an ontological interpretation of the HUP require that quantum correlations and fluctuations be ontologically and causally prior to causal influences? The fine-tuning problem, parallel quantum universes and the relation of mutually intersubjective individuals contrasted with the relation of subjective to intersubjective. @$Fine tuning problem may be solved if each subjective consciousness is allowed to skip between parallel universes. In this way, a fundamental component of coherence of the external world so-called is on account of a continuous projection of the self. (Deja vu – some of memory storage is non-local) April 2013 There

may well be a new and deep principle at work here, that of continuous self-selection. The principle may need a corollary, e.g., “N-thropic bias”, and so on. March 2014

A recasting of the Anthropic Cosmological Principle as an Nthropic Cosmological Principle, in which each universe out of a semiinfinite subset of N universes in the multiverse is fine-tuned to the consciousness field of some particular individual self, so that a personal (individually “tailored”) Anthropic Cosmological Principle applies to each and every conscious observer. In this way, it becomes unimportant what the etiology of interpersonal interaction and communication truly consists of (“consists” is here a substance metaphor). One can rest assured that, somewhere in the vast multiverse there is indeed an anthropically centered subject, and not just a “philosophical zombie” dialed into the representation with which one is interacting and communicating. And this is equivalent to this same parallel universe possessing two people, identically similar to oneself and the other, who are having the identically similar interaction/communication as one imagines oneself to be having, c.f., Wittgenstein’s Mistress’ “somebody at a window, lurking.” http://bit.ly/1jgliG9 Of course, one might complain that there is some convoluted and tricky mechanism of intentionality secretly being invoked here, but as Einstein used to be fond of saying, the solution to some riddle of nature must be as simple as possible, but no simpler. The multiverse and its ineluctable philosophical valet, the anthropic cosmological principle, despite the rather disturbing underlying logic of this cosmological model, which seems to so seriously flout naïve realist common sense, may, so to speak, constitute the magical integration of area under the best possible curve fitted to the astrophysical data thus far at cosmologists’ disposal. Atheist philosophers will just have to come to grips with the fact that the price, that must paid for getting the multiverse model and its attendant anthropic principle to perform all of the metaphysical heavy lifting, formerly performed for millennia by God, is that of degeneracy. And it is the nature of degeneracy that it shall rear its ugly head always when

and where you were not expecting it. First and foremost, there is the resulting degeneracy of the epistemological and the metaphysical as two heretofore distinct varieties of solipsism. This is of no trivial consequence to some academic philosophers, who have heretofore routinely relied on this distinction when constructing demonstrations of solipsism as the absurd (ab-surd, etymologically…cannot be said) implication of their opponent’s arguments, more or less expecting these reductio’s to carry the argumentative force of a logician’s proof by contradiction. There is, secondly, the degeneracy of “the one and the many” with regard to the individual and individuals. That is, as alluded to by Erwin Schrodinger in Matter and Mind, there has only ever been one mind so that each individual mind is but one or another instantiations of this mind. There can only then be a concept of consciousness, if somehow the nature of the medium of experience of multiple distinct individual consciousnesses can be combined in a kind of God’s Eye (or God’s Mind) View and the elusive most general property of experience abstracted from these multiple instances. God would likely have access still more privileged and “incorrigible” than would each individual mind, who only ever has its own privileged access, as opposed to God’s so to speak administrator’s access. http://books.google.com/books?id=d7oWqE2hCj8C HYPERLINK "http://books.google.com/books? id=d7oWqE2hCj8C&lpg=PA58&ots=AQzPYR5nYb&dq=Schrodinger %20%22plurality%20of%20consciousness%22&pg=PA58"& HYPERLINK "http://books.google.com/books? id=d7oWqE2hCj8C&lpg=PA58&ots=AQzPYR5nYb&dq=Schrodinger %20%22plurality%20of%20consciousness%22&pg=PA58"lpg=PA58 HYPERLINK "http://books.google.com/books? id=d7oWqE2hCj8C&lpg=PA58&ots=AQzPYR5nYb&dq=Schrodinger %20%22plurality%20of%20consciousness%22&pg=PA58"& HYPERLINK "http://books.google.com/books? id=d7oWqE2hCj8C&lpg=PA58&ots=AQzPYR5nYb&dq=Schrodinger %20%22plurality%20of%20consciousness %22&pg=PA58"ots=AQzPYR5nYb HYPERLINK "http://books.google.com/books?

id=d7oWqE2hCj8C&lpg=PA58&ots=AQzPYR5nYb&dq=Schrodinger %20%22plurality%20of%20consciousness%22&pg=PA58"& HYPERLINK "http://books.google.com/books? id=d7oWqE2hCj8C&lpg=PA58&ots=AQzPYR5nYb&dq=Schrodinger %20%22plurality%20of%20consciousness %22&pg=PA58"dq=Schrodinger%20%22plurality%20of %20consciousness%22 HYPERLINK "http://books.google.com/books? id=d7oWqE2hCj8C&lpg=PA58&ots=AQzPYR5nYb&dq=Schrodinger %20%22plurality%20of%20consciousness%22&pg=PA58"& HYPERLINK "http://books.google.com/books? id=d7oWqE2hCj8C&lpg=PA58&ots=AQzPYR5nYb&dq=Schrodinger %20%22plurality%20of%20consciousness %22&pg=PA58"pg=PA58#v=onepage HYPERLINK "http://books.google.com/books? id=d7oWqE2hCj8C&lpg=PA58&ots=AQzPYR5nYb&dq=Schrodinger %20%22plurality%20of%20consciousness%22&pg=PA58"& HYPERLINK "http://books.google.com/books? id=d7oWqE2hCj8C&lpg=PA58&ots=AQzPYR5nYb&dq=Schrodinger %20%22plurality%20of%20consciousness %22&pg=PA58"q=Schrodinger%20%22plurality%20of %20consciousness%22 HYPERLINK "http://books.google.com/books? id=d7oWqE2hCj8C&lpg=PA58&ots=AQzPYR5nYb&dq=Schrodinger %20%22plurality%20of%20consciousness%22&pg=PA58"& HYPERLINK "http://books.google.com/books? id=d7oWqE2hCj8C&lpg=PA58&ots=AQzPYR5nYb&dq=Schrodinger %20%22plurality%20of%20consciousness%22&pg=PA58"f=true There is a story featuring Wittgenstein’s usual startling cleverness, now regarded as largely apocryphal in which Ludwig is meeting a colleague in the Quad in Cambridge and asks him, “Tell me, why do people say that it was natural for men to assume that the sun went around the earth, rather than the that the earth was rotating?” His friend said: "Well, obviously, because it just looks as if the sun is going around the earth." To which Ludwig replied: "Well, what would it have looked like if it had looked as if the earth were rotating?" And this is very much the situation here with consciousness: the case where consciousness is a one, i.e.,

each person’s individual consciousness is merely its own instantiation of consciousness per se or at large versus the case where consciousness is a many, i.e, each individual consciousness is radically unique and could some individual per impossible experience the consciousness of an other, he would find the experience so utterly confusing and alien that he should not dream of applying the word consciousness to any of the mental states of that other. Now this is not all to imply that the world is truly each person’s oyster in the full blooded sense of each person actually creating his own universe like a caterpillar constructing its cocoon. But rather that there are additional considerations, besides the anthropic ones of the intimate involvement of consciousness with decoherence and wavefunction collapse, Wigner’s friend, application of the Pauli Exclusion Principle to quantum entangled systems, etc. that suggest either a 1 to 1 or at least a 0 to 1 correspondence between minds and universes. There is something about the unity and integrity of a given universe that seems crucially important to the unity and integrity of the self because of the obvious importance of the fine-tuning question to applications of the anthropic principle to the multiverse, and particularly this question of the finetuning of consciousness. http://wwwastro.physics.ox.ac.uk/~ddarg/pdf/FT_of_consciousness.pdf This would be a radical application of Bohm’s causal principle, i.e., that every causal connection may be equivalently represented as a particular pattern of correlation of fluctuations (causal connections are just structures of quantum entangled fluctuations in disguise) to the multiverse model, which implies an equally radical generalization of this principle. Is the key to the mysterious connection between counterintuitive quantum phenomena as consciousness-induced selfinterference effects not far behind? “Transcendental idealism is a philosophy that explained experience by appealing to necessary and universal aspects of the human mind as opposed to metaphysical idealism, which tries to explain experience by

appealing to an ideal or immaterial substance, c.f., cit=J. G. Fichte, Atheismusstreit, Wissenschaftslehre, and Religionslehre. physical Fine Tuning of the Universe for life are normally regarded as separate problems. I argue that there are in fact close parallels between the two and that the occurrence of consciousness can be essentially recast as an additional Fine-Tuning problem in nature. In fact, the occurrence of consciousness turns out to require much more Fine Tuning than the emergence of complex chemistry and physical life. Motivated by recent trends in cosmology, I discuss a ‘Multiverse solution’ to this problem. I shall broadly conclude that philosophers of mind and cosmologists have much to talk about”, c.f., The Fine Tuning of Consciousness. web= http://www-astro.physics.ox.ac.uk/~ddarg/pdf_thesis/ftc.pdf See the following abstract from Targ’s paper: “The emergence of consciousness from inanimate matter and the interpretation of the physical Fine Tuning of the Universe for life are normally regarded as separate problems. I argue that there are in fact close parallels between the two and that the occurrence of consciousness can be essentially recast as an additional Fine-Tuning problem in nature. In fact, the occurrence of consciousness turns out to require much more Fine Tuning than the emergence of complex chemistry and physical life. Motivated by recent trends in cosmology, I discuss a ‘Multiverse solution’ to this problem. I shall broadly conclude that philosophers of mind and cosmologists have much to talk about.” The reasons for adhering to the law are social, e.g., don’t eat food that’s been offered up to pagan gods, etc. Grace abounds, however at the level of the individual. Why do memes possess greater significance than mere units of imitation? “What breathes fire into the equations” that makes them descriptive of a real physical process?

Virtual Cooper pairs (of all fermion species) may function as a composite spin-0 Higg’s boson. General Relativity doesn’t include spin within its logical framework, c.f., Problems in the Void, Odenwald. GR claims matter creates spacetime, but what properties do particles have that could constitute or structure spacetime? kwo= March 2012 “The Higgs boson is a hypothetical massive scalar elementary particle predicted to exist by the Standard Model in particle physics. At present there are no known elementary scalar (spin-0) particles in nature [italics mine], although many composite spin-0 particles are known. The existence of the particle is postulated as a means of resolving inconsistencies in current theoretical physics, and attempts are being made to confirm the existence of the particle by experimentation, using the Large Hadron Collider (LHC).” kwo=

“Some people replace elementary Higgs bosons by composite spin 0 bosons, an alternative dubbed technicolour, but these theories have fallen into disfavor recently and I will not discuss them further today.” kwo=

“The Higgs is now interpreted as the lightest scalar field with the same quantum numbers of the fermion-antifermion composite field. The Lagrangian part responsible for the mass generation of the ordinary fermions will also be modified since the Higgs particle is no longer an elementary object.” Discuss phenomenon of dream characters taken from real life aging in step with the aging process of the dreamer. What is the implication of the aging of our memories vis a vis von Neumann information and consciousness as decoherence protection mechanism (intelligent design and Heisenberg compensated quantum error correction) Decoherence and its relation to the ground of being. con=Firstly, if all possibilities are realized say, in quantum parallel universes, then each parallel reality is completely context-free and cut off from any embedding ground of its own possibilities. It is possible that “potential” in its acceptation in terms of possibility and probability is intimately

related to the acceptation of this term as component of Einstein’s 16 component metric tensor. It seems that probability is an inert or dead notion without there being some dynamic structure to the totality of underlying possibilities that inform it. We must square that concept of parallel worlds/universes with this concept as implied by the existence of human free will. There are possible worlds that are connected by virtue of being outcomes of the distinct free will choices of a single individual, i.e., “subjective” and then there are those “intersubjective” possible worlds on the other hand that are correlated in a much more abstract way, e.g., where the distinct possibilities belong (or do not belong) (I can’t decide which) to a single informing ground (consciousness?). If everything in reality is intersubjective, then this leaves no room for the collective subjectivity in terms of which the intersubjective must be defined. IN other words, a naturalism that is too thorough going is self-defeating. There can be no subject of change – only change from one parallel universe to another, like the flitting of a consciousness to different parallel universe incarnations of itself. But certainly the quantum correlations themselves underlie the structure and dynamics of consciousness and so each distinct correlational structure cannot be identified with a distinct parallel universe for otherwise there is no basis for the continuity of consciousness across parallel universes. Parallel world in which my consciousness is preserved may not preserve the consciousness of other minds. The history of a human being in any one universe must then be merely the history of that human body and its standing set of memory traces (within that human’s brain) And thus memory traces in the brain don’t determine individual human consciousness as such, but perhaps merely inform and structure it temporarily as distinctly classical physical phenomena.

It is probable that the matrix of quantum vacuum fluctuations quantum

correlated with the brain’s current functioning by virtue of this same brain’s past functioning constitute an ever-growing embedding quantum vacuum context for future functioning. This suggests that the “switching on” of consciousness during some crucial stage in the brain’s development is enabled at least in part by a network of quantum correlations in the vacuum laid down during the history of the brain’s back-reaction upon the quantum vacuum’s fluctuation matrix between conception and the moment of consciousness’ “switching on”. As noted in Matthew J. Donald’s paper on the Many Minds Interpretation of Quantum Theory, the human brain is far too complex to be represented in terms of a pure quantum state. In other words, the density of quantum correlations exhibited by the brain during the course of its normal functioning is far too complex to be completely grounded within the correlation-fluctuation matrix of the embedding quantum vacuum with which the brain locally interfaces. It is interesting that here we see a basis for the necessary “interiority” of the brain’s functioning, i.e., consciousness as well as a highly probable and plausible physical basis for the necessity of the observer’s act of conscious observation of (and/or freely-willed interaction with) a prepared quantum system inducing that system’s state vector function to undergo “collapse”. Eugenicist thinking is powerfully informed by the misguided notion of “most fit individual”. Since what natural selection is indeed “driving at” is a fittest breeding population, i.e., natural selection qua selection can be no more selective than the mechanisms provided it by population genetics allows, there is no “fittest individual” organism as such. The conditions fostering the operation of natural selection are not in place ab initio and therefore there must be additional complementary mechanisms of evolutionary change at work, e.g., self-organization, entelechy, morphogenetic fields, directed mutation and so on. April 2011 A system of individuals represented by the breeding population, each possessing randomly distributed strengths and weaknesses, talents and tendencies,

relative to one another and to the group average, represents a much easier distillation of information from entropy than does any hypothetical breeding population entirely composed of more or less identically “ideally adapted” individuals. Besides such as monoculture breeding population would be wiped out by the first environmental challenge that proved too difficult for only one of its members. So genetic diversity is both easier to produce and easier to maintain than is the evolution of the illusory “ideal specimen”. July 2011 Of course, what natural selection is aiming at in adapting the organism to its environment is not so much the environment itself as it is the long term environment such as it manifests itself in the hands of ancestors to their future offspring. The rationality of the DNA qua language means that the aim of natural selection must be something even broader than that of the breeding population’s adaptation to its current environment because of the fact of the obvious advantages to be gained from out-crossing of individuals from one breeding population to those of some other breeding population, January 2012 c.f., The Dark Triad: Facilitating a ShortTerm Mating Strategy cit=(au=Jonasen 2008): “Findings are consistent with a view that the Dark Triad facilitates an exploitative, short-term mating strategy in men. Possible implications, including that Dark Triad traits represent a bundle of individual differences that promote a reproductively adaptive strategy are discussed. Findings are discussed in the broad context of how an evolutionary approach to personality psychology can enhance our understanding of individual differences…” September 2012 “No one doubts the wisdom of managing the germ-plasm of agricultural stocks, so why not apply the same concept to human stocks?” The preceding was a quote from the avid Darwinian, Julian Huxley. In light of what has been said up to this, we might suspect that there is a confusion or misconsception lying at the root of Huxley’s insight, something along the lines of Russell’s “category mistake”. In short any changes observerd to ensue from a manipulation of the genome of “agricultural stocks” constitutes a referenceable change, one which can more or less easily be categorized and even quantified. However, manipulations of the human “germ plasm” would result in a change in the psychological traits and values of the race to include those

members engaged in future genetic manipulations of the race. And so to start down the path of human genetic manipulation, especially where the expressed goal is that of increasing the talent and intelligence of the race, is to set forth on a path within a realm of extremely low visibility. The accelerated cosmological expansion may perhaps be explained in terms of the peculiar shape of the hyperspherical potential barrier through which the universe is tunneling. The universe should be losing imaginary momentum as it tunnels through this barrier and hence, by conservation of four momentum, must be gaining real momentum, i.e., accelerating in its expansion throughout 3-space. @$Dark energy is then a manifestation of the loss of imaginary momentum by matter as the universe tunnels through the initial hyperspherical potential barrier. What is the relationship between /\E and E, when it is possible for E > /\E, if only for a period, t < /\t? The Penrose “one graviton limit” may be variable and not depend upon Planck dimensions. Spontaneous decoherence may be tied instead to the local value of /\E. Purely thermal fluctuations arise from interaction of the system with outside environment. Purely quantum fluctuations arise from outside of the local simultaneity hypersurface. Purely thermal fluctuations arise from interaction of the system with outside environment. Purely quantum fluctuations arise from outside of the local simultaneity hypersurface. This is implied by the Schrodinger Wave Equation and the Heat Equation being related by a Wick rotation. Psi = sum of symmetric and antisymmetric parts. In gravitational field the probability density function can no longer be represented in terms of purely symmetric and antisymmetric parts. Cross-terms in the density matrix are related to the symmetric-antisymmetric cross terms in the norm of Psi as expressed as the sum o symmetric and antisymmetric

parts. Analogy: composite spin 0 fluctuations  potential energy; spin 1 fluctuations  kinetic energy 3d electric field as 4d cylindrical 4d magnetic field (coiling around the time axis) needs to be complemented by alternatively describing the pure electric force as a Lorentz force acting between a timelike current density and a hypercylindrical magnetic field coiling around the time axis. In the so-called pure electric field case, the time axes of both current densities are exactly parallel. This is not the case for curved spacetime and we see the magnetic fields can be produced through interaction of charged particles with a gravitational field. The 3-body problem has no formal solution (only if an absolute reference frame is not assumed?). Such is perhaps the situation, too in the historical milieu when three or more driving historical forces are at work and there is no explanation for the unfolding of events in terms of the historical frame of reference, i.e., world view, of one or the other of these historical forces, i.e., agents, e.g., government, military, church, peasantry, etc. (the protein folding problem is similarly insoluble). The fundamentally different historical interpretation lies within the historian’s error of approximation. A theory of the behavior of error must constitute the penultimate theory. Searle’s argument that “computation alone” can’t be constitutive of consciousness is similar to the notion that all information as opposed to data are context dependent. On the other hand if I think of a string of 0’s and 1’s along with the code for translating what said output strings of 0’s and 1’s are supposed to mean, then there’s a kind of active process of error correction, etc. by which I maintain a string against entropy producing perturbations which in the quantum case means protection is just controlling this decoherence (same thing really as protection against decoherence pure and simple.)

Context is required for meaning but metacontext is required for consciousness of meaning. @$

All language is secretly meta-language – this is one of the profoundest and most basic insights we can glean from the deconstruction movement. iI  (x,t)  the essence of abstraction, while the ” symbol in this equation represents the origin of von Neumann entropy. A parallelism exists between what might be termed “bottom-up” abstraction and “top-down” abstraction and epistemological versus ontological uncertainty. Integration of temporal change requiring 2-d or greater time, e.g., nonlocal connectivity mediated via superluminal quantum correlations, c.f., Benjamin Libet’s experiments showing 500 ms retroactive referral to the past of higher level processing of sensory inputs. Intelligent design perhaps in the sense of response of the ground of being (and change) to changing boundary conditions and then later with the advent of individual consciousness, this creative response. Evolutionary change/steps can be too small to have any survival value and so are organized according to some altogether distinct creative, selforganizing principle. Monism doesn’t make sense because it only makes sense to speak of kinds if you indeed have more than one kind. Genera and species aren’t distinct unless you have at least two species. But in principle we don’t have to rely on natural selection. If we had an exhaustive enough theory of the correlation (which may well never be 100%, by the way!) between genotype and phenotype, then presumably we could reproduce or even improve considerably upon the order engendering mechanism of natural selection that has all along fostered evolutionary development. One advantage of natural selection of

random mutations is that the process is not formalizable and so immune to the limitations pointed up by Gödel’s theorems. Such a “complete theory” should be able to differentiate between series of genetic mutations giving rise in the short term to identical phenotypes in terms of how in the longer term the evolutionary development of the phenotypes shall diverge with further selection within the field of shortterm phenotypic-degenerate genetic base pair sequences. @$Notice that natural selection is not able to make this kind of fine distinction between what might be termed “short term phenotypically degenerate” base pair sequences. Psi-collapse and the Halting Problem. Changing a 0/1 into a 1/0 and advancing a binary string (memory) to the left or to the right underneath the reader/head are orthogonal procedures (normally), c.f., Gödel’s Theorem and QM Psi function. N 1-d differential equations are equivalent to 1 N-d differential equation so that causality becomes describable as a special case of nonlocal correlation of fluctuations. How is altruism consistent with natural selection, especially in the case of social insects? Can we turn a proof (via work energy theorem) that the gravitational potential performs work upon accelerating masses into a proof that G performs work upon the quantum vacuum – according to au=Volovik’s theory of vacuum mass as induced by gravity – yes. “They are not interested in the historicity of the Bible” – Alan Watts. au=

Esa Graves – Theistic Evolution

There must be theoretically possible beings isolated/cut off from the rugged fitness landscape on which we evolved. But both fitness landscapes should be able to fit into a single, larger landscape as could

not be sustained by a “natural environment”. This lack of a common supporting natural environment is what perhaps accounts for the two fitness landscapes being disjoint. Turing machine may be representation in terms of a factorizable Psi. au= Von Neumann entropy comes into the picture once we can no longer represent Psi in terms of a straight product of eigenfunctions. Searle’s Chinese Room argument begs the question. . . discuss grounds for this criticism. Timing/time scale of computations and resonance with underlying networked processes are a consideration – in short, time scale matters and different time scales involve necessarily distinct computing contexts. Must we use “bottom-up” building materials for the construction of an AI with cognitive abilities? Fermionic topology – closed strings?/bosonic topology – open strings? Thermodynamics of non-inertial frames points to a new definition of work-energy by a gravitational field. Sometimes the application of a concept is simultaneously the extension of that concept though not all such attempts to simultaneously extend and apply a concept or principle are necessarily successful. Why? Does this require the notion of metaconcept? Contrast abstraction from above vs. abstraction from below. Artistic creation is usually a social construction and always a cultural expression. Individual culture may defy rational characterization in terms of conventional definitions. Erotic energy is an impersonal blind lust which through a socially and

culturally mediated system of projections (onto the object of desire) becomes personal. Transcript of 06/02/05 email exchange between Russell Clark and Ziad Fahd: “Hey Russ, According to Bell’s Theorem, for anything to exist, it must be observed by another thing-each depends on the other for existence! Does that mean when you’re not observing me, I’m not here?  Ziad” “Rather, if I’m not observing you, I’m not here. this:

Reasons for saying

1) Ego is a sociolinguistic construct, first and foremost. . . 2) Individual consciousness as such is thought to be derived from a gradual evolutionary development of an internal model of the other, e.g., competitor, potential threat, prospective mate, etc. – a model, which at some point got applied to the self. @$

3) This originally outwardly-projected-onto-the-other selfhood also served to attribute meaning to the otherwise meaningless babble, which once accompanied everything which humans un-self-consciously did (this kind of vocalization was akin to what babies manifest between 18 and 24 months of age). Linguistic meaning started out only as attributed to the other. For perhaps the first several 100,000 years of mankind’s linguistic history, language was understood by ad hoc attribution of meaning to the other’s vocalizations based on an observed and learned correlation between patterns of vocalization and patterns of behavior observed in the other. Only many 10,000’s of years later than this did humans use these complex vocalizations for themselves to consciously communicate with the other.

Contradiction and tautology are indications of language being strained to its natural limits by a mind greater than any linguistic map. Consciousness is not so much an emergent property of brain processes as it is an incorporation of a trick of tapping into a pre-existing continuum of computational spaces in connection with Gödel’s Incompleteness Theorem. (see limitation as “scaffolding”) We don’t notice all of the non-coincidental possibilities so as to better appreciate the “truly coincidental” ones! Some can sense the presence of a kind of “governor” imposed upon the intuitive faculties of the mind preventing it from at once grasping what should be most natural for it to grasp – the reality of the presence of God. This governor, this blockage is of course a manifestation of sin, that is, of man’s fallen-ness. Disengagement of the limitations upon consciousness, which is gradual and an essential part of the natural ending of the human life cycle versus the sudden cutting short of a life may have an effect analogous to the breaking down of the placenta prior to birth. Complications for the emerging soul are then the natural outcome. See quote of Heisenberg by Lyre in “Against Measurement?” – On the Concept of Information, p. 9 footnote. As au=Alan Watts points out, there is no word in Sanskrit for “matter”. Also Watts’ noted that our words, “mother”, “meter” (as in unit of measure) and “matter” all originated from the same Sanskrit word from which “maya” is derived in that language. The psychic energy invested in the erecting and maintaining of boundaries is freed up and becomes available for fueling creativity. It is exactly analogous to the mechanism of conserved psychic energy, which inevitably counteracts the efforts of neurotic individuals to control the

content of their own dreams, i.e., to “dream lucidity.” (Although the reverse) Because from the otherwise ordinary consciousness of the neurotic individual is bled off the otherwise freely available creative energies – energies that could have been enlisted for creative purposes, but which upon the individual’s awaking once again supply the psychic energy required to re-erect the boundaries supporting psychological repression. If the fluctuation field constitutes a medium always at rest with respect to itself, then objects also constituted by this field may appear to be in absolute motion (i.e., in motion with respect to the medium) though this motion is, in fact merely relative, i.e., only the motion of one object relative to another. What type of correlations bind the medium into a potential absolute reference frame? What appears a straight path is always an arc, however wide. The circle is built into all motion, all change. The irrationality of the ratio of the circle’s circumference to its (straight) diameter. Is this because the approximation of a straight line motion by oscillatory (wavelike) motion necessarily evokes a generalized Gibbs’ phenomenon, c.f., “irrational probabilities”. Reverse a definition of the order of being in Anselm’s Ontological Argument. Assume that “existence” is a lower form of being than “nonexistence”, i.e., being unmasked of all limitation. Moreover, existence is the most general instance of the limitation of being. The relationship of mind to consciousness is akin to that of existence to being. Is this still true when we reflect that mind is in consciousness (as a structuring of consciousness) just as consciousness is on account of the fundamental activity of mind? We are all the “children of God” because we are begotten, not made, c.f., au= Feuerbach’s The Essence of Christianity, p. 203 (Barnes & Noble Books). Gödel’s theorem seems to be equally proof and disproof of the Platonic heaven of mathematical truth. Proof: truth is a stronger notion than

provability – this is the basis of mathematical incompleteness. Disproof: mathematical truth does not constitute a unity – this is what incompleteness means. But given the ontological priority of mathematical entities, mathematics’ incompleteness is not a falling short of a would-be or possible greater unity. And for this reason the incompleteness of mathematics cannot be properly interpreted as the inadequacy of mathematics as basis for all future rational description, but must be interpreted as mathematics’ superabundance, i.e., greater than unity. March 2011 We commonly think of mathematics as requiring a foundation, as being built from the ground up, so to speak because that’s how we humans think. But the evidence thanks to Gödel is quite to the contrary, because of mathematics’ lack of a foundation, it can’t really be built or constructed automatically, that is, without any thought going into it. @$The mathematical edifice is an abstraction that cannot be unified abstractly and this is the broad hint that mathematics is the product of a transcendental mind. Novelty is just the transcendence of the ground of being by the entities it supports, c.f., structures of the quantum vacuum too complex to be timelike fluctuations of this vacuum. And the quantity of inertial mass is proportional to the density of the (to the vacuum) novel information contained within it. April 2011 Spacelike fluctuations may only make sense as entangled timelike fluctuations wherein this entanglement surpasses a certain threshold of complexity, i.e., such that the composite cannot be encompassed within a single timelike fluctuation. July 2011 This kind of transcendence is perhaps a good example of ”the stream rising higher than its source”, what Heraclitus emphatically said is impossible. Of course, what is to prevent the stream from acquiring another and higher source? @$If the whole is greater than the sum of its parts, then this is telling us something very important about the nature of those parts, namely, that they are abstract. August 2012 Quite apart from the holographic principle of parts defined in terms of wholes, we have the contrary and perhaps complimentary principle of the virus, which is to say, the kernelsubverting and hence system-transforming action of the single invading particle. Must there be some preexisting rational basis for the

interoperability of the system and its invading virus such as a common mimetic language or linguistic system? So do the holographic and complementary viral principles presuppose a kind of providential rationality? Distributed parallel human experience permits combination and reprocessing of the data of experience in a way that can’t be produced within the experience of any individual human being undergoing unified experiencing. When a stupid and ignorant person gets an insight and attempts to implement it, he quickly comes to the attention of those who understand how the world works and soon after the guardians of the workaday world of honest industrious people are themselves alerted. similar to Terence McKenna’s characterization of the body as “placenta of the soul.” @$Matter allows more complex modes of vacuum fluctuation than what the quantum vacuum can support on its own. This is what decoherence is about. McKenna talks about biology serving to amplify quantum uncertainty. Discuss Asimov’s short story, “The Chronoscope” in terms of implications of such an observational instrument. Various uncertainties would interfere to block collecting of concrete evidence with which to deconstruct all mythic narratives, that is, without engendering other, perhaps grander ones! Lack of temporal change in a closed system, which therefore must be described by a pure state Psi with a single global Phi, itself possessing no physical meaning. So it is the ij with its locally distinct and varying ij that introduce (at once) temporality and irreversibility. Take the definition of information as a reduction of uncertainty and then consider the ambiguity (or mutual inconsistency of) Heisenberg uncertainty as epistemological/ontological. Assume the two interpretations are really the same – implications being what? Transcendence of epistemology by ontology is similar to Gödelian

transcendence of formal provability by truth – IMPORTANT! Show that the Gödel numbering “trick” is buried within the logic of Cantor’s diagonal argument Fractal, recursive or self-referential structure of the way the brain processes its data, i.e., recursively structured thinking and perceiving gives us the idea we are being guided by God or God is speaking to one. This repressed solipsism is projected outward. Eventually a hidden realm was invented into which the repressed solipsistic impulse could be projected. The meaningfulness of comparing, contrasting and grouping into natural abstract categories of subjective experience and more generally, subjective contents of multiple minds is posited by our intuition. Evolution of the theorem proving system and formalizability of theoremproving/thought. Cantor’s Diagonal Argument (three dimensional version) and Gödel’s Theorem. Think of the “diagonal” as the unprovably true theorem. Is it any coincidence that “brain” and “brane” are homonymous? Negation within an open system is necessarily creative in its implications. There are two conceptions which mankind has which he should not have ever discovered – consciousness and transcendent deity. Back formation of a 1st person from a 3rd person particular (and vice versa) is how we arrived at the notion of consciousness. The big heresy of which none dare speak is that this is how the concept of God was arrived at. Heidegger’s concept of the relationship between metaphysics and language is supported by the theory that linguistic structures, i.e., semantic syntactic structures were originally in service exclusively to mechanisms of the brain’s subconscious reprocessing of sensory and perceptual data. He was known to have had policy disputes with the former security of

state. There is no logic – only rhetoric everything is a dream. We can’t really know anything, there is no absolute truth, everything’s relative, etc. Curved orthogonal time (associated with conscious thought) yields curved spacetime. The backwards referring stimuli suggested by Libet’s brain stimulation and reaction time experiments may explain the disruption of the eigenfunction phase relationships that inevitably take place during an observation of a quantum system by a conscious observer. We make up a procedure to cover (over) the areas to which we have heretofore been conceptually blind, i.e., the system recognizes the limitations of (or merely that the system is limited) itself and switches to a new set of axioms (maybe also rules of inference). July 2011 It seems obvious that the procedure of selecting or adding or removing axioms so as to change the domain of provability would not be formalizable one. “Throughout most of these 2500 years scientific knowledge was viewed rationalistically, and it was assumed that the atomic constituents were some kind of self-evident axioms involving basic categories that required no definition. However, beginning in the Renaissance there was a growing recognition of the value of observation and experiment (active intervention in nature) and a corresponding increase in skepticism about the “self-evidence” of any proposition”, c.f., web= .http://web.eecs.utk.edu/~mclennan/Classes/UH267/handouts/WFI/c8 .pdf May 2012 Positivism is not altogether divorced from the mysticism to which upon first inspection it seems diametrically opposite. This is because the more thorough-going version of positivism is the one which does not say that nothing lies on the other side of any line demarcating the boundary between the empirical and the metaphysical, only that nothing can be said about what lies beyond this line. It is by a kind of grace that the recursiveness of mental function permits this skipping outside of the system of the mind – what is thus far

established as system anyway. Jesus termed the “2nd Adam”. Why? Because again god has breathed His Spirit into flesh in the absence of Sin, c.f., MS Word list of mine, “Puzzling Scriptures.” Our successful philosophers are the founders of schools of thought or of the critique of such a school, c.f., cynicism of the Sophists. “Some philosophers who reject substance dualism nonetheless accept “property dualism”. “Property” here suggests “boundary” as in “boundary conditions”. “Internal” + “number” “=” “external” Cantor’s diagonal argument applied to the game theory of chess. Must probabilities play a role in optimal chess play?, c.f., Empedocles’ critique of a closed system of atoms and void as capable of “logical” thinking. Can classical correlations supplement perturbed quantum correlations so that Psi normalization is preserved? Similarity of effect of gravity and consciousness in the decoherence of Psi. But what we want to know is: are there interesting, which is to say, nontrivial mating positions on the chessboard, (say, if only for certain initial and boundary conditions, e.g., 1st 10 moves are . . . must reach a certain position in less than N moves, etc.) in which over-the-board play cannot reproduce the mating positions in question? In a way the positing of a given number theoretic formalism is to abstract from what we presume is already an abstract realm, i.e., that of mathematics itself. Notice that checkmate positions not obtainable in over-the-board play have a peculiar structure – one of so-called irreducible complexity (c.f. Indra’s Net’s “simultaneous arising”). Nonlocality is no doubt important in these kinds of structures. Does the chessboard make for a

model of an “inconsistent system”? “Quantum theory does not predetermine the cut between the system and the apparatus, nevertheless the cut is necessary in order to apply quantum theory to reality.” (The observer does this in accord with his intentional choice based on his perception of the combined system + apparatus system.) @$

“From the Copenhagen viewpoint the idea of a wavefunction of the universe is a physically senseless extrapolation of the mathematical formalism,” c.f., “Against Measurement? – On the Concept of Information” (1997), au=Holger Lyre. Several ways for a computational system to access classically forbidden states: (1) quantum tunneling, (2) teleportation of states, (3) collapse of Psi, (4) manipulation of decohering component phases using quantum error correction algorithms. @$“The present momentum moving through the text unscrambles the letters,” c.f., au-Terence McKenna on the Kabalistic code. You know what the text is getting at because you’ve seen the whole thing before. It’s this idea of Socrates and the slave boy and his theory of knowledge he draws from this story. The testimony of consciousness is that we’ve been through all of this before, in fact, if we believe au= Nietzsche, an infinite number of times. “The present moment moving through the text unscrambles the letters” (Hassidic-Kabalic notion of “Bible Code”) You know what the text is getting at because you’ve seen the whole thing before. It’s this idea of Socrates and the slave boy and his theory of knowledge as “anamnesia”, which he draws from this story. The testimony of consciousness is that we’ve been through all of this before, in fact, if we believe Nietzsche, infinite number of times). Novel sensation abstracted from (filtered) and contextualized by memory,

integrated temporally via retention within a bubble of “specious present”. Study of human folly as manifestation of the unquiet “monkey mind” of Buddhist philosophy. Several ways for a computational system to access classically forbidden states: (1) quantum tunneling, (2) teleportation, (3) -collapse (4) manipulation of decohering density matrix component phases via quantum error correction algorithms. But what we want to know is: are there interesting, which is to say, nontrivial mating positions on the chess board, say, if only for certain initial and boundary conditions, e.g., 1st ten moves are. . . must reach position in less than N moves, etc. in which over-the-board play cannot reproduce the mating positions in question? In a way, the positing of a given number theoretic formalism is to abstract from what we presume is already an abstract realm, i.e., mathematical itself. This is one take on the essence of the Gödel Incompleteness Theorem. Any system which encompasses less than the whole (assuming it Platonically subsists in mathematical reality) constitutes an abstraction in which the suppressed details must always be crucially important. Mathematical unity if it “exists” must be irreducible in its nature. Cantor’s diagonal argument may be applied to the game theory of chess. Must probabilities play a role in optimal chess play?, c.f., au= Empedocles’ critique of closed system of atoms-and-void as capable of “logical thinking”. An important notion in this connection is the irreducibility of mathematics to logic, c.f., Gödel (1930). Strangely enough, the philosophical bias of most thinkers who abhor the constricting conceptions of mind of such artificial intelligence workers as Minsky et al. is secretly that logic is irreducible to mathematics, i.e., thought cannot be reduced to “a concourse of atoms” (Empedocles) such

as might be described by a mathematical trajectory. But Gödel’s 1 st theorem demonstrates just the converse of what is contained in this bias against the agenda of “hard AI.” Holger Lyle (arXiv: quantph/9709059v2) quotes au=Heisenberg (1930), p. 44, “…wenn man das ganze Universum in das System einbezoege – dan ist… die Physik verschwunden und nur noch ein mathematisches Schema geblieben,” … if the whole universe were to be included into the system then physics would vanish and just a mathematical scheme remains” (translation by Lyle). @$ In other words, the quantum mechanical “pure state” is really only an abstraction and the physics only enters in when decohering (continuous or discrete) thermodynamic processes are taken into account – in short, real temporality is irreversible temporality. “Quantum mechanics does not predetermine the cut between S and A, nevertheless the cut is necessary in order to apply quantum theory to reality”,c.f., “Against Measurement? – On the Concept of Information” (1997), Lyle. The observer performs this “cut” in accordance with his intuitions, choice, based on his perception of the combined S + A system. “Therefore the CI viewpoint that the idea of a wavefunction of the universe is a physically senseless extrapolation of the mathematical formalism,” c.f., Lyle (1997) So are perhaps such abstractions as black holes, gravity waves, cosmological constants, superstrings, etc. “Light Exceeds Its Own Speed Limit, or Does It?” (au=James Glanz) What disrupts the determinism of the time evolution of the wavefunction (in accordance with the time (in)dependent Schrodinger equation) induces decoherence or collapse of . “Collapse” is presumably just “decoherence” on an ultra small time scale of ’s evolution. Gravity does this presumably because gravitational energy is not a conserved quantity in general relativity. An observer/experimenter may decohere the I presumably because he/she does not share the ground state of the system he/she is probing/measuring. The environment in its turn via

thermal energy exchanges with the prepared quantum system decoheres the state function of the system because a time reversal of fluctuations within the affected volume, V (with which thermal fluctuations interact) and presumably these correlated quantum fluctuations within the volume cannot reproduce the time-reversed set of thermal inputs to the volume, V – does exclusion of the timelike excitations mean exclusion also of timelike correlations? This is the fundamental irreversibility, which cannot be accommodated by the Schrodinger wave equation for . A given region of quantum vacuum thus cannot model all possible changes within itself that can nevertheless be induced to occur within it as a result of external inputs, what we have termed surprising of the vacuum outside perturbations. May 2012

Quantum mechanical phenomena cannot be understood in terms of just a “souped up” “micro-classical” physics, i.e., in terms of the kinetics of subatomic particles “buffeted” by vacuum energy fluctuations in the form of off-mass-shell particles, i.e., “virtual particles”. This is largely because the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, which leads to appearance of vacuum fluctuations is an ontological and not an epistemological principle. So the apparent kinetics of real particlevirtual particle interactions is a manifestation of a fundamental vacuum dynamics. Discuss the interpenetration of the categories, ontological and epistemological. How is mathematical intuition vis a vis Gödel’s theorem related to the child’s knowledge ``of grammatical sentences it has never once heard?, c.f., relation of Chomsky grammars to Turing state machines and “halting problem” to Gödelian incompleteness. Cantor’s framing of the continuum hypothesis in terms of a set of natural numbers and the power set analogous to space of articulated meaning within a particular language (at a particular stage of its evolution) and the space of meaning of all possible languages which also use “Englishseeming” words and phrases.

Gödel’s diagonal Lemma  there has to be a (possible) language (of seeming English) in which any given English sentence/proposition is a self-referential statement in that possible language of seeming English, i.e., Seemglish, c.f., Incompleteness (2005) Goldstein. Do we need a corollary to Gödel’s 1 st Theorem which reassures us that. . . either it applies to unprovable true theorems that are not selfreferential or that some theorems that are true and unprovable (within arithmetic or better may not seem self-referential (cryptic triviality of all seemingly non-trivial unprovably true theorems or all theorems are secretly self-referential? July 2011 Could we determine a restriction upon Gödel’s theorem for a certain class of axiomatic systems such that his theorem can only be demonstrated utilizing trivially self-referential propositions within those system? This would be somewhat in accordance with the spirit of Russell’s theory of descriptions/types, and if possible would undercut all attempts to apply Gödel in support of mystical ideas. Causal relations have logical structure and classical physics represents a formal system. Quantum mechanics offers the possibility of classically forbidden physical states, very much akin to Gödel’s unprovably true theorems. Either the human mind surprises all machines (to be more precise it can decide more number theoretical questions than any machine) or else there exists number theoretical questions undecidable for the human mind, c.f., au=Hao Wang on au=Kurt Gödel’s beliefs about the implications of his 1st incompleteness theorem. Clearly there are number theoretic questions undecidable for the human questions undecidable for the human mind, if only because what is essential by such theorems is beyond the human ken. Are theorems which are undecidable for the human mind merely because of their complexity ever a counterexample to the triviality of, for example, undecidable theorems of FraenkelZermelo set theory?

This brings up the question of whether such undecidable theorems must always be implicitly or explicitly self-referential and whether selfreferential propositions must always be trivial (semantically speaking), that is, can self-referential propositions possess interesting content, which is to imply that propositions undecidable to the human mind (because beyond its ken) could also be nontrivial, that it, interesting if only we could fathom their content, i.e., understand what they assert. What might the boundary between (to humans) intuitively decidable vs. undecidable number theoretic propositions be structured like? Topology (of the “space” of number theoretic propositions) is certainly important here I think about Kauffman’s rugged fitness landscapes in this connection – and Monod’s claim that the coding of genetic information within the DNA is arbitrary. Is this boundary continuous, fractal, multiply-connected, etc. These type general considerations might result in a loss of faith in the (heretofore unquestioned) assumption on the part of “hard AI” critics that human’s ability to grasp true number theoretic propositions unprovable within any number of formal systems necessarily implies there are no such “ungraspable” or undecidable number theoretic propositions for humans (clearly there are, but this is assumed to be a function of a “simple over-complexity” relative to the human intellects formal computational capacity). But this is where “the rub” lies as far as Minsky et al. are concerned. Need to finally elaborate the idea of humans as symbiotic beings, i.e., primate-spirit, c.f., Philip K. Dick’s “Pluriforms”. Spirits catalyze the operation of the primate brain in quantum mechanical mode of the primate genome into higher forms. Can individual human beings, whole races, epochs, planets, etc. be forsaken by such advantages and disadvantages conferred on each by the other? What mode of operation or its signature is it which attracts one of these beings to join with a host?, c.f., “Secrets of Power”, au=Ingo Swann. See quote of Heiseberg by Lyre in “Against Measurement?” – On the Concept of Information, p. 9 footnote.

“Chomsky proved that the grammar of a natural language cannot be reduced to a finite-state automaton,” c.f., Google search. “Gold proved that no amount of correct examples of sentences are enough to learn a language,” c.f., Google search. Discuss why the conscious brain is embedded in a “false vacuum” state, not entirely sharing the ground state of so-called objective physical reality. This is in part due to much of the brain’s activity consisting of quantum mechanical tunneling (with generation of much imaginary 3momentum). Other contributors to the sustainment of false vacuum are timelike quantum correlation of global brain states, utilization of multiple spacelike-separated physical (free space) vacua, quantum (dense) coding and decoherence damping through quantum error @$ correction strategies, etc. Entropy production on account of the brain’s operation should be composed at all times by a classical and a von Neumann component, helping to explain decoherence of quantum systems (i.e., “vacua”) in interaction with a conscious brain. What difficulties should we expect in our attempt to Fourier transform (a) time domain function(s) where time is irreversible? Can temporal irreversibility be traced to the fact that the absolute phase of Psi possesses no physical meaning though relative differences in phase do? (This is why density matrix with decohered phases imply irreversibility) Does entropy necessarily creep into the picture once we become embroiled in multiple vacua/ground states? So is irreversibility connected with the taking on of physical meaning by the normally purely abstract quantum mechanical phase? What type of correlations between multiple vacua imply multiplicity of temporal dimension? Irreversibility of quantum measurement/observation is perhaps on account of entanglement of brain ground state with that of observed system? Would this observation/idea give us a way of revealing the true

underlying epistemological nature of Heisenberg uncertainty which must appear ontological because of the privileged epistemological access of the observer to the contents of his own subjective ground state? Irreversibility is a cause or a phenomena o the breaking of spacetime symmetry? Parameters that in isolated/insulated systems posed no physical meaning become physically important, e.g., reference frame, absolute energy/”0” of energy, absolute phase, vector potential, orientation in space, direction in/through time, ect. These are all examples of context-sensitivity and/or metaphoricity. Decoherence as phenomenon of entanglement with alien ground states. Breakdown in the division between syntax and semantics/meaning which blocks project of reducing semantics to syntax. Conscious communication transcends that afforded by systems of conventionally determined representation. Free will gives human beings the ability to “bluff the wavefunction”. I see delayed choice measurement theory, c.f., possibility of “undoing a quantum measurement” concept of “quantum take (takie) backs”; See quantum gambling theory. Do we carry out threats intended merely as bluffs so as to shore up alternative quantum (decision) wavefunction branches for our MWI quantum universe counterparts, and is this possibly seemingly altruistic behavior rational self-interest within the context of an MWI quantum theoretic Smithian free market? Is it only an MWI variety of quantum theory that truly can explain the notable, even remarkable phenomenon of self-sacrificing altruism, c.f., ethics of quantum game theory and “quantum Ferrari” game show gedanken experiment. Can we turn a proof (via work energy theorem) that the gravitational field performs work upon accelerating masses into a proof that the field performs work upon the quantum vacuum – according to Volovik’s

theory of vacuum mass as induced by gravity – yes. There must be theoretically possible beings isolated or cut off from the rugged fitness landscape on which humankind evolved. But both fitness landscapes should be able to fit into a single larger landscape, though perhaps one so large as could not be sustained by a “natural environment”. (Alan Watts lecture) (Google search phrase) Wittgenstein’s family resemblance basis of categories applied to philosophy of mind. If you actually “get” the philosopher’s insight, your reaction to this revelation will necessarily be unique enough to establish you head and shoulders about imitators, i.e., an author of ideas in your own right (“PhD mill” principle).. Is this on account of enthusiasm alone (emotional charge delivered to ideas germinating within the forebrain from the limbic system)? (Insert explanation of why “quantum Ferrari” game show thought experiment doesn’t work – from emails to Ziad and Chris) Quantum mechanical phase of a spin-1/2 particle is timelike and spacelike in equal parts. The composite spin-0 particles Psi is purely timelike (inertial frame exists in which spin-1/2 particle is in an energy eigenstate) with decoherence, otherwise purely spacelike spin-1 bosons and purely timelike composite spin-0 bosons become mixed, timelikespacelike or “spacetime-like”. There is a thermodynamic cost in maintaining such a spacetime-like “mixed state”, c.f., 2.7o K cosmic background radiation is just generalized Hawking radiation association with evaporation of cosmic black hole – that which we interpret as the Big Bang. Conservation of entanglement: increased spin-1 Bose condensation corresponds to decreased composite spin-0 Bose condensation, restating

a turn to increased virtual Cooper pair decoherence. Relate polarization of dielectric medium to increased spin-1 to decreased magnetization of a paramagnetic medium. A rotates the phase of a neutral fermion, e.g., neutron. This BohmAharanov effect is connected with the timelike component of spin-1/2. (M  decoherence of composite spin-0 connection?) The 4 symmetry of fermions and the 2 symmetry of bosons must be related to the fact that, E*ds = *dv The additional 2 (over and above the “2-symmetry of bosons) of fermions must be related to the fact that spin +1/2 is always paired with spin –1/2 in a fermionic quantum field, which is timelike while spin +/½ particle in isolation must be real and virtual ½ particles must always create/annihilate in form of composite spin-0 fields. Spin-1: pure spacelike Spin-0: pure timelike Spin-1/2: ½ spacelike, ½ timelike Composite spin-0: spacelike components cancel, leaving only timelike spin-0. In Special Relativity a mass is accelerated, both /\p and p increase along the direction of motion. /\p increases due to Lorentz-Fitzgerald contraction of /\x and p increases due to dilation of /\t and decrease in E due to decrease in /\E and increase in E in accordance with E = /\E. Thermodynamics of accelerated reference frames suggests that a gravitational field performs work upon the quantum vacuum. (mdv/dt + vdm/dt) *ds  0 for propagating gravitational fields. This is because the orientation of the vectors, F1 and F2 relative to ds are of

unequal magnitude (where

mdv

/dt = F1

and vdm/dt = F2) Causal powers are clearly tied to counterfactuals, which are sensitive to the physical conditions set by the underlying physical dynamics by which algorithms are implemented, which are formally indeterminate/undecidable. And no clear distinction can be drawn between implementation of an algorithm and the algorithm’s formal structure qua algorithm. Clearly, if how f(x) = x, where “f(x)” is output and “x’ is input is important to the dynamics of mental states, then we will never be in a position to find another equation, f’(x’) = x’, which possesses the required property, unless we can write, “f(“x”)” “=” “x”! But the invoking of “ “x” ” in the place of “=” means abandoning (a) purely formal relation(s). The irreducibility of function of form is pointed to by the invoking of “=”, which is at once to evoke the notion of “irreducible temporality.” “=” also carries the notion of “equivocation of sense”, which is the very essence of metaphoricity. And it is this facility for equivocation of sense that presumably permits a la Penrose for the human mind to side step the limitations of logic, i.e., “formal symbol manipulation” of which Searle is so critical, pointed up by Gödel’s incompleteness theorem. Context sensitivity of brain processes depends upon a complexity of “function” capable o routinely out stripping the computational capacity of the underlying embedding quantum vacuum. Presumably again, probability is not conserved by these types of processes (since probability is only definable against some unified, normalizable vacuum or ground state) and so such processes are causality-transcending. Small probability that a ball will pass through a wall rather than bounce

back, via quantum tunneling of the ball’s wavefunction. But an aggregation of particles would decohere long before say, a tennis ballsized scale is reached. However, can the phases of the components of the density matrix be tuned and stabilized so that the ball more or less “tunnels through”. Either knowledge of or feedback with the wall, neither of which may be possible, would be required. Integration of brain states over time requires some interaction between such timelike separated states. This in part accounts for the ability of brain function to induce Uberraschung of the quantum vacuum, further inducing collapse of pure quantum states. To think that consciousness could be evoked through the enacting of some predetermined (or even “pre-predetermined) sequence of physical events is surely to indulge in superstitious thinking of the most basic sort. Although true that “without context, there is no meaning, it is also true that without individuation, i.e., differentiation of a being from its ground (or “ground proper”), there can be nothing subject to an interpretation and hence no meaning here either. Deterministic brain processes are processes taking place in a closed system and which cannot therefore have any reference outside the system or be “about anything”. Is it quantum uncertainty that makes function irreducible to form, 4d pseudo-spacetime irreducible to (3 + 1) Minkowski spacetime? It is supposed that “the greater the accuracy . . . in the measurement of spatiotemporal coordinates, the stronger the gravitational field generated by the measurement,” c.f., to quantize Gravity, Christian Wuetrich, Univ. of Pittsburgh. (The way out of this implied dilemma is to distinguish between epistemological and ontological interpretations of the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle.) Elaborate on this further Spontaneous versus induced quantum uncertainty, i.e., unbound vs.

bound fluctuation energy. There is an information theoretic basis, perhaps through invoking a cellular automata model of the quantum vacuum for relating the effects of inertia, gravitation and consciousness in which the finite bandwidth and computational capacity of the vacuum play an important role. Back-reaction and uncertainty are perhaps mutually inconsistent. Back reaction increased with accuracy of (to the ground state or vacuum field) “unanticipated inputs of momentum-energy during minute experimental probings, i.e., measurements. The presence of a gravitational field requires some back-reaction of the vacuum induced mass upon the free vacuum itself. Absolute Psi is not an observable – QM. Absolute frequency is not an observable – SR. Psi and frequency in some sense conjugate or “incompatible”? Does the phenomenon of QM measurement demonstrate the efficacy (as opposed to the epiphenomenal nature of) human consciousness? The “something-it-is-like-ness” of certain brain processes (assuming a reductionist view of mental states) is in essence the intentionality of brain states. But consciousness seems to require the interaction of brain states (across time). The blind spot of personality like the nucleus of the cell is the very target for manipulation of the whole structure. Altruism, rational self-interest – after a certain age cynicism can only be avoided through identification of self with a higher self, political, intellectual, spiritual, etc. Can we in the same way the curl-free electric field may be represented by a divergence-free field, namely by its spacelike component can we

represent a gravitational field as the spacelike part of a four dimensional torsion field? Charge density in three dimensions is the timelike component of the current density in four dimensional ad E-field is spacelike component of four dimensional B-field?

Relation of current density to spin when e + and e- are perfectly anticorrelated the current density in four dimensions is 0. With loss of anticorrelation a timelike (or spacetime-like) current density develops – suggesting Kaluza-Klein 5d spacetime. The notion of a limit, c.f., “Infinite use of finite things” (-Chomsky) We speak of numbers being so large as to be meaningless. Flow of money in a free market economy. “Your bank account doesn’t fluctuate except according to the vicissitudes of your own existence,” c.f., Terrence McKenna lecture on the structure of temporality. Any time I check on my savings account inquiring how much $ is contained there, the teller prints up a slip with a balance indicated on it and hands it to me. With this procedure I am usually satisfied. Each bit of energy is correlated to multiple contexts/continua and so causality must be the theory you get when you consider just a single ground state. We see the overlap of free will and consciousness in our study of the distinctly different quality of vacuum fluctuation energy from when fluctuation is spontaneous as opposed to “reactive.”

Aristotle’s “form” and “substance” are indistinct where structures below the decoherence threshold are concerned. The quantum-classical continuum should not be identified with spatiotemporal scale per se but with nearness +/- to the decoherence/recoherence boundary. There are other conditions besides scale, e.g., complexity which figure into this threshold. This means we must think in terms of Heisenberg stress-momentumenergy uncertainty, /\Tuv. Not only are quantum correlations responsible for bulk properties of matter such as polarization, magnetization, etc., inertia as well vacuum fluctuations, for example, take on mass in a gravitational field and thus contribute to the cosmological constant due entirely to the character of nonlocal correlations guiding, pilot-wavelike the quantum processes underlying nongravitational binding forces/energies, rather than some unqualified substance with a magical intrinsic property of massiveness. One can’t properly Lorentz transform a density matrix with partially decohered phase relationships existing between the density matrix, i.e., the components of the density matrix. A transition must occur between quartic (i.e., 4-dimensional) and “quintic” density matrices, i.e., the quantum vacuum cannot support the coherence of quantic and higher dimensional density matrices. This is due to a theorem of Galois’ on nonexistence of root formulas for polynomials of degree-5 and higher. Quantum decoherence as a vacuum complexity threshold may existentially “ground” mind and force us to a theory of mind that transcends the James-Bergson-Huxley theory, (the theory which secretly implies that the mind of each person is a “unity” instead of a “tamed cacophony”). Man is not any longer in the image of God, not “in the image of” anything. This is the true meaning of existentialism.  and  of ij determines spacetime symmetry, c.f., problems with a

Lorentz transformation of decoherent density matrices. A would-be quantum gravity theory would be concerned with T  that is itself not fully spacetime symmetrical. “Blocking” of vacuum signals is an irreversible process – is not a simple negation, but a critically complex (i.e., threshold – transcending) process. The price of uniqueness and freedom is that the identity of the person is not predetermined. Is this relevant to developing a modern theodicy? Reexamine the book of Genesis in terms of these considerations. The connection between system and new vacuum state established too late or at insufficiently many points along the system’s temporal evolution or system is too complex so that sufficient bandwidth of connection with vacuum state is unavoidable. Nature of correlations of system with itself at different system’s (irreversible) temporality. Our defects we comfortably and philosophically attribute to less than perfect human nature, our virtues to aspects of our personal and individual character. Are our minds adapted to a bounded or boundless processes (“the environment”)? What component of consciousness is epiphenomenal? If mind is an adaptation to a transcendent environment, then how can consciousness be in any sense “epiphenomenal”? How can language so secretly invoke the absolute observer, i.e., “God”? Shipov’s rotational law of inertia: the rotated solid body will rotate inertially as long as external forces do not act on it, c.f., theoretical and experimental research of inertial mass of a four-dimensional gyroscope. Astrology appeals to many for the same reason as does a melody – it exhibits something pervasive and fundamental that is normally hidden from us, i.e., in the case of astrology the dialectic of the struggle of consciousness with an unfree animal’s to effect a freely acting human will. The notion of conjunctions and our vigilant watching for them as

opportunity for spirit to intervene in otherwise mechanical and moronic physical processes. au=

N. V. Filatov’s experiments with colliding gyroscopes or other experiments involving acceleration of rapidly spinning gyroscopes should show a deviation from Newton’s laws of motion that can only be explained by the notion of timelike components of angular momentum, which is to imply that spacetime exists against a back drop of absolute four dimensional space, c.f., Newton’s bucket experiment and Mach’s theory of inertia. In four dimensions there is no net acceleration on account of impressed forces, but merely a rotation of 4-momentum and so presumably the resistance to impressed forces is due to resistance of the mass to changes in the mass’ 4-angular momentum. Something akin to Volovik’s superfluid vacuum might serve as a kind of effective field of “effective supersymmetry” or “induced supersymmetry”, obviating the presumed necessity of superpartners as part of the solution to the cosmological constant problem. “For many years it has been conjectured that these two types of superfluidity are in fact alternative limits of a single universal phenomenon, and that one could continuously pass from fermionic to bosonic superfluidity by properly varying the fermionic interaction parameters, c.f., The Role of Boson-Fermion Correlations in the Resonance Theory of Superfluids, arXiv: cond-mat/0404234v2 11 APR 2004.” The above work is relevant to a theory of induced supersymmetry, that is, a theory of supersymmetry that treats superpartners as quasiparticles. No unique exchange particle required mediating gravitation and no unique particle needed to endow particles with mass, i.e., no Higgs boson. Supersymmetry is dynamically broken in a superfluid vacuum, c.f., Volovik. “When particles are produced in a collision, they are not particles that

were somehow inside the colliding particles. They are really produced by converting the collision energy into mass, the mass of other particles.” This is another example of how quantum mechanics violates our intuitions by revealing “the ontology of epistemology”, just as in the case of the Heisenberg principle that is commonly mistaken as an epistemological principle, c.f., Heisenberg’s Light microscope experiment, rather than an ontological principle, i.e., scope and limits of knowledge is revealed as a limitation of being, c.f., Supersymmetry, p. 75 (2000). The decoherence threshold limits the complexity of what systems may be teleported, appear out of the vacuum as a fluctuation or exist in a superposition state. Vacuum fluctuations constitute the ontological component of Heisenberg uncertainty. Nonlocal correlations cause the magnitude of vacuum fluctuations to become smaller than their corresponding Heisenberg uncertainties. Psi-objective while the density matrix is an admixture of objective and subjective components. How does quantum decoherence affect the density matrix? Beginning to see the connection between gravitation, decoherence, consciousness and the “direction of time.” Elsewhere region should be demarcated according to a decoherence threshold (onset of irreversibility) rather than spatially. Only the decohered component of the vacuum contributes to the vacuum’s inertia. What distinguishes real from virtual particles (“particle” not being a concept within quantum field theory) is mere probability, i.e., particles further ‘off-mass-shell” are less probable. Note that a scalar on the momentum-energy graph corresponds to a vector within Minkowski spacetime. However, once the threshold is passes at which structures become too complex to exist as “fluctuations” of the vacuum’s energy, c.f., Hawking radiation and the black hole information paradox, the distinction between “real” and “virtual” becomes shall we say, more “full-blooded”.

This threshold is also that connected with gravitational decoherence. The reality of indefinite counterfactuals seems to be required by the realness of existent as opposed to imaginary entities and seems more or less excluded by a non-deterministic universe. What about degenerate determinism? (See recent arXiv preprints on the limits of interferometry of “buckyballs”) Particles move about in such a manner that they remain locally real – consistency of mass-shell representation of spacetime? This is just a restatement of the fact that quantum mechanical expectation values correspond to the predictions of classical physics. It is also a restatement of the principle of probability conservation in quantum mechanics. The invoking of natural selection to explain the growth of biological order is vis a vis consciousness to borrow order from a continuum that itself was designed. Quantum cryptography and nonlocality – vanishing point of substance basis of information – information can be divorced from material substrate, c.f., Dualism and Disembodied Existence. But is the information continuity timelike (in sense of a preferred frame of socalled cosmic time)? When decoherence limit is exceeded, information becomes localized, e.g., superposition, vacuum fluctuation, entanglement, quantum encryption and/or teleportation complexity limits are reached. June 2013 "A “brain” cannot just pop into existence as a result of a single entropy fluctuation on account of the Planck massenergy decoherence limit qua Penrose’s “one-graviton limit”. However, a possible distinct coherent quantum state of a given particular brain microtubule quantum-entangled protein dimer network can indeed arise as a fluctuation, given that the appropriate initial and boundary conditions have already been supplied via a preexisting biological brain or other form of neural network. These type fluctuations are what might be aptly termed “virtual Boltzmann brains”. Moreover, Boltzmann brains might be expected to occur within a quantum computer that is

running a simulated universe program. Key Words: Boltzmann brain, Biocentrism, Ancestor Simulation, Nick Bostrom, Robert Lanza, Stuart Hameroff, Roger Penrose, one-graviton limit, quantum decoherence, quantum entanglement, vacuum fluctuation, Planck mass, microtubule, Overton-Meyer." Boundary conditions upon the quantum field become overly complex, then pure state does not so much as “decay” as trans-form into a mixed state (as opposed to a superposition that can be Lorentz transformed, or change of basis performed in some other way into a pure state). Whenever a critical process creates, it borrows. The dual categories of creative vs. critical may have to be recast as “self-plagiarism” vs. plagiarism of the works of others. This revision might be made necessary by the discovery that the self-other distinction is derivative, say from a ground of impersonal dynamic processes. What do we really mean by “dynamic” (simply in opposition to “kinematic”?) Phase relations  curved spacetime/geometric decoherence; phase relations  timelike and spacelike correlations/statistical decoherence. Creation and annihilation operator representation of operators derived from classical physics, c.f., Bohm’s statement/theorem about causality and correlated fluctuations. Temporal protection is embodied in the notion of conservation of electrical charge. Phase relations of ij components, properties of matrices, Heisenberg representation of the wavefunction and topology are closely related concepts. Schrodinger  Heisenberg: symmetries of Psi are translated into symmetries of operators/physical observables, c.f., matrix symmetries.

Does Galois’ polynomial “Incompleteness Theorem” tell us anything about the nature of space that embeds spacetime? There are some results of mathematics that are so counter-intuitive they seem to demand an underlying physics – other such results, an underlying mentality. Conservation of 4-momentum alone is not sufficient to bar faster-thanlight travel. This is simply because (mic)2 = (m(-ic))2 There must be some additional conservation law (or broken symmetry) that prevents this. What symmetries/ broken symmetries underlie chronology protection? Or is, again unending vigilance of an observer (or his consciousness) required? Decoherence theory limitation upon complexity of simple vacuum energy fluctuations poses limitations upon the Bergson-JamesHuxley “reducing valve” theory of brain-consciousness. Philosophical bias exists which says that all real unities are underived not constructed, which denies unity in novelty, denies unity of emergent entities. How can some infrastructure of consciousness which is itself indifferent to the passage of time play a role in the temporality of consciousness? March 2012 I like the visual metaphor of seeing so far that you even see "the other side" while all along a bridge has secretly been in place. https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10100961471350735 HYPERLINK "https://www.facebook.com/photo.php? fbid=10100961471350735&set=a.10100130935905425.2756355.23409 540&type=3&theater"& HYPERLINK "https://www.facebook.com/photo.php? fbid=10100961471350735&set=a.10100130935905425.2756355.23409 540&type=3&theater"set=a.10100130935905425.2756355.23409540 HYPERLINK "https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?

fbid=10100961471350735&set=a.10100130935905425.2756355.23409 540&type=3&theater"& HYPERLINK "https://www.facebook.com/photo.php? fbid=10100961471350735&set=a.10100130935905425.2756355.23409 540&type=3&theater"type=3 HYPERLINK "https://www.facebook.com/photo.php? fbid=10100961471350735&set=a.10100130935905425.2756355.23409 540&type=3&theater"& HYPERLINK "https://www.facebook.com/photo.php? fbid=10100961471350735&set=a.10100130935905425.2756355.23409 540&type=3&theater"theater Intonation and rhythm effect case of uptake of and processing of communicated data. Investigate the role of mimetics in communication of novel information. Why is a system less fundamental if it cannot appear or exist as a sustained fluctuations? Leibniz’ Principle that which creates also sustains carries over into the definition of sufficient cause as the sum of all necessary causes. Can we alter or shift the boundary between fundamental and derivative structures? Can being back-react upon its ground? Is the dot product of a timelike and anti-timelike spin-1/2 particle is 0 even though the mutual angle is 180 degrees? The dot product of two ordinary spacelike vectors is 90 o. Are these observations about dot products for spinors and vectors related to the fact that despite the way the Minkowski light cone is drawn, there is effectively only a 45o traverse for x and t to coincide? That is, acceleration caused a mixing of space and time components that may be reflected in charges in the quantum entanglement of virtual

bosons and fermions. Do the symmetries of the Psi indicate how Psi couples to its particle/field? Explore the connection between decoherence and inertia. A purely resonant density matrix in which each element of ij may be seen as a purely timelike fluctuation with the phase relations o the ij completely determined through nonlocal quantum correlations – this represents the case where all entries in the density matrix may be changed simultaneously. In such a case we say that ij corresponds to a system possessing effectively no inertial mass. However, such a system may take on an effective inertial mass should we interact with the system so as to disrupt the purely resonant phase relations of the ij so that we now have a density matrix with a mixture of nonlocal and classical correlations. Causality is fully determined by correlations, quantum and classical in various admixtures. What determines these correlations is quantum statistics of fluctuations and boundary conditions upon the fields so fluctuating. The ground of wavefunction collapse is decohering vacuum processes. I don’t know the answer, either but it is obviously related to topology of fluctuations and their correlations. We know this much: that in the case of gravitational decoherence, the relationships of the quantum phases of the components of the density matrix are “disrupted.” Meaning that a Lorentz transformation cannot return the density matrix to its previous state, say just prior to the gravitational field being “switched on”. A biological transition must occur, which also lies behind the collapse of the wavefunction. By the way, I think it was Feynman who pointed out the differences in the topology of fermions and bosons.

Conservation laws are violated for vacuum processes and for processes in which the vacuum plays a role. Energy is not conserved in general relativity. This is why we say that gravity breaks spacetime symmetry. Complementary quantum statistical effects of real fermions and real bosons upon their virtual counterparts which is reciprocal. Treating /\E and /\p as a conserved 4-vector. Treating virtual fermion pairs as scalar and virtual bosons as vector, which are combined into a conserved 4vector in analogy to how relativistic Maxwell’s equations treat rest charge as the scalar component of 4-current density. Look at relativity’s definition of 4-angular momentum current density and probability current density. Special relativity applies to /\p, /\E, /\t, and /\x just as well as to p, x, E, t. Quantum entanglement in gravitational field acts in the appropriate manner. Polarization  ; Magnetization  . Pressure, energy density and Mach’s formula for speed of light. Ratios of binding energy to mass energy are the same as the ratio of mass to black hole mass (for same geometry). Hyperspherical potential of false vacuum and the ict axis relates to rest masses quantum tunneling through this potential with imaginary momentum and negative kinetic energy. @$ Gravitation as a rotation of this 4-potential by mass. Conservation of 4-angular momentum as a more elegant explanation of the relativistic perihelion precession of the planet Mercury. Gravitational redshift and deflection of light by gravity could both be explained in terms of quantum entanglement of 3-momentum (virtual photons) and imaginary 4-momentum (virtual Cooper pairs). This should be consistent with magnetization and polarization entanglement witnesses. Light is a spacetime measurement basis in relativity theory for the predicted and now much confirmed relativistic effects of both motion and matter upon space and time. If light moves as though or as if time is passing slower in a given region, then

1) we know a gravitational potential is present 2) time is indeed passing slower in this potential than in so-called free space Since the velocity of light can be considered in light of relativity as a measure of the velocity of time, the rate of decrease in the velocity of light at a given time, t must be proportional to the velocity of light at such time t. In other words, the decrease in the velocity of light (and hence also of time, i.e., its rate of passage) must be decreasing at an exponentially decaying rate. Well, time reversing this trend back to the beginning of the Big Bang and we are then faced with an exponentially increasing velocity of light and of time! This is why I believe that it may be possible to fit 12-13 billion years of our present time into just a few thousand years of “early time.” @$

We must remember that it is the expansion of spacetime that the Big Bang treats of and not the expansion of space over preexistent time! If we still want a background, preexistent time during which spacetime’s expansion is considered to be taking place, then we must invoke the notion of multidimensional time. (Which we would need anyway, if the Everett many worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics is valid) If we don’t accept multidimensional time, then we must consider the existence of a generalized or cosmological time dilation as one of the inevitable effects of the cosmic expansion. And such cosmological time dilation also applies to the various quantum uncertainties in time measurements/intervals (Heisenberg time uncertainty in all of its myriad ramifications). And if Heisenberg time uncertainties of all quantum systems are increasing, then their Heisenberg energy uncertainties must be decreasing (which manifests itself as an apparent acceleration in the universe’s expansion (relative to an assumed constant velocity of light). May 2011 As the mass energy density of the universe decreases during the course of cosmological expansion, gravitational time dilation for the universe as a whole should decrease and this is associated with an increase in the velocity of light in step with this universal decrease in

vacuum energy density. @$Here we see a plausible simple mechanism for an accelerating cosmological expansion, as well as an explanation of dark energy. Cosmological and gravitational redshift may be placed upon a common footing, e.g., cosmic microwave background as cosmologically red shifted Hawking radiation. In a dynamic gravity field, lengths can both dilate and contract, as well as can time intervals dilate and contract. This is what happens when a gravity wave passes through our local spacetime. This is what is called quadrupole radiation, which cannot be described by either spin-0 or spin-1 fields. What induced gravity, effective field gravity and “already unified” theories try to do is define composite spin-2 fields, i.e., fields made up of simpler particles than a pure spin-2 graviton. What has for long been particularly interesting for me is the fact that not only time and space are squeezed and dilated by passing gravitational waves, but also the Heisenberg uncertainties in time and length are squeezed and dilated. This is of possible deep significance in light of the “no hidden variables” theorem of John Bell (1964) because one of the outcomes of this theorem is that the Heisenberg uncertainties are not definable in terms of relationships between merely local (i.e., causal) variables. What is important here is that General Relativity is a strictly speaking causal theory of locally covariant variables! So if the generality of general relativistic effects (as applied to Heisenberg uncertainties in space, time, energy and momentum) is to be accepted, the grounds for GR effects here must be mediated through nonlocal correlations of quantum fluctuations which make up these Heisenberg uncertain variables of time, length, momentum, etc. This leads us to deduce through /\t x /\E  h /\x x /\p  h

and

/\x and /\t general relativistically squeeze and dilate due to changes in nonlocal correlations (and amplitude values?), which is to say, quantum statistical relationships between the nonlocally connected quantum fluctuations in 3-momentum and energy comprising the various Heisenberg uncertainties in these physical quantities are systematically perturbed, creating the effect of their being relativistically squeezed and dilated through the above equations. May 2011 How exactly does Heisenberg uncertainty related to quantum entanglement conjugate observables or even observables that mutually constitute components of some observable with respect to a conserved quantity? /\E is composed of nonlocally correlated virtual fermion-antifermion (virtual Cooper pair) creation/annihilations, i.e., fluctuations of vacuum energy and /\p is composed of nonlocally correlated virtual boson emissionabsorptions. There may be a way of explaining changes in the quantum statistics of fluctuations of momentum and energy, (how probable are fluctuations and how these fluctuations are correlated within spacetime), which underlie the dynamics of all quantum systems via application of FermiDirac statistics (Pauli Exclusion Principle) and Bose-Einstein statistics (principle of Bose condensation) to the interactions of real-real, realvirtual, and virtual-virtual particles/fields. Please see David Bohm’s work Quantum Theory (1951) for support of my assertion that all causal relationships may be consistently represented in terms of fluctuations and their correlations. Show two alternate E = p*dv = mc2 derivations, i.e., one in 3d evaluated from v = (0,c) and one in 4d (3 + 1) space(time) evaluated from v = (ic, c) as demonstration of the 4-dimensionality of the universe as well as the possible existence of a 4-potential of “false vacuum”

through which the Universe (and all masses) is quantum tunneling. Collect research on a cosmological scale WKB approximation of the Universe’s Hamiltonian that supports such an interpretation of the imaginary momentum and negative kinetic energy of “rest masses.” Show dark matter and dark energy as two necessary forms of perturbation of the quantum vacuum by matter via the Pauli Exclusion and “Inclusion” principles. May 2011 Dark matter is a local phenomenon caused by the effect of gravitational time dilation upon the local rate of cosmological expansion. Dark energy is a nonlocal phenomenon caused by the decrease in gravitational time dilation with cosmological expansion. The pioneer anomaly is caused by failing to measure the velocity of radio signals within a reference frame that varies with time due to cosmological expansion. The discrete cosmological redshift is a function of the expansion of the universe through a hyperspherical potential barrier. Matter causes a local rotation of this hyperspherical potential energy barrier from timelike to spacelike. “You are the apple of my eye.” The essence of humanness is the innate metaphoricity of human thought and perception, which underlies human consciousness. What seems to speak to us the loudest is that which calls clearest to mind our own voice. A black hole seems to convert Heisenberg energy uncertainty, /\E Heisenberg into thermalized energy, i.e., von Neumann into classical entropy? Does the event horizon convert spin-0 into spin-1 fluctuations? He who could build a time machine could change the course of history and rule the world – change history or merely switch tracks from one parallel universe to another? Explore the connection, if any, between critiques of David Deutsch’s quantum computing argument for the existence of parallel universes and my notion of -collapse based in combinational complexity overwhelming the computational resources of the quantum vacuum qua

cosmic CPU. / It takes energy to recreate a mass through space over a finite time interval. Slow acceleration, only low frequency fluctuations need be reprocessed. As the universe expands there is more space and the positional uncertainty increases. Hence momentum uncertainty decreases and so the momentum spectrum of all particles and fields within the universe develops a long, high-momentum tail, which statistically is correlated with a net acceleration in direction of cosmological expansion. The speed of light also slows, which compounds the appearance of accelerated expansion.

The way /\p and /\E transform from one reference frame to another in special relativity is substantively different from the transformation of these quantities in going from one point in a gravitational potential to some point at another potential. Does a Lorentz transformation only change the diagonal terms of the stress-momentum-energy tensor or does it potentially change the off-diagonal terms though without altering the phase relations between the Tik that contributes to the decoherence of the density matrix, u,v defined from the Hamiltonian that is in turn constructed from the stress-momentum-energy tensor, Tuv? The above question was prompted from considering the spacetime symmetry breaking of the quantum vacuum induced by uniform accelerations, c.f., my email discussion with Ziad Fahd of the twin paradox of special relativity. There may be a simple topological way of understanding black holes that explains the seemingly discrepant factor of two between ours and Schwarzchild’s prediction of the relation between black hole mass and radius, which invokes somewhat the idea of a frequency cutoff in

combination with a Volovikian understanding of gravitation in terms of the vacuum inertia induced by mass in interaction with the quantum vacuum. One question that arises in this connection is: how can Volovik be correct in his assertion that the density of vacuum energy, i.e., cosmological constant is more or less equal to the cosmological mass-energy density when the density of perturbed vacuum for masses is usually considerably less dense than their black hole geometry? A related question is why the quantum fluctuation energy cutoff (on the mass = perturbed vacuum energy theory) is lower for larger masses such that black hole density is a function of R-2? The density matrix can always be transformed via Lorentz transformation to a purely diagonal form, provided that certain constraints upon the phase relationships of the component eigenfunctions are maintained. In other words a density matrix represents a pure quantum state function if a Lorentz transformation exists that permits transforming the density matrix into a matrix with no off-diagonal terms. What is the density matrix for spin-0 superfluid? What is this representation for a spin-1 superfluid?. . . a “bi-vacuum” superfluid composed of “equal parts” spin-0 and spin-1 superfluids? What effect would a gravitational field have upon such an equilibrium bi-vacuum condensate, i.e., a two-superfluid condensate in which the spin-0 and spin-1 components are of “equal” or complementary density? A gravitational field can be represented in terms of a continuum of Lorentz inertial frames connected along a geodesic path (a, b). The irreversibility associated with the action of a gravitational field can be demonstrated through the manner in which phase accumulates for a parallel-transported wavefunction. Reversibility is an aspect of merely abstract manipulations of Lorentz frames. The real transformation between Lorentz frames cannot be reversible because of the inevitable accelerations implied in changing Lorentz frames. Are so-called adiabatic accelerations possible?

Is it proper to apply the notion of current density to the dynamics of the underlying cellular automatic (CA) infrastructure? Doesn’t such a notion only apply to the phenomena of motion and not the underlying cellular automatic (CA) physics of this motion? Is this to assume a preferred cosmological reference frame in which the underlying CA mechanics is located? Elements of a quantum-statistics-based underlying mechanism for induced gravity: Complementary quantum statistical effects of real fermions and bosons upon their virtual counterparts, which is reciprocal, i.e., virtual fermions and bosons affect the quantum statistics of their real counterparts. /\E and /\p are timelike and spacelike components of a conserved 4vector. Treating virtual fermion-antifermion pairs as scalar and virtual bosons as vector particles, which are combined into a conserved 4-vectorin analogy to how relativistic Maxwell’s equations treat charge as a scalar component of a 4-dimensional current density, J. Special relativity applies to /\p, /\x, /\E and /\t just as well as p, x, E, t. Quantum entanglement in gravitational field acts in the appropriate direction, i.e., increasing Bose condensation of the vacuum in the direction of increasing gravitational potential and increasing decoherence of real and virtual Cooper pairs with increasing gravitational potential. Polarization and magnetization of the quantum vacuum interpreted as permittivity and permeability, respectively of the quantum vacuum change in the right direction so that the local variations in the velocity of light with changing gravitational potential are consistent with the

equation, c = 1/sqrt[ue], where u is here the magnetic permeability and e is the electric field permittivity of the vacuum. . Pressure and energy density of the vacuum and Mach’s formula for the local speed of light. Pressure and energy density of equilibrium quantum vacuum are equal, i.e., vac = pvac pvac~ = [vac - matter], which is the modified quantum vacuum energy density. Ratios of gravitational binding energy to mass energy are equal to the ratio of mass energy to black hole mass energy. Hyperspherical potential and ict-axis relates to mass at rest tunneling through this potential. Gravitation is rotation of this potential by mass energy. Interpretation of Davies-Unruh effect as decrease in virtual fermionic vacuum density and increase in real fermionic vacuum density. The Schrodinger formalism like the LaGrangian and Hamiltonian formalism before it is not particle/field theory specific in the validity of its application. The Feynman diagram formalism shares this generality in that, for example, the formalism can be readily adapted to handle supersymmetric particle/field interactions. God has free will. (by definition) Therefore, if God exists, it is because He chose to exist.

But this conclusion only follows if it also true that, If God does not exist, this too is because He chose not to exist (Otherwise there is no real choice, contrary to the stipulation of God’s possessing free will) But God would not deprive himself of the opportunity to lord it over us all. . . Hence God exists! Note that your anti-theistic argument is no better than mine, and by the way overlooks the fact that suffering can induce positive spiritual transformation in survivors and compassion in those who are witness to suffering – neither is possible in a perfect world where suffering is barred. God could have created us “in one go” as he did the angels, leaving out those important traits in our being which absolutely demand temporality and its attendant developmental dialectic. The angels serve God, but only beings capable of moral error are capable too of loving the Creator. Irreducible complexity comes in two basic types: analyzable and unanalyzable. Biological irreducible complexity is analyzable in the sense of a chess mating position that is definable, e.g., a knight and King checkmate against an enemy King, but which cannot be produced by “over-the-board” play (think of irreducibility here in accordance with “the rules of play” as laws of microevolution, say) – a human player must set up the board position by making several moves simultaneously, c.f., multidimensional time. Again, the chessboard position of enemy King checkmated by one’s King and knight can be “inserted by hand” and on the surface appears no different from other chessboard piece configurations that can be brought about by over-the-board play (think of evolution here). But there is the irreducible complexity of such a thing as consciousness, free will,

aesthetic and moral sense, linguistic ability, humor/laughter, and, of course probably also love. It is this unanalyzable irreducible complexity which may most strongly testify to the reality of Deity, if one is limiting oneself to philosophically or scientifically oriented arguments. I think the textual comparisons made between the Qumranic documents (dating from 200 A. D. or so) and various books of the New Testament demonstrate a stability of the text of the Bible through copying and multiple translations that defies linguistic and script-entropic theoretical analyses for ordinary texts. The Bible is simply not the cumulative result of some centuries’ long game of “Chinese Whispers”. Now how can matter perturb the quantum vacuum statistics in two opposite ways, you might ask? By causing the vacuum to locally gravitate and by causing the vacuum to nonlocally gravitate. (hypothesis) Since gravity can viral-like induce mass in the quantum vacuum (dark matter) and because gravity can also cause gravitational decoherence of nonlocally connected (quantum correlated) quantum fluctuations, I believe that it is through the collective action of all sources of gravitation upon the originally highly quantum correlated early universe that is contributing to the creation and action of dark energy in causing the accelerated expansion of the cosmos. April 2011

One must take into account the natural exponential decay of quantum entanglement with distance and time – something no faster than Gaussian, i.e., A0exp(ax-2), as opposed to inverse-square, i.e., A0x-2. (Could there be some gradient associated with a scalar field, which transforms Gaussianvarying nonlocal entanglement into an inverse-square varying field?) If we have decay of the aboriginal quantum entanglement as a result of cosmological expansion, one which is secretly conserved, the “decay” being only by virtue of a transformation of this quantum entanglement

from its spin 1 form to that of collective spin 0, then we would expect the Heisenberg 3-momentum uncertainty to be decreasing while the imaginary 4-momentum uncertainty increases, all of which should be associated with an increase of the velocity of light with cosmic time. The decrease in the velocity of light with cosmic time might be associated with a decrease in the gravitation constant, much in the spirit of spatial increases in the gravitational constant with increase mass distributions posited in some Machian theories of gravity. In this way, dark energy is cosmological, associated with the time-variation in the gravitational constant while dark matter is local and is associated with the spatial variation in the gravitational constant. The so-called Pioneer effect would then be explicated in terms of the back-reaction of gravitational time dilation upon a time-varying gravitational constant. Dark matter is a nonequilibrium state of the quantum vacuum in which bosonic (3-momentum) fluctuations dominate fermionic (imaginary 4momentum) fluctuations in the vacuum’s energy, acting like real matter and constituting a phase of an otherwise equilibrium vacuum state that contributes to the small, gravity-sensitive cosmological constant, i.e., contributes some of the “missing matter” behind the larger than explicable gravitational binding energy of the cosmos. Dark energy is a nonequilibrium state of the quantum vacuum with oppositely perturbed symmetry, i.e., fermionic fluctuations can be more easily understood in terms of the two types of nonequilibrium vacuum statistics affect the local velocity of light. C = /\E/ /\p /\E = fermionic fluctuations (of imaginary or timelike 4-momentum) (in the form of creation-annihilation of virtual e+e- pairs) /\p = bosonic fluctuations (of spacelike 3-momentum) (in the form of emission-absorption of force-mediating exchange particles, e.g., photon, W, Z, gluon, etc.)

Case 1: Dark matter - /\E < /\p and local value of “c” is less than the free space value (gravitation) Case 2: Dark energy - /\E > /\p and local value of “c” is greater than the free space value (anti-gravitation) See Jack Sarfatti’s paper entitled, Destiny Matrix for his version of this hypothesis. Galois algebraic theory proves that no polynomial roots “exist” (in the sense of “mathematical subsistence” within any deductive procedure) for degree N = 5 polynomials or greater. Yet via numerical approximation methods one can determine to arbitrary desired accuracy such “nonexistent” roots of (N + 4) and higher degree polynomials. My comment on the relevance of this mathematically interesting fact for the purposes of philosophical theology is” “so what.” Asymptotes are at the poles of a function because that is where the singularity in the function’s solution space lies. Yes, but by the same token, Cantor’s “diagonal argument” proves that rational and counting numbers cannot be placed in one-to-one correspondence with one another such that the set of rational numbers is larger than the set of counting numbers, though this set itself be infinite. In other words, Cantor proved that there are orders of infinity, which became the foundation of his “theory of transfinite cardinals”. So I suppose any argument you want to base on the premise below (that there is only one kind of infinity) can be rebutted through application of Georg Cantor’s ideas about the transfinite, which contradict such a limited notion of the mathematical infinite. FEB 2011 The counting numbers can be represented as the inverse of fractions, that is, of rational numbers. So the counting numbers select a subset of rational numbers. Cantor’s diagonal argument is sound if the subset of rational numbers selected cannot themselves be placed in a bijection or one-to-one correspondence with the set of rational numbers which constitute the remainder of

numbers that are not selected, i.e., the set of numbers that cannot be represented as inverse fractions. For purposes of illustration consider the following: 1 = 1/1/1, 2 = 1/1/2, 3 = 1/1/3, etc. Counting numbers are equivalent to real numbers possessing each an infinite number of significant digits. Mind is the ground of metaphor, however a mind is not itself a metaphor; God is the ground of existence, however God is not Himself an existent entity. Heisenberg energy uncertainty is the basis of all changes in energy and hence of temporal change. You get the idea. Metaphor is the Gödelian shift from one axiomatic deductive system to another. Consciousness is ground of metaphor, but is not itself a metaphor (this would be category mistake). Critical complexity and consciousness – threshold for onset of quantum decoherence and necessity of consciousness collapsing Psi. But could consciousness also be involved in gradual decoherence of Psi after the fashion of environmental/thermal decoherence? Explore use of indefinite counterfactuals as element in argument against the notion that life begins at conception. Stereochemistry of dimers of aldehydes, ketones and pentachols. (Jack Stocker, Ph.D. dissertation title) Short story idea – a man and woman fall into a black hole and come out the other side “as each other.” Sci-fi that explores philosophical problems connected with personal identity, e.g., Philip K. Dick. Interesting that pure temporality is associated with global phase evolution of a coherent system while irreversible or entropy-laden temporal change involves progressive disruption of mutual phase relations of density matrix components which may be connected with processing of local information as nonlocally encoded. The masses as manipulated by the holders of power through campaign in

which the masses are buoyed up as they are extolled for obeying the principles in which they are being indoctrinated and which the power mongers claim their executive decisions are informed by principles, the propaganda underscores are shared between peasantry and mobility alike. The late comers to power mongering must pick from the other or complementary projection of the Necker cube of political rhetoric in order to capture a mental challenge the older and better established mongers of power and greed, c.f., Schwanitz’ analogy of political campaign or revolution for scientific paradigm change. Look at fermion pairings, e.g., e+e+, e+e-, e-e-, etc. as different axes of a spin-space coordinate system. In spacetime rotations no axis rotates by more than 45o (/2). Galilean transformation of coordinates involves rotations of axes of up to 90o. Relativity’s necessity for both antiparticles and spin possibly connected to the fact that 45 o Lorentz boost covers spacetime while 90o rotation is required for a Galilean transformation to cover all of space. Dark matter local gravity induced nonequilibrium vacuum state. Dark energy is nonlocal gravity induced decoherence in equilibrium vacuum statistics. Irreversibility caused by complexity threshold crossing or by “registration” in the nonlocal vacuum (vacua) of consciousness(es). Are these two thresholds one and the same? This reminds us of Maxwell’s theoretical discovery that light is identical to electromagnetic waves. Cosmological expansion creates spacetime, that is to say the Universe does not expand “into” some already existent space or spacetime. Consequently, positional uncertainty must increase with the “manufacturing” of additional quantities of space along with the expansion of spacetime. Hence momentum uncertainty increases and so the momentum spectrum of all particles and fields within the Universe develops a long, high momentum tail, which statistically is correlated with a net acceleration in direction of cosmological expansion. The

speed of light also slows, which compounds the appearance of accelerated expansion. Thomas Kuhn characterized the progress of science as the accumulation of not truth but seeming truth, that is, truth in inextricable admixture with nonsense. Use the relation c = vsound = sqrt [pc2/], i.e., Mach’s formula for the speed of sound to argue for Volovik’s contention that the density of matter and vacuum energy are comparable (and track each other over the course of cosmic expansion-obviating one application of the Anthropic cosmological principle) when the density structure of the vacuum is assumed to be a babushka-doll-like black hole, i.e., r = 2GM/c 2 applies fractally, that is from both perspectives inside and outside the black hole. Can Volovik’s vacuum be invoked to explain a constant small anomalous acceleration term? A constant cosmological acceleration could be generated by a fractally structured density for the universe-ascosmological-black hole combined with a simple model of the acceleration of gravity within a body of uniform density and associated constant potential (and associated 1/R force field). @$

Discuss implications of the paper, three-region vacuum nonlocality, arXiv: quant-ph/05010128v1. Discuss philosophical implications of Galois theory of polynomial symmetry groups in connection with implications of the Gödel Theorem and Heisenberg Principle. A pure spin-0 field does not transform under Lorentz transformations in a Lorentz covariant manner, which suggests that such a field may not exist in nature. A composite spin-0 field one composed of quantum entangled spin-1/2 particles may transform properly if degree of entanglement transforms akin to the magnetization component of the polarization-magnetization tensor. This fermionic entanglement must be complemented bosonic entanglement such that gravitational decoherence of fermionic entanglement in an increasing gravitational potential goes hand-in-hand with increasing bosonic entanglement.

Superpowers, players, sustainable vs. ruinous greed. Isn’t it a duty of the military to support the party line at the administration in order to sustain the idyll for the majority of US citizens? As President Clinton has intoned, “it’s for the children”. The naïveté of American citizens must be protected much as “the institution of childhood.” @$au=

Von Neumann information may be shared, but not transmitted; there is no flow of von Neumann entropy. au=Benni Reznik’s paper on threeway vacuum nonlocality has implications for the better understanding of “irreducible complexity” in the argument-from-design debate with neoDarwinian theory. All lose threads stick out on the underside of the rug of grand unified effective field theory. The line of reasoning goes something like this: four-momentum and the spacetime interval are conserved quantities in special relativity, so if the Heisenberg uncertainties of these are also conserved, then we expect that as /\E decreases  /\t increases  /\x decreases  /\p x increases such that we’ve established that /\E (increasing, decreasing)  /\p x (decreasing, increasing), @$which is consistent with the complementary quantum statistics of fermionic and bosonic vacuum fluctuations manifesting as spin-0 e+e- fluctuations (increasing, decreasing) and spin1 photon fluctuations (decreasing, increasing) such that spin-0 (scalar) vacuum fluctuations and spin-1 (vector) vacuum fluctuations may be understood as components of a conserved (3 + 1) vector representing fluctuation in the vacuum’s momentum-energy. We should be able to elegantly demonstrate this through use of fermionic and bosonic creation-annihilation operator definitions of p, E, x and t. The problem here is that “t” is not an operator in quantum mechanics, unless time can be quantized. It seems this might only be achievable on a four dimensional vacuum crystal lattice composed of supersymmetric coupled oscillators. New conserved quantities such as von Neumann entropy and a vacuum that an also be modeled by a kind of cellular

automata theory. Cellular dimensions would probably be based upon Planck units/dimensions. It is well established that the density of Cooper pairs in a superconductor is a good index of the degree of quantum coherence in the superconducting material. Similarly, the timelike current density of virtual Cooper pairs is an index of the quantum coherence of the vacuum, which decreases in the direction of increasing gravitational potential. How does this relate to the magnetization and polarization of the quantum vacuum? “The keys can now be produced simultaneously by transmitter and receiver – the transfer is made redundant” This suggests that the relativity ban on superluminal information transmission only applies to “known information”, i.e., the information by which the consciousness of the self is constituted can never at the same time (but perhaps only at later times) be part of the contents of that consciousness, c.f., World Premier: Bank Transfer via Quantum Cryptography Based on Entangled Photons, Prof. Anton Zeilinger. The DNA in terms of this information bearing molecules virtually unlimited number of viable mutations (both chemically and in evolutionary sense) represents a “state” somewhat akin to a quantum superposition, which needs to have been prepared. Examination of Wigner rotations of Bell state (reduced density matrices) reveals the Lorentz invariance of von Neumann entropy as a measure of quantum entanglement, c.f., Chopin Soo and Cyrus C. Y. Lin (2004). Because of the virtually infinite energy density of the vacuum all kinematics of continuously existing particles must have an alternate description in tirms of the dynamics of the creation and annihilation of particles, both fermionic and bosonic.

“Recall that “creation and annihilation operators are indeed Hermitian conjugates,”c.f., Wikipedia, Quantum Field Theory. Hamiltonian is the time evolution generator, and cycle of creation/annihilation functions after the fashion of a CPU clock pulse, c.f., Cellular Automata theory of spacetime.. Particle conservation is obeyed by fermions, but not by bosons. Does this suggest an uncertainty relation defined by /\F(f)/\F(b) >= h, where F(t) denotes function of fermion # or density, etc. and F(b), function of boson #, density, etc.? We can make vectors from scalars by differentiation of those scalars, and we can make scalars from vectors by taking dot products, which, of course requires integration of the dot product. Presence of real particles and fields breaks the supersymmetry of the quantum vacuum, giving the vacuum a mass approximating that of the real particles and field breaking the supersymmetry, c.f., Vacuum Energy and Cosmological Constant: View from Condensed Matter, Volovik (2001). There should be a way to replace the momenta and energy in the Hamiltonian formulation of General Relativity with the appropriate fermionic and bosonic creation and annihilation operators so as to point the way to an effective field quantum gravity theory. Microtubule electron mobility switches from quantum to classical when dimers (dimer polymers) reach 005 molal concentration of gas or vapor. At this stage nonlocality of the electron currents cuts out as well as interaction with a defined coherent ground state underlying the brain’s neural physiology  loss of coherent temporal evolution of brains neural network as a whole system. Review questions:

What symmetry is implied by validity of arbitrary choice of gauge, gauge symmetry? – meaning what else? Why can/can’t spontaneous emission be accounted for by stimulated emission by virtual particles? Virtual particles may become real, but not vice versa? Is this due to thermodynamic irreversibility? p and x may be defined in terms of bosonic and fermionic creation and annihilation operators – can E and t be defined as well in terms of fermionic creation and annihilation operators? “Alternate”, “Alter-nate”, i.e., of other nativity, that is, origin. Can an uncritical act of pure creativity produce all possibilities? The creative source would exhaust itself or run afoul of the Gödelian paradox. “Alternate”, implies a combinational permutational field of discrete possibilities. @$The coming into being of information, i.e., the notion of “democracy” in ancient Greece cannot be described in the same way as the transmission of a known quantity of information. (Perhaps only data is transmitted while information is shared – like a quantum-encrypted bank key note). May 2012 All creativity is the reprocessing of other information. Really? What does this absolute assertion imply for a universe constuted soley of information? How is information reprocessed which involves the combination of two or more “streams” of information, streams which have never before interacted and are completely uncorrelated? Clearly the universe would have to be made of more than just information qua information if information reprocessing in the manner alluded to above is allowed. There would have to be distinct levels of some other quantity with “information” being a kind of this quantity subsisting at one level or another of this more fundamental quantity. So if the statement that reality consists soley of information is to be considered literally true, then we must confess that our concept of information is not general enough. But this is the problem of language overall: speakers always rely on words the use of

which inevitably involves reference to concepts beyond the ken of (more general than) the speaker. The evolution of the acceptation of a given word to include changes or shifts in the word in terms of its evolving pronunciations and orthographies cannot be fully analyzed within the context of contemporary ad hoc linguistic mappings. The evolution of linguistic mappings implies Timelike, spacelike and “light-like” transmission of energy/information/data. Where does nonlocal transmission fit in? Must the framework of special relativity be expanded? Although the Sophists were facetious and prided themselves on being able to make the worst side of the argument appear the better one, they may well have been onto something which only much later is articulated in Feuerabend’s “anything goes” principle, Derridean inversion of textual interpretation (as well as the interpretation of everything else as just further instances of “text”) as well as in the Everett interpretation of the quantum measurement problem, namely, that reality is rich, complex, ambiguous and underdetermined enough to answer our questions on their own terms, provided that the formulation is coherent. Faith  Grace  Faith and the dynamics of dream/dreamer interference, e.g., loss (or gain) of faith and loss (or gain) of grace are reciprocally related. If Im basically a believer in my spiritual orientation, then if Im a quantum-Derridean Sophist, I can neglect the promptings of my atheistic side and continue selecting for more and ever more faith-reinforcing ideas, examples, arguments, etc. while continuing to believe myself intellectually honest, i.e., true to my intellectual principles. The sum testimony of the world is as balanced on a knife edge between supporting atheistic evolution vs. theistic intelligent design, and the very precariousness of that balance itself seems to be part of the theistic design  perhaps this is our only real preponderant piece of evidence for God over atheist metaphysics. There is a

very humorous and insightful treatment of this theological notion in Futurama episode 15, Season 6. Why unique assignment of an individual  to a unique observer – one which accounts for strong self-interference effects experienced by observer when he performs a measurement? Because observer only experiences that which is supported by his/her own ground or vacuum state. Implications so indeterminate for each quantum mechanical concept that it is easy to form alternate interpretations . . . If we are good, it is on account of grace, e.g., natural health, good living conditions, happenstances, etc. If we are good because of not of these it is perhaps because of a grace, seeming of an altogether other kind. How is it that 1st cousins are less related than are half-brother and halfsister when both relations are constituted by the sharing of a single set of grandparents? This is supposed only because despite an additional “shuffling” of the genetic material in passing down two rather than only one generation. This difference in amount of shuffling seems akin to that by which two and four shufflings of a deck of cards differs in the arrangements of those cards. Making friends by appealing to one’s narcissism provides us with a good analogy for the attack of a virus upon a living cell. Investigate the connection between quantum mechanics, probability and rates of temporal change in relation to inertia. Density matrix allows probability density to be spread out in a continuum other than 3 + 1 spacetime. Tunneling may occur both “over” and “under” the potential barrier, according to two distinct frames of reference. October 2011 In the first instance of tunneling, the particle receives a boost of momentum on account of a fluctuation in the vacuum; in the second instance, the

minute, but finite probability allowed for by the particle’s wavefunction for the particle to appear on the other side of the barrier is the operative factor. In the first case, we have quantum uncertainty; in the second, nonlocality. Relate uncertainty to entanglement conservation vis a vis induced or effective field gravity. Probability underlies the observed phenomena of the quantum world and by extension via the correspondence principle/prn=Ehrenfest’s theorem) the observed phenomena of the classical world. It therefore seems reasonable that the most general underlying mechanism for gravity and inertia should be the quantum statistics of  and ij. Shouldn’t internal symmetry underscore the dynamics played out within spacetime, i.e., the external symmetry of phenomena. We are observing something key to the dynamics of observing, measuring something key to the dynamics of measuring, c.f., au=Richard Hofstadter’s self-referential closed circuit television, only with the observer observing and performing measurements on his own brain while in the very act of doing this. Crossover between categories of onto- and epistomo-logical with respect to uncertainty and information gathered by measurement (energy interference) and observation (information interference) of observer’s brain by the observer himself. October 2011 I have a recurring suspicion that all of the counterintuitive aspects of quantum mechanics stem from “bootstrapping effects” within the Kantian collective, intersubjective synthesis of the phenomenal world. Ziad, I thought that on a Friday, I'd give you something to puzzle over. OK, you begin accelerating in a spaceship along the x-direction. Question: does this affect the velocity of the ship along the y- or z-

directions? Well, normally in a "vacuum" the answer is "no." However, imagine for a moment that the spaceship is accelerating through what we might term here an "active medium", say a medium able to induce drag where the amount of drag is governed by a kind of stress-strain-shear medium resistance tensor. And how the medium is interconnected between x- with y- and z-directions would determine the resistance put up by the medium as a result of a body's acceleration through the medium along the x-direction. Well, think about how as an object accelerates, it travels ever slower through time, the faster it moves through space. Space and time in socalled "free space" are mutually perpendicular so how can accelerating along the x-direction in space cause a deceleration along the ictdirection? (Just think about how the range of a projectile can be calculated without explicit reference to the acceleration of gravity which is always perpendicular to the forward momentum of the projectile down range. ) Unless "free space" isn't "free" at all, but is part of an intrinsically "warped" spacetime. prn=This is a Machian idea of course that in genuinely free space, i.e., within a truly "flat" 4-dimensional spacetime, objects should not be expected to present any resistance to our attempt to accelerate them! The Machian idea is basically this: inertia in "free space" (flat spacetime) is a manifestation of the interaction of bodies interaction with the gravitational field of the Universe. Of course, if local gravitational fields are present, then the body must also interact with this local field in addition to the Universe's g-field and hence the effective inertial mass of the body would be expected to be larger for a mass present near a massive body (and general relativity can predict just how large this effect is). (“Dark matter” within the context of induced gravity theory?) Otherwise, I just can't see how acceleration along "x" can affect motion along "ict" without such an intrinsic coupling of time and space as befits

a What Russell

universal/global

gravitational

do

you

field. think?

Ziad, Can time be decomposed into reversible and irreversible components? In free space? In a gravitational field? If gravitation contributes to the decoherence of the wavefuntion and decoherence processes underlie irreversible time, @$then how can gravitational time dilation slow down the process of quantum decoherence? Russell Let me look at the second paragraph first. The Heisenberg uncertainty principle (HUP) is not an epistemological principle; it is an ontological one! What this means is that it is not on account of the observer's physically interacting with the submicroscopic systems whose state he wishes to measure that "causes" a "disturbance" to the system, creating uncertainty in physical observables "conjugate" to the physical observables he is attempting to measure. Rather the HUP is a consequence of Fourier Analysis (pure mathematics) and the brute fact that energy is proportional to Planck's constant, i.e., it is quantized, c.f., Time in Quantum Mechanics, (Muga, Mayato and Egusqiza):

Note: It is unfortunate that Heisenberg published his "light microscope

argument" in favor of his principle because he sold his discovery short in doing so. The HUP is a much deeper principle of nature than the hidden mechanics of some "inevitable interference by the observer" with that which he attempts to measure/observe! From Fourier analysis, we find that the more sharply defined a function is in the time domain, the more ill defined is the function in the complementary frequency domain (and vice versa). This is a purely mathematical consequence and is demonstrated via application of the Fourier Transform and Fourier Inverse Transform on any piecewise-continuously differentiable function! The same situation exists for wavelength and wavenumber (proportional to momentum via "h") As for the first paragraph, the "external spin" so-called is the angular momentum of the electron (or positron) and the angular momentum is a conserved quantity. Conservation is a mere "constraint" to the dynamics of a subatomic process or of its dynamics and does not actually contribute to the dynamics of the process itself. In quantum mechanics, any process is possible which is not strictly forbidden by constraints such as conservation laws. You cannot have any more angular momentum, i.e., "external spin" after the subatomic process than you had at its beginning, assuming all the original participants in the collision are accounted for. If there is excess energy large enough in magnitude to equal mc**2 for some other collection of particles, then those particles will be produced with a certain probability if the output quantum number balance with the input quantum numbers or the original particles going into the reaction - which particles and with which probabilities this happens is determined by the summing of input real particles and virtual particles within Feynman

diagrams in which vacuum particle processes are taken into account. To start the calculation the photon propagator has to be calculated from appropriate Green's functions. The vacuum Green's functions have to also be taken into account. With added energy, higher and higher order Feynman diagrams representing more and more complex patterns of particle creation (from the original photon and electric field/virtual electrons/positrons are needed). The probability of a given order of Feynman diagram falls off in probability with the inverse fine structure constant. This constant is 1/137 so a 2nd order process is 1/137th as probable as a first order process. So yes, there is a theory, that of Feynman propagators/diagrams which can relate at least probabilistically, external spin so-called to excess energy. Russ PS, Bell's Theorem and the results of the Alain Aspect experiments have demolished the notion of an objective reality in your sense. Yes, it's absurd, but the next generation of physicists will not think so - they will have grown up with these ideas being common parlance. :) > Pair production can also occur in any strong static or slowly > enough varying field, magnetic, electric, nuclear, gravitational, etc. > The simple propagation of photons in vacuum is by the way mediated by > the continual spontaneous creation/annihilation of virtual > electron-positron pairs along the photon's trajectory, and the photon > may be thought of as a most elegant "book-keeping" device for keeping > track of the flow of electromagnetic energy along this chain of > virtual pair production events that is always taking place in vacuum > on account of the Heisenberg uncertainty principle (because the > Hamiltonian, the energy function which via the Schrodinger equation > gives us the wavefunction, is itself a function of incompatible

> observables (kinetic and potential energy)- get Ziad to explain this, > very interesting)! > > All of the excess energy (above 1.02 MeV) is converted into the > kinetic energy until the excess energy becomes equal to or greater > than the mass(es) of (a) subatomic particle(s), the quantum numbers of > which add to the same values for the quantum numbers (which represent > conserved physical quantities) of the original photon (and > electron-positron pair), i.e., total spin of "1", same angular > momentum, same 4-momentum, same lepton number, etc., same > charge-parity-time (CPT) (if weak nuclear fields are involved), etc. > > There is no direct relationship between "spin" which relates to > an internal symmetry and "kinetic energy", which relates to an > external symmetry, i.e., spacetime symmetry. @$It is true that internal > and external symmetries may be unified in supersymmetry theory (a > prediction of string theory), but then one would be relating spin with > kinetic energy only indirectly. > > I hope this is all perfectly clear! :) > > Russ > > I have a question concerning pair production. Why does > it have to occur in the coulomb filed of a nucleus? Also, if the excess > energy carried by the incident photon above the 1.02 MeV is all > converted into kinetic energy imparted to the pair, what portion of > this will become spin? > -----Original Message----> > > But, Mr. Reznik says that quantum entanglement > violates Bell's inequalities that is the hidden non locality! > Also, creates a reduction in the Ent., When > separation occurs ! why is so?

> > > > Yes, what you are saying is most clearly > explained in cit=http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/quantph/pdf/0008/0008006.pdf > > Distillation of vacuum entanglement to EPR pairs > au=Benni Reznik > School of Physics and Astronomy, > Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv 69978, Israel. > (01 Aug. 2000) > > Russ, > Quantum Mechanics manifests a non local behavior > which is not in conflict with microscopic causality. With this non > locality, quantum entanglement cannot be produced locally. A pair of > separated systems which may communicate only via a classical channel, > can not become entangled as a result of local quantum operations done > separately on each system. When entanglement already exists, it may be > locally delivered from one subsystem to another. A sample of pairs of > spins, can be purified to singlets - EPR pairs- and remnants of non > entangled states. > > This is how I view it, what do you think? > > Ziad > > > Ziad and Ben, > > Spin is a quantum number and so > represents a conserved quantity, so if the positronium atom is > composite spin 0, then the photon spins should be equal and opposite

> (and parallel to the photon's direction of propagation, i.e., +/- 1) > though the orientation of the spins would be indeterminate in the > absence of a magnetic field with which to measure those spins. > 4-momentum, i.e., momentum-energy is a conserved quantity, but > 3-momentum is not, generally speaking. But a photon's momentum is > identical to the photon's 4-momentum, so yes, the photons would have > equal and opposite momenta. Also the photons would be quantum > entangled. If the positronium atom was prepared properly, i.e., the > interaction Hamiltonian representing outside environmental influence > on the prepared system is negligible, then the two photons should be > more or less 100% quantum entangled. If the photons pass into > spacetimes that are differently curved (relative to each other), then > the quantum entanglement will decay away. > > Hope this is a good enough answer, > Russ > > > Russ, > A system of an electron and anti-electron > orbiting one another, getting annihilated and producing photons. > These photons are equal and opposite. Are these > photons having equal and opposite momentum and spin? > Are these quantities conserved? What are the > system's momentum and spin before annihilation? Does this > Annihilation lead to quantum entanglement? > > > > Ziad, A good example of nonlocality for purposes of illustration here is the sharing of a quantum encrypted key code or key, e.g., bank account number, etc., first created upon collapse of a quantum superposed wavefunction at both banks. The key code is in this way shared instantly between the different quantum computers at the two

banks, which, other things being equal may be separated by any distance whatever. This may be thought as the instantaneous transmission of information, but information of a very special kind: unknown information. The conventional definition of information is that a message (of however many bits), known to a given person (or persons) is coded in some manner, maybe only in spoken language, e.g., "Hey, you wearing the red cap, watch your step!", or in binary, hexidecimal, etc. and is then transmitted to someone else, a receiver. Relativity places a limit on the speed of such transmissions of "c" or less. Not only is the key code created by the inherently random processes of quantum superposition, and hence the key code is not known prior to its transmission (transmission is constituted by either participant in the information exchange performing a required quantum measurement), but any attempts to (illegally) intercept the key code in order to read it results in collapse of the quantum entanglement, detected on both sides by the intended sharers of the key. "Transmitter" and "receiver" are of equal status here (and are replaced by the more general concept of "sharers of information") because prior to the collapse of quantum entanglement and creation of the key code, neither participant knows what information is to be exchanged. So there is no flow of information from lesser to greater uncertainty! And hence, no concern about relativity restrictions on speed of information propagation! Both participants in the quantum exchange of information know the same amount before (nothing) and after the "transmission" of the key code (however many bits). There is no "during" representing the duration of the transmission as in the case of conventional, classical information transmission - the quantum nonlocality principle implies instantaneity in all Lorentz frames.

Russell > > Russ, > Doesn't quantum entanglement suggests that either information is > traveling faster than c or, the two photons share a physical sameness, > oneness, or something or other that means the one is affected by the > remote collapse of the wave function of the other? Just using the > phrase quantum entanglement doesn't answer the question of the > mechanism or the causality? Therefore since no info is traveling > faster than c (that we know of) we have no violation of causality, if > we define causality as information travels at c or less. This is a > completely circular definition! The violation of causality would be in > our frame, not the photon's frame Discuss kinematics as boundary conditions applied to dynamics in relation to “reducing valve” theory of consciousness, Hameroff and Penrose’s theory of consciousness and anesthesia. Microtubules, polymers, electron mobility, tunneling current, Zener diode bias voltage, filtering, radio/TV tuning analogy of consciousness compared and contrasted with internet (computing online vs. offline analogy). Because general anesthesia ensues and consciousness ceases once a vapor, gas, fume or mist that the patient has inhaled has reached a concentration in brain lipids of 0.05 molal, independently of the chemical properties of said vapor, gas, etc. strongly suggests that it is not the chemical properties of the anesthetic substance which are responsible for consciousness though certainly chemistry plays an important role in the structuring of state of consciousness once (individual) consciousness as such is given. May 2012 This further hints, perhaps that nor is it the chemical reactions per se taking place in the brain that are essentially productive of consciousness. May 2012

A suggestive relationship between subjective and objective is

pointed up by the fact that the consciousness of the observer collapses the electron wavefunction in the two-slit experiment while collapse of the wavefunction describing the network of quantum entangled microtubule electrons is associated with the onset of general anesthesia, i.e., loss of consciousness. 

September 2013, FB communication with Todd Moulder

“Yes, the brain's memory circuitry may be a kind of "directory tree" of hyperlinks that, when "clicked", resonantly tune to certain (perhaps preexisting) quantum vacuum E/M frequencies. The gradual death of a person's brain tissue under hypoxic conditions can be likened to "link rot", which has no effect upon the webpages themselves, but merely in the ability to open them. The quantum vacuum electromagnetic field with an energy density of upwards of 10**95 kg/m**3 acts as the universal server or cosmic CPU. Each brain possesses its own tiny frequency subspectrum of the total quantum field and "Cosmic FCC" permitted frequency band. Individual consciousness may be a unique signature associated with a kind of hard encryption which helps to enforce Hawking's "chronology protection" (the time axis of temporal integration of conscious experience into a forward phasing "specious present" is more or less orthogonal to that of intersubjective linear time, e.g., the cognition of a melodic theme and its progression, note by note are temporally orthogonal). Of course all of the quantum entanglements laid down into the quantum vacuum as a result of cerebral action, i.e., conscious thinking encode information, which is conserved. This quantum information from the conscious life experience of all intelligent beings is being input into a single matrix and therefore is open to be reprocessed into larger, transhuman meanings perhaps this is the purpose of the "after life."

 “Memory is non-neural because it is really the trillions of tubulin dimers within the millions of microtubules within each of the brain's 200 billion neurons that actually does "the heavy lifting", c.f., Hameroff and Penrose's "Orch-OR" model of quantum consciousness and anesthetic action. And these tubulin dimers are really only waveguides for the

quantum vacuum electromagnetic field. As we discussed during the predeployment at Fort Bliss, when any gas, vapor, mist or fume reaches a concentration in brain fat (similar to virgin olive oil) of 0.05 molar, general anesthesia takes place. It is precisely at 0.05 molar concentration that the electron mobility in tubulin dimers within the microtubules switches from wave-like to particle-like, i.e., "dumb elastic ball bouncing along a pipe"-like. The wave-like properties of molecular, atomic and subatomic particles is owing to the continual exchange of quantum observables, e.g., momentum, energy, angular momentum, etc. between said particles and the quantum vacuum electromagnetic field (QVEF). So the specific action of anesthetics is to sever this connection between the brain's microtubules and the QVEF. The brain effectively becomes "unplugged" from the "cosmic Internet" and is left to "compute offline". As we know, without context there is no meaning and the physical occurrences within a truly closed, stand-alone system, e.g., circulating electron or ion currents in the anesthetized brain, "can't really be about anything", that is, these physical processes cannot "refer to anything outside the closed system". This loss of ability of the brain to represent and refer by way of this loss of context is what we call unconsciousness. Strangely, this is the inverse of the situation in the two-slit experiment, in which the presence of consciousness causes the electrons to hit the phosphorescent screen as impacting particles instead of interfering waves. The absence of consciousness *inside* is associated with particle-like behavior of electrons in the brain, while the presence of consciousness *outside* is also associated with particle-like behavior of the two-slit experiment electrons. I suspect the presence of quantum entanglement between brain microtubule tubulin dimer electrons and the electrons hitting the phosphorescent screen in the case of the two-slit experiment. I suspect the loss of quantum entanglement between tubulin dimer electrons in the brain and the quantum vacuum electromagnetic field in the case of general anesthesia.” A new model of perception arises from these and similar considerations. An object viewed serves as the basis of a collection of sensory data (as opposed to information), which instructs the brain how to alter its

quantum electronic filtering/tuning circuits so as to “tune in” from the vacuum spectrum of information signals that precise set of vacuum signals representing the object perceived. This Huxlean, Jamesian, Bergsonian, McKennian, Wattsian, etc. theory of perception seems to lend considerable support to Plato’s theory of forms. A correct theory would retain Plato while acknowledging Bergsonian creative evolutionary process, i.e., emergence. Since the Heisenberg uncertainty in a quantum observable is derived from the fluctuation in this observable, i.e., sqrt[ - **2]. it may well be that the mutual interference of quantum fluctuations of microtubule tubulin dimer electrons with the quantum fluctuations of the vacuum electromagnetic field carrying the entanglement signature of an object in the external world that is in continual interaction with said vacuum forms the basis of the brain's perception of external reality. A correct theory would retain Plato while acknowledging Bergsonian creative evolutionary process, i.e., emergence.” D = E + P and H = B + M /\E//\p = c and 1/ also equals “c”. In accelerated frames, /\E decreases and /\p increases so that c’ < c vac. Might we also suppose that  and  change with increasing gravitational potential so that c local decreases with increasing potential exactly in step with the theoretically predicted decrease in c with changing potential indicated by /\E//\p = c? /\q = [2 - ] and so = [2 - /\q2] P and M form with one another a 4-vector. Permittivity and susceptibility tensors – how to interpret off-diagonal terms? Look at Ju, current density in terms of ,  and c. Can  and  be interpreted as the magnetization and polarization of the free space vacuum?

Inventions of “0”, , “i”, etc. have what general enabling characteristic in common? Derrida applies Heraclitus’ famous maxim of the flowing stream (namely one cannot step twice into the same spot within it) to Saussure’s notion of semiosis, i.e., a referential network. Mental attention theory of solipsism analogous to Euclid’s “visual ray” theory of vision, c.f.,  and observer, J0, the timelike component of J is associated uniquely with the electron spin, c.f., Real Spinor Fields, Hestenes. Spin 0 – spin in direction of “motion” of particle (composite spin-0 – virtual Cooper pair); spin-1 particle spin also in direction of particle motion, but now purely spacelike. Any quantum principle, e.g., Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, etc. not obeyed by general relativity must play a role in the underlying mechanism of gravitation – in this way there would be a clear division between the formal and “physical” characteristics o the theory and would make general relativity a “perfectly abstract” theory of gravity and inertia, that is must contribute to the building and sustainment of the “effective field”. String theory makes no distinction between so-called real and virtual particles. au=

Derek Parfit’s – Personal identity perfect scanner thought experiment – investigate the naïve realistic assumptions lying behind this gedanken experiment, c.f., quantum “no-cloning” theorem, quantum key code encryption, chronology protection hypothesis, Heisenberg uncertainty, etc. You say reality is quantum mechanical, which means composed of waves – “waves of what?” There is the receiver of these waves which

is itself not waves. Collapse of the  is proof that reductionism is false, i.e., that the classical world cannot be reduced to a purely quantum mechanical one. Determinism goes hand-in-hand because each in its own way requires the concept of “a complete description”. Does the context-sensitive nature of things demand that a complete description in one field rely on a complete description of reality itself? The failure of reductionism means that there is more than one spatial (or temporal) scale to reality, to being and so justifies our belief in emergence, i.e., difference in scale or levels of description are not “mere appearance.” If the brain is an emergent structure then consciousness cannot be reduced to the sensing of the brain and/or its activity by its embedding quantum vacuum. Emergence means that a being’s context never exhaustively or sufficiently “embeds that thing.” And ground is forever being outstripped by the objects inhering in it. Each consciousness has its own degeneracy, symmetry, conserved quantities, etc. A non-falsifiable theory in the Popperian sense is Pauli’s “not even wrong” theory. Coherence: when enough possibilities are excluded short of (N – 1), one of the N possibilities is spontaneously engendered.

effects

Have the initial methods of deconstruction sharpen the (appearance of the) already granted sharp political divisions between liberal and conservative? Contrast this with critiques of Vidal, Nader, Chomsky, Zinn, et al. who view these profound ideological divisions as “superficial”.

We might contrast these two critical methods as hypertextual (c.f., hypermedia) vs. power-analysis critiques.) Could Foucault’s thought perhaps unite the two? How much do the alternate acceptations of “writing” (c.f., “Writing” as data or memory “traces” (see Derrida & ij of quantum theory) function as quantum superposed states? And is the connection between QM and consciousness easier to glimpse using a Derridean/Bohmian metaphor for quantum mechanics? Collapse of unlimited semiosis and collapse of . The raising of consciousness of the literate classes in the societies of the traditional and less developed world is blowing the lid off the real motives, interests and goals of superpower, colonial and advanced industrialized nations and so fomenting the dissemination of. . . (missing page) , (Introduction reference to Kabbala, Bible Code, etc., c.f., The Association and their song, Cherished) Also use this in connection with the division between subconscious (stimulus-response, Pavlovian, etc. response component of linguistic communication) and linguistic behavior’s conscious component. HUP, stability, reversibility, DNA, evolution, reproducibility, reductionism, determinism, etc. Can we compare identical boundary conditions upon differently evolved fields? But we must go deeply into that which we seek to overthrow via argument – so deeply we risk going over to our ideological opponents’ side. The best Christian apologists are former atheists, agnostic scientists. It is only the inherent mysteriousness of consciousness that guarantees the unfathomable nature of the world and/or its “deepest”, c.f., infinitely

thick cheese block analogy and Gödel Incompleteness) dynamical processes. Difference in topology between real and virtual particles, c.f., “the mass shell.” We go from the sterile the way to the dynamics underlying general relativity by recasting Minkowski mass-shell cone.” Conservation laws not observed by off-mass-shell particles. Destiny – Karma; Fate – Character “Absurd”  unspeakable, c.f., Speakable and Unspeakable in Quantum Mechanics (John Bell) In a partially dissociated state over would see things always there but that one normally never notices, e.g., a passing vehicle on the highway is seen to “shrink” in one’s visual field, and so on. Consciousness may be interpreted as breaks in the lockstep of deterministic brain processes or, perhaps yielding its effective action there. Rather we retain a memory of possessing less developed consciousness. Memory traces deposited in a more primitive nervous system continuous with a less primitive one. Nothing that could have laid down those memory traces from a recent set of sensory stimuli? The infinite regress of appearances (cause & effect) originates from transcendentally creative (and free) consciousness? Yet another version of the Serpent’s lie is that the structure of the psyche is not a la Freud tripartite but composed of four parts, Id, Ego, Superego, and God. Place the four into a circle, show arrows representing mutual action of

each on the other, exhaustive or circular, uni- or bi-directional? God creating Id constituting Ego via societally programmed language, Ego back-reacting on Id via mechanisms of repression, Ego constituting Superego via social contract, Superego back-reacting on Ego as moral sense/sublimation, Superego acting upon God via prayer, God backreacting on Superego via Holy Spirit, etc. How does God communicate with the Ego (Man)? – through the Id rather than through the Superego as would be commonly assumed? This is analogous to the creationist sidestep in the argument with evolutionists to speak of “directed evolution”. Intelligence can be impersonal – an eternally present filled such as vacuum energy.

Which arose first, the moral sense or hypocrisy? I say hypocrisy. This quite turns everything on its head and so requires extraordinary explanatory grounds. epi=fcbk It is the evil perpetrated by the righteous, which provides strongest proof of Man’s fallen nature, not the acts of psychopathic dictators and sociopathic mass murderers. And it is only a highly personal, demonstrable proof of man’s fallenness, i.e., one’s own state of damnation, which can convince the unbeliever of his need of a savior. I was quite stunned to find that a Google search with such phrases, as “house(s) of spiritual complacency”, c.f., my oft repeated utterance that “Churches are houses of spiritual complacency”, etc. produced not a single hit. This has been remarked elsewhere, but bears repeating here: if Christians really believed what they oft pay lip service to, i.e., the wonders of heaven in store for each as term of their salvation,

they would not be able to contain the inevitable spontaneous displays of joy and exuberance. Note that there are indeed a very few Christians who live their daily lives in continual witness to this heartfelt inner joy stemming from the conviction of their religious beliefs, but again, the number of such individuals is vanishingly small and should any given church be comprised by a majority of such individuals, this church would be branded as a dangerous cult, raided by the FBI and perhaps set afire and razed to the ground. There is much evidence that humankind didn’t discover the wheel until around 5000 B.C. The “intellectual distance” between ideas frequently contracts, sometimes radically once the latter derivative idea is safely in hand. There is an idea popular amongst conservatives that values held dear (or regularly paid lip service to) by “most Americans” such as industriousness, freedom, democracy, capitalism, rugged individualism, advanced technology, etc. are now basic common sense, that is, are invariably revealed by the light of reason, should it choose to shine, and not merely the abiding historical legacy of serendipitous social and cultural conditioning as, it is supposed, are indeed all notable alternative values in opposition to these, i.e., those long held dear by peoples of “traditional” cultures widely differing from the American advanced industrialized model. It is widely believed that a person from a traditional or tribal, i.e., primitive culture is happy to give up the cozy small world of his traditional culture in exchange for a doubt-ridden, disoriented position within the infinitely larger universe opened up to him through his society having come into contact with an advanced industrialized, post-colonial power. Similarly, it is smugly supposed that the farmer of the early 1800’s’ life was improved when he moved to a tenement in a squalid industrial center to slave 14 hours a day at the local factory for bare subsistence wages. The same extol the virtues of “the free market” though without having apprised themselves of the myriad external controls, which are nowadays applied to the economy to at turns, stay and guide the Smithian invisible hand.

It is commonly believed amongst amateur historians that the causes of the French Revolution were simply class envy and the misery experienced by the peasant classes. Because of the low literacy level amongst the lower classes, it was thought that the ideas of Hobbes, Montesquieu, Voltaire and Rousseau could have played little if any role in the instigation of this revolution. July 2011 But the grand conceptions of these gentlemen as it turned out, easily survived being stripped down and applied to the consciousness and conditions of persons individual and collective. But it was the historically and culturally conditioned preexistent class structure, which permitted this trickle down of intelligent application. And it is not as though these distinguished philosophers had really formed their lofty conceptions in the ivory tower as it were. Moreover, for the peasants’ part, one does not always have to possess a full understanding of the subtleties of language to correctly perceive that one has been the subject of insult. Derrida’s “diffe’rer” may be applied to Aristotle’s Metaphysics as “meta”-physics where “meta” has the double meaning of “after” (liberalcoincidental) and “different” in the ultimate sense of “transcendental” (metaphorical-intentional). Derrida’s concept of “trace” bears some similarities to the “trace” of the density matrix in quantum mechanics. July 2011 Coincidents of language are never coincidences. “Heaven” as Kingdom of Derridean “postponed meaning”. Rhetoric versus Logic – analogous to time dependent vs. time independent Schrodinger equation, quantum field vs. classical field theory. Analogous to quantum versus classical interference distinction.

Taking the theory of Electro Magnetic Quantum Gravity (EMQG) and replacing charge with spin in the role of the theory’s dynamical mainspring might be worth investigating. Similar remarks perhaps apply to Haisch, Rueda and Puthoff’s theory. How are we to define the surface area proportional to the entropy associated with the DaviesUnruh acceleration temperature? If the world possesses no complete description, a theory of everything is not really possible, they all of our systems of categories and even the most fundamental ones, e.g., mind vs. matter, etc. must break. Quantum entanglement is important to maintaining the bulk properties of solids, i.e., photon entanglement underlies polarization of a dielectric medium and spin +/-1/2 entanglement magnetization of diamagnetic media. The conservation of von Neumann entropy points to the conservation of quantum entanglement and the unification of polarization and magnetization of bulk media as spacelike and timelike components of a conserved polarmagnetic 4-vector point to maximally entangled Cooper pairs and maximally entangled photons as timelike and spacelike components of a conserved entanglement 4-vector. In this way, the gravitational redshift and the Davies-Unruh entropy are seen as manifestation of spacelike and timelike components of bisuperfluid quantum mechanism underlying an “already unified” theory of quantum gravity, c.f., Sakharov, Volovik, Reznik, Alsing, et al., c.f. also vacuum entanglement, Wigner rotations, Pauli blocking of virtual fermions, loss of Cooper pair entanglement and @$enhancement of virtual boson entanglement in accelerated reference frames, etc. How do we apply the distinction of working versus recognition vocabulary to information or information systems, e.g., study vs. experience, ribosome vs. DNA, and so on. . . There is an analogous interpretation of “random mutation” upon which natural selection operates to the Huxlean nonlocal theory of perception, i.e., mutations are also nonlocal if not in physical origin, then in

meaning and reference. Language must fail to refer, e.g., answering machine prompt, digital computer phone operator, etc., when there is insufficient context, which is to say, proper embedding of the informational system in nonlocally connected quantum vacua (note: we do not here refer to anything like “the quantum vacuum”) “Indeed, excavated ancient libraries could not be trusted to contain the works of intelligent men and women, “c.f., Charles B. Thaxton, “In Pursuit of Intelligent Causes,” Origins & Design,, Summer 2001, p. 2829. (If DNA/RNA cannot be taken to contain information qua “intelligently (network) configured data.” (Above passage quoted by Thomas F. Heinze) Should the exorcism of consciousness from human history repair the breach between the naturalistic world and rationality? Wigner derived a formula relating a clock’s accuracy to the uncertainty in a time interval measured by a clock in terms of the clock’s mass and physical dimensions, c.f., The Ascent of Life, New Scientist, Dec. 11-17, 2004. The information content that we may associate with a given quantity of energy uncertainty is dependent on the degree of quantum entanglement of the noise spectrum of energy fluctuations comprising this quantum uncertainty of energy. Although the pressure of information within the brain is thought to be mediated via nonlocally correlated system of fluctuations of momentum energy of electrons flowing within tubulin dimmer proteins composing neural microtubules, the converse of this is not necessarily the case, i.e., not all such system of quantum fluctuations are encoded with “accessible”) information. There must be some kind of “von Neumann information” “uncertainty principle” involved here that prevents “accessible” and “inaccessible” information from being commensurate in content, i.e., no underlying informational common denominator by which the information content/density of accessible information might be compared with that of “inaccessible information.”

From the 100-page “Brookings Report”, “Anthropological files contain many examples of societies, sure of their place in the Universe, which have disintegrated when they had to associate with previously unfamiliar societies. . . and The so-called Pioneer anomaly is quite simply explained in terms of the deceleration of the spaceship’s radio signal (being received by an earth tracking station) in the direction oriented from tracking station to probe, combined with an assumption that this deceleration vector points away from the Sun itself rather than away from the tracking station. In effect, the pioneer anomaly is caused by failing to measure the velocity of radio signals within a reference frame that varies with time due to cosmological expansion. The Pioneer probe has a component of velocity away from the tracking station of Hr, where “H” is the Hubble constant and “r” is the directed line segment connecting probe and tracking station. As the radio signal from the probe propagates in the direction of the tracking station, the line segment, “r” decreases at a rate, dr/dt = c. The unaccounted for component of outward velocity, Hr = v is therefore decreasing at the rate, d/dt(Hr) = Hdr/dt = Hc and so the radio signal is accelerating in the direction of the space tracking station by an amount Hc. If this effect is not corrected for, then the spacecraft for component of acceleration, assumed to be specifically sunward. Parmenides once exclaimed, “Nothing cannot exist!” Modern physics has proven Parmenides correct and spacetime is now understood to be a structure of momentum-energy just as indeed matter is. And the dynamical link between momentum-energy and spacetime is really just that maintained between real and virtual momentum-energy, subject to the laws of the quantum statistics of fluctuations and their correlations. For example, each Lorentz frame (inertial frame) corresponds to a finely

tuned set of nonlocally connected (quantum correlated) quantum fluctuations in momentum-energy. In free space, “real” vs. “virtual” is an arbitrary distinction. Not so for the case of gravitational fields. It is a fortunate grace that intuition complements the fundamental limitations of Gödel-incomplete systems of theory. Self-reference is an inevitable earmark of a description that does not merely parallel (and this fails to refer to) that which the theory seeks to describe. Does the procedure by which a natural language is formalized carry the contaminant leading to the Gödel-incompleteness of the new formal system (language) that results? An example of a discontinuity in the semantic map of a language is the opposition in German, willkurlich vs. unwillkurlich. Willkurlich: arbitrarily, uncontrolled, autocratic, capriciously, arbitrarily; Unwillkurlich: involuntarily, in unwilling manner, instinctively, naturally, spontaneously, automatically. . . April 2013 another example are the English words, “completeness” vs. “incompleteness”, which are mutually contradictory, however, the German translation of these two terms is “Unvollstaendigkeit” and “Vollkommenheit” are not mutually contradictory in German. One might argue then that the German terms are less ambiguous than their equivalent English terms. The highlighted words in each definition indicate those words, which in part compose the semantic discontinuity. The above is perhaps in important extension of Derrida’s critique of rational thought (critique of Logos) as entirely founded upon unstable oppositions of dual categories. What proportion of interpersonal communication consists of button pushes and how much the cold-blooded apprehension of a message? The Golden Rule, love the other as thyself or, do unto others as you would have them do unto you makes perfects ethical sense, that is, until one attempts to apply this principle cross-culturally! Examples of the less than judicious application of this principle are the following:

1) This is for your own good. 2) This is going to hurt me more than it’s going to hurt you. 3) The greater good must be served. 4) We know their best interests better than they do. 5) “Rational” in “rational self-interest” is not an objectively definable thing, but conventional and intersubjectively defined. Can we say that because physical, mental and mathematical are mere abstractions that Penrose’s “ontological triangle” is any less of a mystery? Two objective timelines, i.e., of brain and embedding vacuum entertained give our subjective impression of time’s passage? What happens when a spin-1/2 particle from an EPR pair falls into a black hole while its partner escapes to infinity? Math of communication: pushing buttons of stimulus-response (SR) network is 100% or only partial? Is our appreciation of “our favorite things” really so unique and personal that it is essentially incommunicable? Well no, if this appreciation is 100% culturally mediated. Analogy of Chomskian grammar is a Vis a Vis linguistic evolution and unknown grammar of DNA expression. Huxlean theory of perception and postmodern theory of evolution invoking morphic resonance/formative causation. Logic of Descartes “cogito” and the impossibility represented by the Ourobouros, which is indeed possible in higher dimensions, e.g., Klein bottle. Victorian spiritualists associated the spiritual realm with the fourth dimension. Sensitivity to initial conditions in the ground continuum of self-organizing systems accounts for the wide separation

of distinct self-organized systems on the au=Kauffmanian rugged fitness landscape. Can the ground of mathematical being be uberrascht by the constructions of human intuition?, c.f., connections between Gödel’s Incompleteness Theorem and the insufficiency of the quantum vacuum in its role as determinate ground, or are all true theorems of mathematics waiting, some with infinite patience, to be discovered by superhuman intuition? There are, for example, higher order Aleph’s, c.f., Entanglement (Amir Aczel), which cannot be built up or derived from lower level Aleph’s and yet there they are, “floating seamlessly” in the Platonic mathematical heaven. The dialectic of thought by which contradictions are dissolved relies characteristically upon the faculty of metaphoricity. This does not take place through a mere redrawing of the category map over the selfsame territory itself in the dialectical changes undergone by Geist. Quantum uncertainty represents not as is commonly supposed the effect of the observer’s inevitable physical interference with any object he observes, but rather represents the effect of the observer’s selfinterference. This follows from the ding an sich as collaborative, intersubjectively based spectrum of eigenfunctions to a single-observerbased solitary eigenfunction (appearance). The interaction of the Kantian categories with the primeval chaos (that forms the stuff of the material world) is akin to hw the DNA (ribosome, really) reproduces itself, by picking from a soup of random amino acids those which it needs at a particular moment. Because one cannot measure one’s velocity relative to the quantum vacuum energy field, it follows that one cannot divide or partition this vacuum into distinct Lorentz-framed subvacua. But EPR effects due to measurement succeed so it appears in doing just this very thing! Lorentz invariance implies that the vacuum is densely packed with “Lorentz subvacua”. Als ding an sich, the quantum vacuum indeed possesses a Lorentz spectral structure, however this structure must

remain intrinsic quantum spin whose direction is observer dependent provided that an act of measurement is performed by the observer. The misogynist’s irreverent answer to the Kay Jeweler’s advertising jingle, “Every kiss begins with Kay” is the darkly humorous, “every jizz begins with “J”” SOP’s for engineers, policies ad procedures manuals for government bureaucrats, petty stereotypes for the family’s first meeting of one’s new fiancée during Thanksgiving dinner – all of these have an important element in common, they are one and all programmed sets of instructions, not unlike computer programming code, which tell us each in his or her own sphere of life, how to proceed without or with little of the burden of original on-the-spot analysis. Compare inspectors’ application of principles underlying a regulatory statute, i.e., judgment with slavish adherence to the regulations based upon that statute. Talk of Kant’s concept of the regulative function of metaphysical theoretical entities. . . The scholarly mind has its center of volition shifted from the limbic to the cerebral cortex functions. These types regard ideas as living beings – seductive bad ideas require some sort of “anti-virus protection.” -collapse comes about for a variety of closely related reasons, unpredictability of action, exceedance of threshold of complexity, environmental decoherence. Inertial effects may be conditioned by forming of couplings to heretofore-distinct vacua. Consumer brand as part of a system of “marking” in service to collectively implemented class segregated system. Racism is just the

most obvious and most easily/directly legislated against social injustice/ from of bias/prejudice. Each system of prejudice is subsumed by some broader and subtler one. . . Sophies Welt: pedophilic subtext, destroyed late childhood innocence. . . The 2nd variety of Fromm’s necrophilia is demonstrated in this novel – get the person being corrupted to “rip the face off of their world” instead of you ripping their “face” off. The preestablished harmony is not between monads, but between levels of description. Idealism, Empiricism and Kantianism are but different starting points within Penrose’s triangle. Superiority of quantum computers over classical  greater density of internal degrees of freedom than external  spontaneous collapse, given sufficient spin-space quantum (as opposed to classical) correlation. Denial of Euclid’s 5th geometrical postulate didn’t change anything at the ordinary scale of observation, that is to say, at the level of appearances, but carried out nonetheless wide ranging implications and applications. Might there be other impactful appearance degenerate changes in transcendental variables yet undreamed of which future theoreticians (or metaphysicians) shall uncover? What’s the distinction at the “B-particle level” end between an observer’s having performed a measurement upon particle A and the converse, i.e., no measurement? “Simultaneous in the EPR experimental sense is observer specific. Could this be further support for the notion that each observer is to be assigned a unique and/or unique / associated with a unique Lorentz frame?

Timelike angular momentum is associated with the superposition of spin, which possesses no spacelike component until a Lorentz frame is chosen by virtue of an observer’s making a measurement. In the same way that the cerebral cortex is an elaboration, a superstructure of the deeper and more primitive levels of the brain, so are all individual expressions social, cultural and hence, ultimately instinctual. All is simulation which is itself not ground (of being). Stray signals with unverifiable references are just as real as actual perceptions. Why are we more horrified by a lie than by almost any other crime? This peculiarity of the human mind must have a deep biological or even metaphysical explanation. Well for one, lies enable the spread of evil by either enabling evil acts or suppressing their detection. Also lies build upon one another to create either senseless chaos of destruction, depending upon whether the lies build outward or upward as it were. The wistful nostalgia we have for the past, those salad days of halcyon youth is perhaps really only our longing for forgotten youthful fantasies about our would be future. In other nostalgia is not past directed, but directed to alternate universes, i.e., to the self as other. Role-reversal of teacher-student gender and long term psychological effects of “broken trusts”. Derrida got the idea for deconstruction by reflecting on how Aristotle’s “Metaphysics” was only termed such because “meta” is Greek for “after” and Aristotle had chosen to place his volume entitled “Metaphysics” immediately after his volume on Physics. Now was it a mere coincidence that Aristotle placed his metaphysics sequentially next after his Physics? Or did Aristotle have something in mind similar to Newton who intentionally placed his “Queries” after his physical

theorems and propositions within his book, Optiks. An investigation of this question along these and similar lines could well serve as an ausgangspunkt for a new theory of “the deconstruction of Deconstruction.” Metaphors may seem arbitrary when we have only scratched their surface, seem pregnant and prescient with inner or latent truth upon our delving deeper but only to appear wholly arbitrary and historically conditioned upon our digging deeper still. But is meaning built upon history of contingently associated conditions necessarily arbitrary? Derrida also is just as guilty of attempting to “system build” upon some external point of reference relative to the “semiotic continuum” as are those whom he so scathingly critiques. Derrida pointed out that semiosis is inherently unstable in the sense that no system of extended semiosis could retain its self-referentiality indefinitely, i.e., the selfreferential nature of extended semiosis is inherently unstable. “Since /\ > - universally repels and /\ < 0 universally attracts we have the Bondi vacuum propeller in which the center of mass of the rigid device self accelerates without any g-force, i.e., a self-generating timelike geodesic with on board /\-field generators.” Sarfatti’s stated mechanism of “space drive” acceleration is reminiscent of our stated mechanism underlying gravity. The metaphorical reality of free will necessitates our acceptance of a parallel universe ontology. The constitutive and interactive dynamics of this ontology may indeed be more or less adequately described by quantum mechanics, e.g., relative quantum field theory. If we are not ready to give up the principle of sufficient reason, then there must be some “causal substrate” in which the possibly fractally structured quantum multiverse is embedded, which governs the dynamics of parallel universe engenderment and collapse.

The relation of consciousness to free will might be most generally characterized in the following manner: consciousness is the “processing of free will” is just as free will is “the processing of consciousness”. The expansion of spacetime: with passing “cosmic time”, the causal substrate is able to support a more and more expansive universe. One is not one’s same self when part of a group as when by one’s self. This fact is more obvious to some than to others. Those for when social play acting is effortless, namely those whom are deemed by the psychological profession to be the most “well adjusted” must at the same time be the most ingenuous (naïve) or, paradoxically, the most disingenuous. The logic at work here reminds us of the similar logic by which we may categorize people in terms of the results of a polygraph test: (1) lying: (a) guilty, (b) innocent but neurotic; (2) telling the truth: (a) guilty but sociopathic, (b) innocent. Since all intelligence agencies, e.g., CIA, NSA, FBI, etc. require applicants to pass a “lie-detector” test, then presumably these agencies become stocked with two fundamentally different (but perhaps also complementary) kinds of people: those who have never done anything that they need lie about, and those who have much to hide, but who happen to be skilled or unconscionable liars. This is perhaps a rather less than ideal ground upon which to build an intelligence culture and command hierarchy. But certainly an intelligence organization which owes at least some accountability to congress if not to the public must not permit the highest levels of its hierarchy to become populated with Svengali’s and sociopathic masterminds, but rather with individuals who can be sacrificed in a pinch without the organization or its secrets being exposed to any real danger. The Machevellian sociopaths on the other hand are ideally adapted for “field work.” How an acceleration of a mass along say the x-direction be at once coupled to a deceleration along the ict-direction. Space must possess a stress tensor which serves to couple spacelike and timelike dimensions.

Mild applied forces produce more acceleration than relativistic mass increase; the converse is true, however for what we might term “violent” applied forces, i.e., the affect of the applied force in this instance produces more relativistic mass increase than acceleration. This is only to be expected since as the velocity of light is approached by an accelerating mass, additional inputs of “kinetic energy” do not produce increases in velocity of the accelerating object so much as increases in the object’s relativistic mass. This line of discussion suggests that Bohm was right in speaking of mass as representing locked up internal motions. The above point is very crudely put, but illustrates Mach’s principle that there is a delay in the response of local matter to applied forces due to the feedback not from distant masses per se (as Mach once supposed) but from the distant vacuum fields which have themselves taken on mass on account of perturbation of these vacuum fields by local matter, c.f., Volovik’s theory of the Cosmological Constant. Relativistic mass increase due to acceleration seems to suggest a progressive saturation in the lines of communication connecting local to nonlocal vacuum fields, what we might term here bandwidth saturation of the local-nonlocal vacuum field interface. This interpretation of Machian inertia is along similar lines to cellular automata (CA) inertia theory. In pluriformal metaphysics, c.f., Philip K. Dick’s “Descent of the Pluriforms,” a prerequisite for a system’s becoming conscious is that the system become complex and integrated enough to: (1) “select” its own unique ground state and (2) “surprise” the global quantum vacuum by virtue of the system’s “action” “Action” here denotes initiating a causal chain of course, a raft of systemic or organic changes must then be engendered throughout spacetime within the scope of some density matrix so that probability remains conserved despite the pool of preexistent possibilities having

been (by virtue of some “free agents” action) added to, i.e., metaphysical work having been performed with the resultant enlargement of the being of Being. Truth is a thing of this world. –Michel Foucault http://www.scribd.com/doc/58080180/Braver-A-Thing-of-This-WorldA-History-of-Continental-Anti-Realism (degeneracy, cohesion, symmetry, conservation, permutation, “Turing automata”, etc. Greater cohesion  greater self-organization characteristics of system components But the seeming greater “inevitability” of these more cohesive, more highly self-organized systems is more than off-set by sensitivity of initial conditions. But boundary conditions placed upon consciousness serve not only to channel, structure and delimit global consciousness, but also to resonantly tune to both intersubjective and “trans-subjective” contents of consciousness. An important distinction here is that between “inter-“ and “trans-“ subjective. The only truly “Platonic” “forms” may what we might term “transcendental identities.” The reality of a hidden timelike momentum is implicated by the careful analysis of the results of high-energy elastic collisions in which 3momentum conservation ostensibly fails though relativistic calculations reveal that the quantity of total 4-momentum for the entire system of particles is conserved once the hidden components of initial and final timelike 4-momentum are properly taken into account. In ultrahigh energy particle collisions, i.e., collisions in which the kinetic energies of some of the particles exceed the mass energies of various species of subatomic particles, a component of the timelike momentum must be comprised of creation of new particles in time. Is the distinction

between real and virtual then merely one of perspective? Strangely, the answer to this question is: Yes and no. When under acceleration, particle creation is observed in both the laboratory frame and the reference frame of the accelerating observer. In distinct inertial frames, there must be a distinct partitioning of the total 4-momentum current density into real and virtual parts. The preestablished harmony lies not between Leibnizian monads, but between levels of description, which accounts for Wigner’s unreasonable effectiveness of mathematics in the physical sciences. Idealism, Empiricism and Kantian transcendental philosophy are but different embarking points within Penrose’s self-referential triangle of MentalPhysical-Mathematical-Mental. Mass represents bound vacuum energy in which the densities and current densities of /\p and /\E are no longer perfectly counter balanced, the quantum statistics of the underlying bosonic and fermionic fluctuations to these uncertainties are shifted from “perfectly random”, i.e., information encoded “purely internally” (also equipartation of quantum entanglement between its boson polarization and fermion magnetization forms) due to shift in correlations of these fluctuations in time and space reflected in the variation in quantum entanglement of virtual bosons and fermions from its structure in free space. Smaller /\E controlling larger /\p represents increased virtual boson entanglement and decreased spin-1/2 entanglement. Exploration of both ideas and the outer world only provides the narcissist further grist for the fuller and ever more minute contemplation by him so to speak of his own navel. “Navel” here coincidentally serves as an excellent metaphor: point of closest connection of the incarnation back to his/her physical origin, itself a metaphor for metaphysical origin in the form of the true self or “Self”. The principle illusion/delusion motivating the narcissist in his sacred quest for ever more perfect self-contemplation is his confusion of a merely general human nature, one confined and channeled, i.e., instantiated or

particularized in his own highly contingent (existent) being with just this arbitrary and contingent and hence highly idiosyncratic expression of the “generic humanness.” C.f., my poetic explanation of man’s hubris as infused with the tragically mistaken logic whereby the drop imagines itself to be secretly the ocean because made from the very same substance. The horrible truth is quite to the contrary (that is, horrible for Satan and other narcissistic types) (joyous for the humble of heart), namely that each soul is a uniquely and separately created substance though each possessing the same origin with the others, that is in having been created ex “nihilo qua nihilo” rather than as Satan would have us erroneously believe, ex “nihilo qua ex pleno.” This lie is hidden at the root of transcendentalists’ equating of “the Void” with “impersonal divinity”, i.e., with the Plenum. This clever identification of creature with Creator appears in myriad hidden guises, just the most recent of which is the cosmologists’ equation of cosmological constant and quantum vacuum. Further support for the hypothesis that each person is a separately and uniquely created (and not derived) substance: God desires to be loved by the wholly other rather than involve himself in a (to him) transparent charade of self-love, i.e., being loved by beings, wholly derived from Himself and whose substance is one with that of the creator (note: is substance really only ultimately a question of topology while a plurality of substance transcends the topological potential of a mere “unitary” substance? c.f., unitary within the specialized vocabulary of quantum theory). Language determines thought to the extent which the dynamics of speech creativity outstrips (and hence amplifies) the intention of the speaker, c.f., “God spoke the world into being, c.f., Jewish Kabalic symbology and numerical/arithmetic structure of Hebrew vis a vis Gödel’s arithmetization procedure upon which the “mechanics” of his incompleteness theorem is based. Investigate the concept of “radical metaphoricity.” Less than instantaneous response to impressed forces requires digitized medium informed by clock pulse of limited frequency. Taking into account the cumulative gravitational time dilation at the surface of the

sun, the sun has lost approximately 200 years since the date of the Big Bang. Investigate timelike deflection of starlight by gravity field. Manipulation of the quantum statistics of vacuum fluctuations constitutes manipulation of the amplitudes making up the density matrix or state vector. Gravity can be manipulated electromagnetically because electric and magnetic field can be used to simulate vacuum statistical effects, which when the gravity and inertia. Conservation of 4-momentum in 4hyperspherical universe expanding at the speed of light, combined with the concept of matter tunneling through a four potential can easily explain the acceleration of gravity – in effect, gravity can be shown to originate in tidal pseudo-forces. /\p increases with decrease in /\E, which would seem to require that progressively more 3-momentum fluctuations become tied to progressively less energy fluctuations. Singing and musical instrument sounds – coherence depends in sound producing structures of the listener’s body. How many times the listener has heard elementary components of composition, etc. Suppression of fermion-antifermion creation/annihilation implies increased density of entangled virtual photons, e.g., decay of fermionantifermion composite spin-0 particle leads to production of Bell nonlocally correlated photons with DeBroglie wavelength of lambda/2 = lambda/N(2). @$

Energy not conserved in /\E, though fluctuation number is?, c.f., Quantum Noise in Photonics. Time and momentum become entangled just as space and energy do – appearance of vacuum “force”? Environmental decoherence possesses an underlying mechanism composed of two parts – decoherence of the system due to action of the

external environment and that due to the complexity of the system’s Psi overwhelming the computational capacity of its ground state. Now both mechanisms reduce to the same underlying one since environmental decoherence is an overwhelming of the quantum system’s ground state computational capacity due to inputs external to the system whereas socalled spontaneous decoherence achieves this through internal complexity of the system in terms of its quantum sate permutational/combinational structure outstripping the embedding quantum vacuum’s computational capacity. In other words, spontaneous decoherence is owing to classical communication parallel processing outstripping quantum serial computation – in a word, when CPU outstrips the bandwidth connecting it to RAM, c.f., au=Y. S. Kim and Quantum Theory of Information. au=

Popper’s EPR two-slit thought experiment fails in its challenge to the fundamental limitations posed by the Heisenberg uncertainty principle because it fails to take into account the momentum-sharpening effects of photon entanglement, c.f., cit=arXiv:quant-ph/9905039v2. Local operation cannot increase, but only maintain the entanglement of nonlocally connected systems. ; How does quantum entanglement related to Heisenberg uncertainty? One would assume that increased entanglement of virtual photons on the quantum vacuum, say due to movement down a gravitational potential gradient, should be coupled with a narrowing of Heisenberg energy (imaginary momentum) uncertainty. The orthodox cosmological view is that the universe is only expanding “on average” over intergalactic and larger distance scales. But this is perhaps only an appearance due to the fact that stellar and local galactic peculiar velocities are much larger than would be the local Hubble recessional velocities at such distance scales. A statistical analysis of

local stellar and galactic peculiar velocities would reveal, if only our sample recessional velocity of local stars and galaxies. The problem here is that the sample size may need to be so large (in order to overcome the random spread of local velocities) that we should once again be considering cosmological distance scales. This may be the “cash value” of the assertion that space is only expanding “when averaged over a very large scale.” In fact, the local Hubble expansion of the Universe would provide us with a handy solution to the Pioneer 10/11 anomalies. Because of the necessity of relativistic factors such as historical conditions for fixing the identity (or supplementary the indeterminate identity) of physical, chemical and biologically indeterminate systems, there can be no absolute identity for such systems. A simple example is how the meaning of male and female shifts if the Biblical Creation Story, i.e., 1st Chapters of the book of Genesis is rewritten with Eve created before Adam. Another possibility in this vein is the proprietary nature of the relation embodied in Sheldrake’s notion of morphic resonance, e.g., the duplicate of an entity cannot possess duplication of the 1st original entity’s morphic resonant structure, e.g., the Pauli Principle in quantum mechanics, the no-cloning theorem in the theory of quantum information, the insuperable difficulties in perfecting the cloning of higher mammalian life forms. The phenomenon of spontaneous decoherence may well provide heretofore unrecognized direct evidence of the uniqueness of complex entities sustained by the quantum vacuum. The uniqueness of naturally occurring systems poses a perhaps unbridgeable limitation to the otherwise “perfect rationality” of science. One important feature of language, which limits rational understanding is the process by which an imbalance in the juxtaposition of dual categories can become overgrown to such an extent that one category wholly subsumes its erstwhile opposite, e.g., dream vs. reality, good vs., evil, etc. But this only seems to occur as a result of the growing acceptance within the linguistic community of some new set of

metaphysical principles. This suggests the possibility, much entertained by Heidegger that language determines to the extent that it embodies a set of metaphysical principles. Possibly metaphysics, rather than being an example of metaphysical thought is in reality the ground of a language’s organic metaphysical system. Past perfect and past imperfect – this distinction of two types of past exists perhaps only because it is what the brain experiences. These two types of past are represented in objective reality, i.e., past as complete vs. past as uncertain. The Heisenberg time-energy uncertainty and position-momentum uncertainty can be combined into a covariant momentum-energy-spacetime four vector in the quark model of hadrons, c.f., Does Lorentz Boost Destroy Coherence?; Y. S. Kim (1997). A spin-0 particle is really a spin-1 particle moving along the time axis such that the particle’s spin is directed either parallel or antiparallel to it direction of motion – shouldn’t this mean that there is a hidden degeneracy with respect to a spin-0 particle’s timelike motion. What experiment could serve to reveal this degeneracy? (spin-1 particles move parallel or antiparallel to their direction of motion) Any attempt to measure the mass density of the vacuum shall fail because mass is an artifact of coherence borne of quantum entanglement ad the vacuum is only very partially quantum entangled with itself. A paraphrase of Aristotle’s “the unexamined life is not worth living” turned upon its head is “the unlived life is not worth examining”, which tells us so to speak not to be just an alternate in life. If entanglement distillation and concentration can be performed utilizing only quantum statistics, then perhaps vacuum statistical variation in spacetime is only an intermediary while quantum entanglement is the true mechanism of gravitation.

Exchange a brief glance with the wholly other (or so we believe, somewhat relieved, perhaps) and a tiny kernel of very personal insight passes between you, namely that II am the other; the other is just myself under different circumstances. There is a subtle linguistically camouflaged lies in how the self regards the other, c.f., my email to Ziad about how I should expect my church to be fired up;on if I sore weapons in it ad engage the enemy from within it. Strong AI proponents naively suppose that consciousness is just somehow a function of a sufficiently complex nervous system. This may turn out to be correct, but not for the reasons given by advocates of “strong AI.” The transition may not exist precisely at the boundary between what might be termed “quantum1” and quantum2” behavior, say where the bandwidth “pinch” between the nervous system and its embedding vacuum state becomes such as to facilitate a critical density of quantum tunneling between nervous system and vacuum. Everything which is started as a idea is started as an idea, either contrived or “hit upon”. And “contrived” is “hit upon” subject to boundary conditions. With the advent of sin in the world was the law of sufficient reason rescinded. Given /\/\J  , decoherence of ’s must possess an underlying spin-based mechanism. Spontaneous 3-momentum and energy fluctuations must lead to the thermal fluctuation of spin current densities, which in turn leads to decoherence of the phases of elements of the density matrix. Non-uniform expansion of the vacuum’s spin bath might be responsible for the thermal nature of spin fluctuations and hence gravitational decoherence. “The Pleming Test”, p. 31, Oct. 9-14, 2004 issue of New Scientist. An interesting and important breakthrough in artificial intelligence research

might be creation of a proof that the Pleming ad Turing tests are equivalent (in some sense). ; ; ; “” means Google search “. . .” “One may decrease the entanglement between two subsystems either by increasing the spatial separation of the systems or by decreasing the size of the systems.” Fluctuations in the energy of a lattice of coupled harmonic oscillators is due to timelike-mediated interactions between the lattice (as a whole) and its embedding ground state or vacuum; excitations of the lattice are owing to spacelike-mediated interactions between the lattice and its surrounding (and interpenetrating) environment. /= hbar/2, where the energy width /\E2of the collapsed signal photon wavepacket, was determined by the measured energy width /\E 1 of the idler photon, in order to conserve total energy. Hence, the energy width /\E 2 of the signal photon, which enters into the Heisenberg uncertainty relation (4), was actually the width /\E1of the remote filter F1, through which this signal photon did not pass.” See p. 10 of Heisenberg’s Introduction of the ‘Collapse of the Wavepacket’ into Quantum Mechanics (cit=arXiv:quant-ph/0201036v2 23 Jan 2002). In the above paper a photon detection experiment is described in which conservation of energy uncertainty is crucial to maintaining the energy-entanglement of pairs of photons created via the parametric down-conversion of ultraviolet photons within a potassium dihydride phosphate (KDP) crystal. Applying relativity to conservation of /\E implies that /\E and /\pi must together compose a conserved momentum-energy 4-vector. Should we think of perfectly correlated virtual electron-antielectron pairs as representing 0-probability of a photon, while a perfectly anticorrelated pair represent a probability of unity that a photon is present? Do anti-correlated virtual e+e- pairs then represent thermalized energy of 1.022 MeV? Depending on preexistent binding of virtual fermions of the pair may we get a virtual photon of anywhere from 0 to 1.022 MeV? (But no more than 1.022 MeV in virtual photon energy because of the

Lorentz invariance of vacuum fluctuations) At what velocity must an observer more opposite the direction of motion of the photon for the classical and relativistic photon for the classical and relativistic Doppler shifts in the photon’s frequency to cancel? Can this be relevant our understanding of cosmological expansion? Attempting to collect information about the position of a tunneling particle within the barrier reduces the Heisenberg energy uncertainty which, added to the particle’s kinetic energy during tunneling, provides the particle with enough energy to transit the potential barrier. In this case the act of attempted position measurement serves to at once increase the particle’s 3-momentum uncertainty and decrease the particle’s energy. The act of position measurement in the direction of a tunneling particle’s momentum appears to decelerate the particle in step with the increase in the time uncertainty of the position measurement of the particle. Does this lend support to the idea that /\p and /\E are spacelike and timelike components of a four vector momentum-energy uncertainty? The current densities of fermions and bosons are directly tied to the instantaneous densities and inertial reference frames (in which the particle densities are indeed “instantaneous”) and hence tied to the particle wavefunctions, which are either symmetric or antisymmetric. The current density can be adjusted either by changing the number of particles or by changing the geometry of the spacetime in which the current densities are defined. Why will advances in technology over the next 200 years lead to capitalism being replaced by anarcho-syndicalism? If the world economic activity were analyzed in terms of domains of distinct levels of socioeconomic affluence, then the world economy takes on somewhat the appearance of a network of differentially efficient Carnot engines. Akin to Fischer’s electrical circuit analogy for economic systems, there is a physics analogy that may be used to describe another system from

the domain of the social sciences, i.e., a thermodynamic systems analogy for describing the distribution and flow of moral goodness. One must use two additional theories in order to facilitate the application of this thermodynamic systems analogy, Mill’s calculus of utilitarian value and Maslow’s theory of human moral development. Particularly interesting is how the concept of waste heat (entropy) can be applied to systems of interacting moral systems (moral agents and their groupings). Exploitation of the poor and the disenfranchised both domestically and externally by those holding the reigns of socioeconomic power creates an environment of general economic well being that fosters the emergence of an intellectual and artistic class with the moral stature and authority to call into serious question the policies and decisions of the cynical, disingenuous, bloated, reactionary plutocrats. Universities, foundations, institutes, non-governmental organizations, etc. fill out the list of those socioeconomic entities that can only emerge from moral systems occupying a plateau of elevated chemical potential. ess=

Man has resisted advances of the Copernican revolution at every step until the facts demanding that a succeeding step be taken overwhelm the older, more anthropocentric paradigm. Acknowledgement of the necessary existence of extraterrestrial intelligences is a logical and is a to-be-expected further advance of the Copernican Revolution. (Anarchosyndicalism and the analogy of web-based elective communities) October 2011

Extra-terrestrial civilizations frustrated by the roadblock to interstellar communication and travel posed by the finite value of the speed of light might well strike the bargain of sacrificing a large portion of the immense future that still lies ahead of them in order to overcome this limitation. This could be simply accomplished, theoretically speaking, of course, by each ET civilization placing its entire home planet or star system into a deep gravitational well so that the effective distances between prospective neighboring alien civilizations effectively contracts, permitting near real time interstellar communication, that is,

within the lifetime of individual members of the ET society. For example, an ET civilization with perhaps a span of a billions years ahead of itself, but long since having faced little chance of further development, socially and culturally in the absence of cross-fertilization with ideas from other comparably or more highly technologically advanced alien cultures might choose to envelope themselves in a gravity well possessing a time dilation factor of 1000x or more, which would permit near real time communication with alien civilizations hundreds or even thousands of light years distant. This suggests that our search for extraterrestrial intelligence may remain in vain unless mankind as a civilization develops more patience in listening, but especially signal time compression techniques. Some truly ancient advanced extraterrestrial civilizations, composed of highly actualized individuals possessing individual lifespans in the thousands of years may actually opt for the “nuclear option” in the desperate attempt to detect and contact other extraterrestrial civilizations by entombing themselves within gravity wells will time dilation factors of 1000,000x or more and this always with the dying hope that there are counterparts elsewhere in their galaxy or nearby galaxies, who are doing the same! One distinct advantage for an advanced technological civilizations living within deep gravity wells is that observation of the cultural and technological evolution of younger neighboring civilizations would be greatly facilitated as any “exo-anthropologist” of the more advanced society would be afforded ready opportunity to observe, for example, Earth’s society evolving from a splintered proto-technological culture of the early 20th Century into the mature space faring culture is shall have become in, say, the 40th Century and all within the compressed time scale of a few weeks or months. Select periods of particular interest could always be time decompressed for “play back” from out of the huge mass of archived stellar observations and intercepted communication transmissions. There may be a fairly highly restrictive limit on how far time can be compressed relative to the outside Universe that is posed by the dangers of highly blue-shifted stellar and cosmic radiation.

There are perhaps a couple of other means of escaping the impending social and intellectual cul-de-sac inevitably facing every truly longlived, hyper-advanced extraterrestrial civilization. One of these would be to “return to the past”, retaking upon itself the former, nearly forgotten limitations to existence, which once had invested life with so much meaning and significance. This would have already been tried, of course, in the very early stages of the walls of an advanced technological civilization closing in upon itself in the form of a pioneer style exploration and colonization of the neighboring habitable planets and star systems. Another way might be to seek solace in a transcending or diminution of the egoistic self within a collective or “hive mind”. Still another way, which seems likely and even inevitable for Mankind itself, given that “Moore’s Law” shows no sign thus far of relaxing even a little bit, is the refuge for an aging hyper-technologically advanced civilization represented by a so-called “ancestor simulation”. The idea that the age distribution of advanced extraterrestrial civilizations might follow a Gaussian distribution is suggested by the fact that the age distribution of Sun-like stars is expected to conform to a Gaussian distribution with a median age of perhaps five billion years. The percentile versus age for Sun-like stars can be constructed from a fit of observed percentile vs. stellar age data points to a Gaussian shaped curve. The sun-like character of a star is easily enough determined from spectroscopic analysis of starlight. Even a relatively small standard deviation for stellar age distribution of say, 333,500,000 yr. for sun-like stars presently supporting life and extraterrestrial civilization might imply a correspondingly large civilization mean age of around 100,000,000 yr. and a standard deviation for civilization age of something like 15 million years! What is skew about our statistical assumptions, of course is our basing the estimate of mean stellar age on the current age of our own sun. Who's to say that the mean stellar age for presently existent extraterrestrial civilizations is not closer to a billion years, especially if we are taking Class II or Class III type civilizations into the account? Of course, metal rich Population I stars

(including G dwarf stars like our Sun) are not thought to have come into their own until five or six billion years ago. Rephrase of highlighted text above in a youtube.com posted comment I made on December 14, 2011 to the following video: http://www.youtube.com/watch? v=oLiYg97iZ_o See below: December 2011

The idea that the age distribution of advanced extraterrestrial civilizations might follow a Gaussian distribution is suggested by the fact that the age distribution of Sun-like (G type main-sequence) stars is expected to conform to a Gaussian distribution with a median age of perhaps five billion years. In principle, the distribution percentile versus age for Sun-like stars can be fit to such a curve. Even a relatively small standard deviation for stellar age distribution of say, 333,500,000 yr. for sun-like stars presently supporting life and extraterrestrial civilization might imply a correspondingly large civilization mean age of around 100,000,000 yr. and a standard deviation for civilization age of something like 15 million years. What is skew about these assumptions, of course, is basing the estimate of mean stellar age on the current age of our own sun. Who's to say that the mean age for presently existing extraterrestrial civilizations is not closer to a billion years, especially if we are taking Type II or Type III civilizations into account? Of course, metal rich Population I stars (including G dwarf stars like our Sun) are not thought to have come into their own until eight of 10 billion years ago. This is all by way of saying that the chances that the civilization of Mankind is only 6,000 or 7,000 years old is accordingly quite slim, virtually nil, in fact, since such a small civilization age would fall well within the 0.001th percentile of the Gaussian age curve above. This is perhaps another way to demonstrate the high probability of us living within an "ancestor simulation", an argument which is independent and in addition to the excellent argument put forward by Nick Bostrom. C.f., When SETI Succeeds: the Impact of High Information Contact, Section V, Paper 4, How Old is ET? “This paper considers the factors that determine the probable age of a civilisation that might be detected in a SETI search. Simple stellar evolution considerations suggest an age of a few Gyr [gigayears or billion years]. Supernovae and gamma-ray

bursters could in principle shorten the lifetime of a civilisation, but the fact that life on Earth has survived for at least four Gyr places a severe constraint on such factors. If a civilisation is detected as a result of a SETI search, it is likely to be of order one Gyr more advanced than we are. . . The median age of a civilisation is therefore the median age of those civilisations that started between five and 0 Gyr ago, which is 1.7 Gyr. Therefore, in the absence of other factors, any civilisation that we detect via SETI is likely to be 1.7 Gyr more advanced than we are.” May 2013 The civilization age Gaussian distribution idea still works even if we are the only intelligent civilization in the universe. This is because that probability distribution applies to a quantum superposition of representations of universes within a larger overarching universe. The relation of along-with-ness of persons is determined from my side in the sense of my precisely resonantly tuned consciousness as having been selected from a field of 10**500 possible, say. The fine tuning for others is not so exacting because it is only that of behavioral verisimilitude. May 2013 kwo= "The civilization that blurts out its existence on interstellar beacons at first opportunity might be like some early hominid descending from the trees and calling “Here, kitty” to a saber-toothed tiger." - Astronomer Robert Rood, 1981 March 2014

So if intelligent life is widespread in the Universe, as seems likely, since the bulk of the development of biochemical complexity and hence evolutionary potential was set in place during the initial billion year epoch of chemical evolution (necessity) which took place in the complete absence of the action of natural selection (chance), by for most extraterrestrial civilizations would have had a multi-billion year head start on the human race. Of course, whatever informed the infrastructure for chemical evolution transcends this duality of chance versus necessity. November 2013 fcbk=

For a million years past, ever since nature first hit upon the appropriate molecular tuning and filtering circuits for patching into and eavesdropping on the whispers of the zero-point quantum field, primitive hominid apes have been both blessed and cursed with the dim

ability to channel and develop spirits of their own and received the benefit of reason, but also a "knowledge of good and evil". This perhaps inadvertent development significantly perturbed individual and collective behavior patterns in each breeding population and created altogether novel natural selective pressures on the evolving behavioral genetics of early humankind. But the unfolding development was slow enough because it was in step and in accord with a natural process for which evolution had long been preparing those who indeed constituted our earliest true ancestors. How will new and precipitously changed selective pressures on human behavioral genetics alter the course of mankind’s future evolution? Enter Google glass: how the early 21st Century says "Borg". Ten years afterwards...brain biochips. That will really be the beginning of the hive mind! Throw in quantum computing in which the wearable/implantable tech is just a kind of brain microtubule-quantum vacuum uploading-downloading interface, and the stage is set for humankind to stumble onto a veritable encounter of the 5th kind. Prognosis: the ghosts of the quantum vacuum shall take us over decades before the robots get their chance to overthrow us, lol. These may turn out to be the very Mind Parasites, of which Sam Bankester and Naomi Jakins have tried to warn us. I am starting to believe that H. P. Lovecraft and Quantum Physics are not all that incompatible. Some of us humble folk still manage to enjoy the luxury of petty conceits. The more nuggets of humor and wisdom I steal, the crustier I become. May 2013 kwo=

“Astrobiology is the science that will decide which of the two modern astronomical worldviews is true. However, a third world view, rarely broached, is possible. If one takes into account cultural evolution as part of cosmic evolution and the Drake Equation, and considering the likely age of extraterrestrial civilizations, it is possible that we live in a postbiological universe, in which biologicals have been replaced in most

cases by artificial intelligence, with possible implications for SETI”, c.f., Three Views of the Universe, Steven J. Dick, NASA Chief Historian. The circular motion (acceleration) of the electron about the nucleus was originally described by DeBroglie in terms of standing waves, which were later interpreted by Born as probability waves. MMI of QM might help physicists understand the peculiar and counterintuitive phenomena predicted by quantum theory for what they are – psychokinetic manifestations of the conscious mind of the freely-willed individual in experimental settings in which the state of a system has been specially prepared as a closed system to which only that individual may interact with the system. Analogous to the chronology protection afforded by traveling to the “spatially distant past,” causality is violated in a manner that can neither be measured or proven whenever an observer interacts with a system that is effectively sealed off from every part of the universe save perhaps from the vacuum state in which the observer’s brain is embedded so as to permit the observer’s conscious state of awareness of the system. Rather than peculiar quantum effects, e.g., tunneling, superposition, entanglement, decoherence, etc. being necessary for the existence o consciousness, we should supposed that the hidden feedback between the observer and system via their overlapping ground is to be held responsible for the appearance of peculiarly quantum effect/phenomena. All that is required are measuring instruments of precise enough resolution and sensitivity along with a sufficiently controlled and protected environment in which to conduct measurements. If an electron is moving about an atomic nucleus with relativistic angular velocity can we consistently state that the angular momentum vector of the electron points in some specific direction of instantaneous 3dimensional space, i.e., does L lie altogether within the 3-hypersurface of a given Minkowski spacetime? We cannot. The electron continually experiences such large acceleration and so does not occupy

an inertial reference frame. Bayesian probability theory is ideal for the description of probabilities of eigenvalues of mixed quantum states. This is because the probabilities of given eigenstates are conditioned upon the likely actual quantum state of a system. The objection to the many worlds interpretation of quantum theory on account that the theory cannot provide adequate ground for the coherence of alternate quantum universes may be analogously applied to the general critiques of induced gravity theory. These critiques assume an absolute definition of the particle masses, which are inserted “by hand” into the Standard Model. The necessity of invoking supersymmetry theory in order that fermionic and bosonic fluctuations might largely cancel to yield a near zero cosmological constant stems from this unquestioned assumption of the absolute value of the Standard Model’s particle masses. If however the masses of the particles of the Standard Model are relative and derive from the balance of scalar and vector spin current density fluctuations in which real particles embed themselves, then there is no need to locate new species of supersymmetric particles. If mass is spin statistics mediated and not an absolute, then we should expect spin degrees of freedom in the quantum fluctuations of momentum-energy to be responsible for fine tuning offsetting fermionic and bosonic contributions to a cosmological constant approaching zero. February 2013 (See Huping Hu and Maoxin Wu, Experimental Support of Spin-mediated Consciousness Theory) The determination of some fundamental physical contants to 12 or more decimal places, e.g., the Bohr Magneton, when the anthropic cosmological principle only appears to require a fine tuning of perhaps the first one or two decimal places in each physical constant suggests, in light of the understanding of the intrinciscally dynamical nature of particles and fields and still more of the underlying quantum vacuum itself qua substrate of structure, change and temporality, that the exactness of the fundamental physical constants is not so much a

persisting artifact of the Universe’s initial and boundary condtions that were set at the advent of the Big Bang, but a structure that is continually being sustained within an almost infinitesimally narrow range of values. @$ Now the idea of applying the anthropic cosmological principle is one thing when one is speaking of possible beginnings, but this principle is really altogether something else if one is speaking of applying this principle as being continually in play as a principle by which the universe is being sustained from moment to moment. The entropy of generalized event horizons, i.e., event horizons not necessarily associated with a “trapped surface” is to be understood in terms of the photonic crystal model of the quantum vacuum. Stronger gravitational fields are associated with larger fractions of the timelike 4momentum fluctuations being correlated by virtue of the increased density of 3-momentum exchanges. This shift is from nonlocally correlated quantum fluctuations toward locally correlated thermal fluctuations. The thermalizing of quantum fluctuations is also the progressive breaking of spacetime symmetry. The energy fluctuations in the form of creation-annihilation of virtual fermion-antifermion pairs (virtual Cooper pairs) that are suppressed by the presence of a real fermion then appear in a different form, e.g., the exchange of a virtual photon between the real fermion and a neighboring virtual Cooper pair that was not suppressed via the Pauli-blocking mechanism. Now if the uncertain momentum-energy is to be a conserved quantity such that this quantity be properly described by a Lorenz-invariant 4-vector, then must the exchanged boson substituting for the suppressed 4-momentum fluctuation, i.e., virtual fermionantifermion pair possess an uncertain 3-momentum of (2 x 0.511 MeV)/c? But the entire 1.022 MeV of fluctuation energy doesn’t have to be substituted for because the fermion-antifermion pair suppressed would have also possessed a certain amount of negative binding energy by virtual of internal virtual boson exchange between members of the pair.

Of course quantum mechanics does not permit us to say what this offsetting negative energy, i.e., the precise wavenumber of the virtual photon suppressed along with the Pauli-blocked virtual pair cannot be predicted – only the probability densities of these virtual particles. Nonlocally encoded memory and the quality and integrity that determine the apparent coherence and rationality of the objective world through modulation of resonance with other incommensurate consciousness. Increasing one’s knowledge of the world arguably should be expected to lend greater stability and consistency to the realm of appearances because of the nature of information role as limiting and structuring uncertainty. Uncertainty may be closely related to entropy after the fashion of how potential and kinetic energy are related, i.e., uncertainty is akin to a kind of active or dynamic entropy. In the case of quantum uncertainty, information is inaccessible because encoded in nonlocally connected quantum fluctuations. Whereas for the case of old-fashioned thermodynamic entropy, information is inaccessible because dispersed into (rather than “encoded” in) thermal fluctuations. Question: how do we then distinguish those off-diagonal elements of the density matrix that have to do with quantum vs. thermal fluctuations? In the Star Trek episode, entitled “Parallels” Whorf becomes unstuck in reality, which appears to continually change although none of the other Enterprise crewmembers seem to notice the changes; Whorf is the only constant and common denominator to all of the changes he observes. This interesting Star Trek episode suggested to me the following line of speculation: perhaps sometimes there are differences in the recollections of individuals that are too small or insignificant to permit objective (intersubjective) agreement concerning the existence of a discrepancy. This is perhaps by virtue of the peculiar logic of a self-limiting process. Perhaps the boundaries between perception, memory, will and imagination are fine tuned in such a manner as to support optimal intersubjective agreement in promoting maximal appearance of objective reality. But if so, there must be some kind of tradeoff which results. July 2013 Libet’s direct brain stimulation experiments are relevant here in

demonstrating that the perceptual world to include one’s internal subjective states of perceived will and intention is the product of the processing of sensory date (“internal” and “external”) by the neocortex, rather than the ongoing act of this processing (real time). Is Whorf’s memory correct even though it contradicts that of the other crewmembers whose memories are also “correct”? “The diagonal elements of the density matrix give the probabilities of finding the system in the state |n>, while the off-diagonal terms describe the quantum correlations between different states”, p. 96; “The symmetry of the Hamiltonian is higher than the symmetry of the ground state: that is, the symmetry is spontaneously broken”, p. 156, Quantum Theory of Many-Body Systems (Zagoskin). “in general relativity, the spin state of a particle obtained by the partial trace over the momentum is found to evolve from a pure state into a mixed state if only the particle changes its position in a gravitational field.” Density matrix description of spin states takes on off-diagonal elements that represent appearance of spin entropy due to entanglement of spin degrees of freedom when the 3-momentum is not in an eigenstate. Also spin-orbit coupling increases and energy eigenstates of coupled harmonic oscillators decay due to increased spontaneous oscillator transitions with increased virtual photon exchanges between the component oscillators – increased internal coupling (binding energy). More of the energy uncertainty, /\E is internally generated and less externally by vacuum (decoupling of crystal from vacuum fluctuation reservoir). What does this mean thermodynamically? “the spin entropy of a spin-1/2 particle is not invariant under the Lorentz transformation unless the particle is in the momentum eigenstate.” “In conclusion, we have shown that spin entropy is generated when spin-1/2 particle moves in a gravitational field. Even if the spin at one spacetime point is in a pure state, it may evolve into a mixed state as the particle moves. In particular, the spin entropy of a circularly moving particle increases very rapidly near the event horizon of the Schwarzchild black

hole”, Rapid spin decoherence in strong gravitation, Terashima and Ueda. +

+While Lorentz transformations cannot change the overall quantum entanglement of a bipartite state[3, 4], they can change which properties of the local systems are entangled. In particular, Gingrich and Adami[5] showed that under a Lorentz transformation the initial entanglement of just the spin degrees of freedom of two spin half particles can be transferred into an entanglement between both the spin and momentum degrees of freedom. Physically this means that detectors, which respond only to spin degrees of freedom, will see a reduction of entanglement when they are moving at large uniform velocity. In so far as teleportation fidelity is an operational measure of quantum entanglement, our results suggest that quantum entanglement may not be preserved in non-inertial frames. ++ The above passage suggests that changes in the complexion of quantum entanglement track the shift from energy to 3-momentum uncertainty.

“If we write p0 in the eigenbasis of H, then the elements prr, or the diagonal elements, describe the populations of the energy levels. The off-diagonal elements describe when a transition is occurring between two levels, which we will call a coherence. (The density matrix is determined by the Boltzmann equation in the case where the Hamiltonian describing the system in equilibrium is diagonal) “For this we need the equation of motion for the density operator better known as the Liouville-von Neumann equation.” dr/dt = -i[H,r(t)]

“The commutator in this equation implies that some fundamental incompatibility between the density operator and the Hamiltonian must exist in order for the system to change with time. If they commute, then our system exists in its stationary states with respect to that Hamiltonian. If they do not commute then our system is in a non-stationary state ad the coefficients of the expansion we wrote above change with time. The Knight and King theoretical chess mating position presents us with an apt metaphor of the Gödel Incompleteness theorem applied to the rules of chess. The rules of chess do not predict a King and Knight mating position though such a mating position nonetheless exists. A fermion gas can either be in a pure quantum state or in a statistical mixture. What distinctly different roles do exchange bosons play in a pure state vs. a statistically mixed state of a fermion gas: perhaps the fermions of the gas are coupled respectively via exchange of on-shell vs. off-shell virtual bosons? The mutual incommensurability of distinct individual consciousnesses accounts for the phenomena of emergence, novelty and indeterminism. How can there be a rational and coherent common ground via which these incommensurate consciousnesses may interact, but one that does not nullify the transcendental distinctness individual consciousnesses? Protein structures are the expression of sequences of genes. If memes are analogous to genes, what is analogous to the protein structures expressed by genes? The notion of altruism arose through a process of a negative dialectic because people are not able to perceive how they exploit others, are un aware of their own agendas and how the subconscious controls the implementation of those agendas. Here is an example of how we can have a concept without there being instantiation of the concept apart from the relative differences of appearances.

A mass, m0 possesses the same 4-momentum independent of the mass’ state of uniform motion. This is what we mean by the spacetime symmetry of the vacuum. Luv = [xupv – xvpu] u~=v How are we to interpret the off-diagonal components of our angular momentum tensor, Luv? The 3-angular momenta components are related by a commutator, the “imaginary” (timelike) component of the 4-angular momentum are related by an anti-commutator. -Verify this assertionEnergy and angular momentum commute with one another. This suggests that the presence of Heisenberg energy uncertainty implies uncertainties in angular momentum. Discuss the implications in terms of a spin-based theory of induced gravity. The timelike component of Luv is . . . ? L0v = x0pv – xup0 and Lu0 = xup0 – x0pu, if u = v = w, Luv = [xw, pw] ~ ihbar Luv superficially appears to be a 2nd rank tensor, but it can be proved that Luv only possesses four independent components. Firstly, the components along the diagonal are negligible on a macroscopic scale. Luv takes on tensor characteristics only in the presence of matter. The conserved 2nd rank tensor, Tuv should be a subgroup of the group describing the would-be conserved 4-momentum. The quadrupole radiation (gravitational radiation?) emitted by an accelerating mass may be modeled in terms of the radiation reaction of the vacuum as it reconfigures its virtual magnetic dipoles. The radiation reaction of the vacuum due to acceleration of a mass must be consistent with the reaction of the spin statistics of the vacuum to the acceleration. The theories of specific fundamental interactions of particles and fields are special cases of the theory of the spin statistics physical mechanism underlying the interactions. This is to say that the so-called fundamental forces mediated by specific exchange bosons are a manifestation of quantum statistical forces that are really probability

current density flows. If such mythic elements as virgin births, resurrections, second comings, theophagy, etc. collectively exhibit self-organization rather than evolve via sociocultural selection of random mutations to mythic ideas. The protein structures that are the expressions of nucleic acid base pair sequences possess themselves the chemical coherence and stability of genetic base pair sequences. With increased coherence of systems by virtue of the system’s self-organization these systems become more independent and difficult to predict and control. “Thus, Fermi-Dirac statistics appears in this holistic, continuum field theory of matter as a linear approximation, when the constituents of the matter of the actual closed system appear to be uncoupled. This approximation is valid only when the amount of energy-momentum transfer between interacting constituents of the closed system is nonrelativistic in magnitude” (See p. 111 of Quantum Mechanics and Gravity, Mendel Sachs). Do the off-diagonal terms of the stress-momentum-energy tensor constitute a measure of spacetime symmetry breaking? Free space possesses negligible stress-momentum-energy and the off-diagonal terms of Tuv are owing to the effect of real particles and fields upon the quantum vacuum embedding in which all particles and fields are embedded. Take a look at the relativistic momentum-energy equation, E = sqrt [p2c2+ m02c4] Where “p” is the 3-momentum and “m0c” is the imaginary component of the 4-momentum. The current density of the 3-momentum is constituted by the current density of the binding force-mediating bosons within the mass, m0. The mass, m0 is composed of its “material

constituent particles”, fermions, which account for the imaginary component of the current density of the 4-momentum. The mechanism underlying the conservation of “E” in the above energy equation may indeed be that of integrated Bose-Fermi quantum statistics. What effect does a gravitational field or spacetime curvature have upon the strength of spin-orbit coupling? A superficial search of the relevant scientific literature appears to indicate that the spin-orbit coupling increases in progressively curved spacetimes. Can atomic clocks and the global positioning systems that depends on them be vastly increased by exploiting the unique underlying mechanisms of quantum computers, namely superposition and entanglement? What is the difference between the present and the re-presented? To wit, lack of original context. The very passage of time seems to require the notion of representation in the above-implied sense. Investigate the notion of temporal evolution of density matrix versus pure states in the two cases where is subset of and is subset of . The temporal evolution of an infinite set may be both absolute and relative. The possibility of my existence prior to my first existing evolves by virtue of my having later existed, so that my existence according to the template of my possible existence prior to my existence becomes no longer possible. This suggests that perhaps the notion of such a template corresponding to my unique personal identity is an incoherent notion. There is no such thing as possible human beings that “never succeed” in coming into being/existence. The distinction, possible vs. actual only lines up with that of appearance vs. non-appearance of an abstract form. “Zel’dovich does not address why the zero-point energies of the fields do not build up a huge cosmological constant. So he assumes, in a rather ad hoc way, that the zero-point energies, as well as higher order electromagnetic corrections to this, are effectively cancelled to zero in

the theory. What is left are the higher order corrections where gravity is involved, and the spirit of Zel’dovich’s paper is that this “left over” vacuum energy, acting as a cosmological constant, might explain the quasar observations, c.f., The Quantum Vacuum and the Cosmological Constant Problem, Rugh and Zinkernagel.” But “higher order corrections” are artifacts of the particular assumptions made by the theorist and so what has been left outside of these approximations cannot be cited as the source of all the important physics treated in the theory. How can the substantive physics described by a theory be a function of the arbitrary choices that underlie the approximations of the theory. Zel’dovich theorizes that induced gravitational effects occur with higher order correction terms in the effective theory where the positive and negative energy contributions of the vacuum fail to precisely cancel. This is puzzling for several reasons. Is Zel’dovich saying that both the positive and negative energy of the vacuum gravitate absolutely (and not merely in the sense of induced gravitation), but that there is only an observable induced gravitational effect from the vacuum component that fails to cancel? The inner-outer or subjective-objective distinction applies anew to each individual person’s consciousness. In metaphysical terms therefore this distinction must fail when applied to two or more distinct individual consciousnesses. How does the indistinguishability of quantum particles affect the group theoretic description of particle permutations and combinations? The breaking of a symmetry as the partitioning of a group into subgroups is exemplified by the collapse or evolution of a pure state wavefunction into a statistically mixed state. (Superposed eigenstates do not exchange momentum or energy with one another) An Abelian group transformation represents a commutative operation; a non-Abelian transformation represents non-commutative operations. The shift in vacuum statistics from a balance of commuting and anti-commuting

virtual particles toward more commuting and less anti-commuting constitutes a change in the topology (connectivity) of the vacuum. Imagine that time dilation is to be conceptualized through the analogy of a subatomic sized pendulum (or coupled system of such oscillators) or mass, m, length, L and period of oscillation of T = sqrt[L/g]. But what shall play the role of “g” here, that is of restoring the pendulum bob to “rest” once perturbed? If Heisenberg energy uncertainty is not assumed then energy is clearly not conserved during atomic transitions. Energy might be deemed to be conserved during atomic transitions that are “caused” by fluctuations in the vacuum’s energy of E - - -  nß÷ = E, nßk = p There is a close parallel between the occupation number formalism and that of the harmonic oscillator/crystal lattice. Changes in the energy of the crystal lattice is associated with the excitation or deexcitation of one of its component oscillators which are necessarily tied to absorption and emission of phonons by the crystal. This corresponds to the creation of an excited fermion paired with a deexcited antifermion (fermion hole). Notice that each increase in the energy of the crystal by one quantum of frequency f an energy hf is necessarily accompanied by a decrease in the

3-momentum of the crystal by one quantum of wavenumber k and energy (hk)2/m. Spontaneous fluctuations in the momentum and energy of the crystal due to Heisenberg momentum and energy uncertainty will also occur in the form of discrete quanta, i.e., virtual rather than real quanta. This implies that the Pauli exclusion principle enforces the suppression by the crystal lattice of virtual excitations of the crystal. These virtual excitations are in the form of the spontaneous creation of virtual fermion-antifermion pairs from the crystal’s vacuum state. Hypothesis: the momentum fluctuations of the crystal The 3-momentum fluctuations of the vacuum within the crystal over and above the density of 3-momentum fluctuations for the free space vacuum suppress the excitation and deexcitation of the crystal lattice. If a given atom of the crystal lattice spontaneously emits a photon within the time uncertainty of the spontaneous excitation of the atom of the crystal emitting this photon, then the virtual deexcitation (by the emitted photon) and excitation (by the creation of an excited electron and “hole”) mutually cancel. A perhaps clearer and more elegant way to describe the Pauli-blocking and Bose enhancement effects of the crystal lattice upon the vacuum is the following. If the crystal is subject to a strong electromagnetic field tuned near to one of the crystal’s resonance frequencies, the crystal will be strongly excited and will undergo a high rate of electronic excitationdeexcitation. Due to the Pauli blocking effect of real upon virtual fermions vacuum energy fluctuations in the form of virtual electronic transitions within the geometry of the crystal are suppressed. On the other hand, the increased density of 3-momentum (photon) exchanges has a Bose-enhancement effect upon like momentum exchanges within the vacuum of the crystal lattice. This leads us to the following hypothesis: the Bose enhancement and Pauli-blocking effects produce equal and opposite change in the number density of virtual bosonic and fermionic fluctuations, respectively within the vacuum of the crystal lattice. C.f., Quantum Fluctuations in Photonics.

The electromagnetic and nuclear binding energies of matter are greater for a mass sitting in a strong gravity field than in a weaker field. There must be a connection between the quantum statistical induced shift in the density of bosons and the shift in the spectrum of boson wavelengths. This connection we believe is described by the equations of probability current conservation. If number density of fluctuations is conserved within a curved spacetime, this will appear as a non-uniform and nonconserved number density within flat or Minkowski spacetime. A question arises here as to whether the gravitational length contraction occurs only along the radial coordinate centered on the body’s center of mass. Part of what makes evolution an irreversible process is that the information “stored” in the genome is essentially holographic in nature. This means that the information is coded into DNA base pair sequences that are not so much arbitrary (in Monod’s sense) as they are historically determined. The physics of DNA’s peculiar molecular structure is compatible with the structures, which determine the genome’s meaning, rather than any particular base pair sequences possessing a fixed meaning. This is why it is not strictly, though perhaps only in a colloquial sense, correct to speak of the information content of a DNA sequence. There seems no technical problem, however in speaking of the DNA possessing a fixed information bearing capacity in the case where DNA are to be utilized as an alternate data storage medium. There are perhaps degeneracy’s associated with organic molecules that cannot be “split” by merely local or causal physical processes – this would almost certainly be the case for DNA if it can code information holographically. In this way genetic material that has been a part of one cell may carry some trace of this fact even after it has become incorporated into another cell. This may indeed account for some of the so far inexplicable difficulties animal cloning researchers have been experiencing, e.g., offspring being outsized or undergoing accelerated aging, mysterious

neurological disturbances, etc. Nonzero spacetime curvature is measured with respect to hypothetical or abstract “flat” spacetime. In similar manner, nonzero momentumenergy density must be determined relative to zero momentum-energy density. However, note carefully that there are two distinct ways to define a spacetime manifold of 0 curvature, one of which is structureless and trivial, Tuv = 0, the other highly structured (and symmetrical), i.e., ÓuÓvTuv = 0 (rather than from Tuv = 0) that cause a deviation of the spacetime manifold from “flat” spacetime. Tuv

T00 T01 T02 T03 = T10 T11 T12 T13 T20 T21 T22 T23 T30 T31 T32 T33

So the “non trivial” structure of stress-momentum-energy would be the following:  

{-T00 = T11 + T22 + T33} { Tij = -Tji }

That is, a spacetime manifold on which the pressure and energy density are equal and opposite and on which the stresses are precisely counterbalanced. It does not matter if the vacuum energy density, for example, is enormous, just so long as the vacuum pressure is equally enormous, as well as the stresses within this vacuum precisely counterbalancing. Hypothesis, if cosmological expansion rolls over into a contraction phase, precisely at the cusp of this transition, the Tuv components become individually zero. @$This possibility is the one in which gravity is a function of the energy of cosmological expansion. Binding energy constitutes an imbalance in the relative distribution of

stress-momentum-energy amongst the Tuv. As stated earlier, this imbalance may also be described as a disturbance in the otherwise antisymmetrical balance of vacuum 3-momentum and energy fluctuations, i.e., balance of current densities of virtual fermionic and bosonic creation-annihilation events, or as a disturbance in the quantum statistics of a spacetime symmetric vacuum state. Individual particles are indistinguishable within quantum theory. A wave function is only a complete description of a closed quantum mechanical system. In an open system, there’s nothing to assure conservation of probability. The imbalance in the distribution of momentum fluctuations within bulk matter subject to a gravitational potential may be understood in terms of the idea of the gravitational redshift. @$

Exchange of force-carrying bosons away from a gravitational source (spacetime “sink”) are redshifted while exchange of these bosons in the opposite direction towards the gravitational body are blue-shifted. Hence, the internal binding forces of matter “at rest” within a gravitational field are unbalanced in the direction of the center of gravitational mass. These internal stresses presumably are not equalized until the mass accelerates in the direction of this source with a large enough acceleration. P = h/ì = hî/c äp = h/c[äî - îäc/c] In free fall the äp  0. Therefore, free fall requires that [äî - îäc/c] = 0 or @$

[cäî - îäc] = 0

The redshift of exchange boson wavelengths is compensated via the

Doppler shift (opposite blue shift) of the exchange boson frequencies due to the free fall acceleration of the bulk matter. A similar compensation corrects the blue shifting of exchange bosons being exchanged in the direction of the gravitational field source. The altered velocity of light is explained as the counterpoised wavelength and frequency shifts of the binding force and energy-mediating exchange bosons wherein cø = ìbluefred. There is a relationship between ÑÑ* = |Ñ|2 = particle probability density and = More specifically, the probability density for virtual photons is an equivalent description of the component of the 3-momentum fluctuations in the quantum vacuum electromagnetic field. The portion of this vacuum electromagnetic field that produces physically measurable effects is that corresponding to the vacuum electromagnetic momentum uncertainty. The definitions of fluctuation and uncertainty implied in the above passage may only be made consistent if a distinction can successfully be drawn between the expectation value of an observable and the classical physical instantaneous value of this observable. There is at work here a perhaps subtler than usual distinction of physical concepts. The phenomenon of the collapse of the wavefunction offers us the quantum mechanical eigenvalue in contradistinction to the expectation value of this observable. The special relativistic mass increase may also be understood in terms of the effect of the Lorentz contraction upon the exchange bosons mediating the binding forces and energies of bulk matter undergoing accelerations. This suggests that the origin of gravitational mass may be related to the binding energy or more aptly, the binding forces holding together bulk matter, whereas the inertial mass may be related to the frequencies of spontaneous creation and annihilation in the vacuum of virtual fermion-antifermion pairs. Another way to describe the

special relativistic increase in mass is in terms of the conservation of 4momentum within Minkowski spacetime. But what we want to know is: what is the precise physical mechanism taking place within the quantum vacuum which accounts for Einstein’s relativistic mass formula providing a proper description of this phenomenon of relativistic mass increase? It is quite simply in terms of the mutual shift in the current densities of 3-momentum exchanges and imaginary 4-momentum “exchanges” within bulk matter and between bulk matter and the quantum vacuum, respectively. The equivalence principle inspired by Einstein’s elevator thought experiment (the occasion of which that Einstein referred to as “the happiest moment of my life”), which describes the indistinguishability of the observable effects of gravitation from those, caused by acceleration implies that conversely, the phenomenon of gravitation may be “mechanically explained” in terms of spatiotemporal variations in the current densities of 3-momentum and imaginary 4-momentum fluctuations. A redundant and perhaps viciously circular way of speaking of the effect of the gravitational field upon relativistic mass is in terms of the relativistic mass increase for the exchange particles themselves. Perhaps the manner in which vacuum fluctuations and their corresponding observable uncertainties are related is this: the density of fluctuations in a particular observable representing a classically conserved quantity is only short of infinite due to the appropriate Planck cutoffs, i.e., mass, length, time, etc., however, what actually determines the portion of this enormous magnitude of fluctuation density which manifests itself within One simple way to think about this is that, for example, a larger wavelength particle will have a lower probability density than a particle of shorter wavelength. The gravitational redshift of photons, say, may be understood in terms of a spatial gradient in photon probability density due to the stretching of the radius of the volume occupied by the photon, i.e., the photon’s wavelength, in other words this shift in the photon’s

momentum would be consistent with an increase in the quantum vacuum energy density (increase in the probability density of virtual fermionantifermion pairs) with which increase must be associated an upward shift in the zero-point energy of the vacuum. @$

The redshifting of photon’s emitted from a gravity source, e.g., the Sun, would be consistent with an appropriate corresponding elevation of the vacuum zero-point energy relative to which the energy of the emitted photons must be measured. ÑbosonÑ*boson is importantly related to . Similarly, ÑfermionÑ*fermion is significantly related to . Moreover, the probability densities of virtual bosons are connected to the probability densities of virtual fermion-antifermion pairs. Because of the fact of bosons having spin 1 and virtual fermion pairs, composite spin 0, which suggests timelike and spacelike components of a 4-vector. The dynamics of this 4-vector should be embedded in a probability current density continuity equation expressing the conservation of probability density current of anyons. The anyonic probability density current is conserved regardless of this current’s direction within spacetime. The connection between the gravitational redshift of bosons along with time dilation of fermion-antifermion pairs and spatial variations in the momentum, energy and particle (boson and fermion pair) number densities of the quantum vacuum may be mathematically explicated in terms of changes in representation, i.e., from position to momentum representation and from time functions to functions of frequency. One cannot store information anywhere. Information is a function of a creative, dynamic process. Only data that represent information in a context dependent way may be thought of as a commodity whose stock varies at different times and places. Evolution, in other words, is

brought forward and its multifarious fruits sustained by open-ended process acting within an ostensibly closed system (biosphere). The smaller the wavepacket becomes, the greater the energy associated with the mutual interference in time of the component waves of the wavefunction, i.e., the higher becomes the “beats” frequency. The energy of the quantum mechanical beats of the wavepacket may be understood as the fluctuations in the internal momentum of the wavepacket due to momentum exchange within the packet. This interpretation of the temporal interference of the wavepacket’s components in relation to the size of the wavepacket appears consistent with the relation /\xj/\pj ¾ hbar (where j = 1,2,3) If the wavepacket is accelerated to some velocity, v, then if the direction of this acceleration is along the x-axis, then the positional uncertainty of the wavepacket must suffer a Lorentz contraction. And according to the Planck relation, the momentum uncertainty of the wavepacket must experience an expansion or dilation. The time dilation experienced by the wave packet when travelling at velocity v = v x must be accompanied by a contraction of the energy uncertainty of the wavepacket. The relativistic increase in the wavepacket mass must be embodied in the relativistic effects upon /\p and /\E. The /\p j and /\E must be related in much the same way as and , namely the /\p j and /\E for a particular system must in some way comprise a conserved quantity, e.g., sqrt[/\2pj + /\2E] = /\Tuv ? This could perhaps be made technically consistent with present theory by thinking of /\p and /\E as merely the quantum vacuum components of the composite system wavepacket + vacuum. The nothingness in which the composite system is nonlocal so the new values of /\p and /\E for the composite system (now closed) are wholly internal and not in part due to interference from outside the system. The mixing entropy which results from the combining of, for example, two distinct gases within a single container from either side of a

formerly impermeable membrane may be equal (or significantly related to) the sum of the formerly separate quantum energy uncertainties minus the composite system energy uncertainty that results from mixing divided by the appropriately corresponding system temperatures. The degree of quantum entanglement (correlation) of the two systems is significantly a function of the reduction in the magnitude of energy of the reduction in the magnitude of energy uncertainty from that of the simple sum of the individual system energy uncertainties. There should be only negligible final state interaction (FSI) between the virtual particles of a spontaneously created and annihilated fermionantifermion pair. This is because the lifetime of the pair is defined by the time uncertainty in the fluctuation of vacuum energy represented by the pair. The correlation of two quantum systems, ñ1, ñ2, may be defined as  ñ1ñ2*/[(ñ1 + ñ2)(ñ1 + ñ2)], where ñ1 and ñ2 are the normalized wavefunctions of systems (1) and (2), respectively. Or alternatively, in terms of energy uncertainties, R(ñ1,ñ2) = ? (the right hand side of this equation must take into account the two distinct cases, /\E1 ¼ /\E2, /\E1 ¾ /\E2. If an otherwise isolated or closed quantum system is considered to be correlated with the evolution of the systems vacuum (or ground) state, then the system cannot in a strict technical sense be completely described simply in terms of a pure state wavefunction. The system can only truly be given a complete description in terms of a density matrix (though in all practicel case (so far) the off-diagonal terms of the system density matrix are negligible). The combined system + vacuum state may, of course still be properly described in terms of a single wavefunction.

The combined system + vacuum must be in an eigenstate of momentum and quantum vacuum with the interaction of the quantum vacuum with the system which prevents it from occupying an energy eigenstate and so induces in the system its Heisenberg energy uncertainty. A similar statement applies where the system’s momentum uncertainty is concerned. This is simply because of the elementary fact of [p, E] = 0. One might alternatively describe this compatible of the observables p and E as a 100% correlation of ñp (ñ in the momentum representation) with ñE (ñ in the energy representation), i.e., measurement of p does not “disturb” the energy of the system. The question naturally arises at this juncture whether [p, E] = 0 within a curved spacetime. The answer to this question seems to be that p and E are indeed no longer perfectly commuting observables in the above case. We note here that the usual case in that of all observables representing conserved quantities commute with one another. This is because the Heisenberg uncertainties must always be stated in terms of the product of uncertainty with respect to a conserved quantity and an uncertainty with respect to a quantity that is not conserved. But energy and momentum are not individually conserved in the case of a 2 nd rank momentum-energy tensor possessing off-diagonal components. There are two important formalisms, that of Schroedinger in which ñ evolves and ^O is a constant and that of Heisenberg in which ñ is a constant and the operator ^O evolves. Instead of using a scalar or vector operator upon a density matrix, we now utilized an operator in square matrix form to operate upon the state vector. A system momentum-energy must be described as an energy tensor operator, Tuv in which Tuv possesses nonzero off-diagonal components, must be described in the Schroedinger wave formalism in terms of a 2nd rank tensor quantity, namely, the system density matrix. It is easy to utilize the density pure state wavefunction, in order to determine the expectation values of ^p and ^E, in order to determine the

expectation values of each component of the energy tensor operator. And from here, the fluctuations and Heisenberg uncertainties in these components may be determined. Alternatively, the expectation values of the Tuv may be calculated from a knowledge of äTuv and /\Tuv. @$

Because Maxwell’s demon is defeated by Heisenberg uncertainty the Second Law of Thermodynamics, therefore, is not of a mere statistical significance. The ultimate ground for this assertion is the fact of Heisenberg uncertainty being an ontological, and not merely epistemological, principle. Information is constituted by energy (or its fluctuations) + all higher order correlations. (so the energy fluctuations themselves may be considered 0th order correlations – of what physical quantities – only conserved quantities?) The wavefunction contains all of the information about a quantum system up to but not including the system’s degeneracy’s. The same information (as that contained in “ñ”) may be thought to be encoded information the hierarchical structure of the 1st order and higher correlations. The quantities, /\p and /\E underlie and define the boundaries of nonlocal quantum processes, i.e., reactions, interactions and creation-annihilation processes. So a nonlocally mediated particle interaction, for example must involve exchanges of momentum and transitions in system energy that are less than /\psyst and /\Esyst, respectively. When two system become quantum entangled isn’t the sum of the energy (and/or momentum) uncertainties of the two systems necessarily greater than the respective uncertainties for the combined system? Yes, indeed. And by the definition of information as a reduction in (energy or momentum, angular momentum, etc.) see that any information engendered by the two systems becoming quantum entangled must reside in the structure of quantum correlations created as a result. So in

a sense, i.e., system 1 + system 2 + ñ(x u(1), xv(2)) is less than the sum of the separate system entropy’s (prior to the system’s becoming quantum entangled). Note: does observation of both systems by a single experimenter/observer necessarily cause the two systems to become nonlocally connected, i.e., quantum entangled or just the correlating of the quantum fluctuations within each system? The case of two systems initially unconnected and temporally evolving according to the time independent Schroedinger equation must of course be addressed in part of this discussion. When two such systems become nonlocally connected through observation, mutual interaction or the systems both interacting with some third system, does a sudden relationships adjustment of the phase relationships of the two system wavefunctions take place or in addition a sudden adjustment in the phases of the constituent eigenfunctions of each system wavefunction? A so-called “pure state” is a closed quantum system. Once any component or components of the system become entangled with another system then the original system must now be described in terms of a “mixed quantum state.” By virtue of the Pauli-blocking effect of real fermions upon vacuum energy fluctuations, i.e., spontaneously created virtual fermionantifermion pairs, the virtual fermion pair becomes entangled with the quantum state of the real matter, however the converse effect upon the real material system is negligible. It is necessary to distinguish a pure state from a mixed state and a collapsed state from a pure state, etc. What determines the mutual statistical correlation of the elements of a density matrix representing a mixed quantum state? The greater the momentum uncertainty of the virtual fermion pair, the more strongly entangled is each fermion in the pair with the other, c.f., EPR experiments with decaying spin 0 particles on whose decay particles magnetic fields are used for testing Bell nonlocality through use of these fields to perform spin +-1/2 measurements upon the particles, i.e., the greater is the binding energy of the virtual pair – for this virtual pair an “antagonistic” or reciprocal

relationship obtains between local /\E and /\p of the pair. Pauli blocking effect (for relatively uncorrelated pairs).

Also as the

/\E//\p = /\x//\t = c We must not confuse /\Ef+f- with the more general /\E region , i.e., the local vacuum energy density. To what extent can a spontaneously-created-from- vacuum virtual fermion pair (virtual Cooper pair) be considered a composite boson and to what extent two merely coincident fermions? Certainly the quantum statistical identity of the spontaneously created virtual particle pair is determined by the degree of similarity (in the properly crucial respect) of the density matrix describing the particle pair to a so-called pure or unmixed state. Another way to put this is perhaps in terms of the relative entropy of the mixed state describing the particle pair. The higher is the entropy of the spontaneously created virtual pair, the more likely shall the Pauli exclusion principle apply and the less likely that the Bose-condensation principle will admit the pair into the vacuum energy density. It appears that matter has the effect of decreasing the entropy density of the vacuum via the filtering effect of the Pauli principle. The temperature of the free space quantum vacuum is not known, however, if the vacuum possesses a finite though perhaps vanishingly small temperature, then the entropy suppressing effects of matter and the Pauli principle should produce a concomitant increase in the vacuum temperature, assuming the vacuum’s internal energy density is relatively constant (over non-cosmological time scales). The sum of the necessary causes ½ sufficient cause of the phenomenon of mind. @$

The symmetry of spacetime represented by Lorentz invariance is embodied in the two axioms of special relativity. The breaking of spacetime symmetry represented by spatiotemporal gradients in the

velocity of light are the cause rather than the phenomenological effect of gravity. As already stated, c = /\E//\p and hence, for example, cxx = /\Ex//\px; cxy = /\Ex//\py, and so on. The spacetime metric, therefore is embodied at a particular infinitesimal spacetime region in the matrix,

| c11 c12 c13 c14 | [cuv] = | c21 c22 c23 c24 | | c31 c32 c33 c34 | | c41 c42 c43 c44 |

; where cuv = /\Eu//\pv

Actually, the above matrix elements should be related to ï/\puï/\xv.

| c11 c12 c13 c14 | [cuv] = | c21 c22 c23 c24 | | c31 c32 c33 c34 | | c41 c42 c43 c44 |

; where cuv = ï/\puï/\xv

As the local velocity of light defines the particular partitioning of spacetime into a 3 + 1 space and time, i.e., the local spacetime curvature, [cuv] must contain all of the same information as [g ik], the metric tensor of Einstein’s field equations. The presence of mass induces local changes to the statistics of

momentum and energy fluctuations in the quantum (nongravitational) fields of the vacuum which, in order to be coextensive with a gravitational field, must vary with the inverse square of distance. The spatial gradients in the /\pu or in /\pj and /\E must be comprised by the variation in the quantities inversely to the distance. This brings to the fore the question of how the momentum-energy uncertainty in one localized region of spacetime affects the value of this uncertainty in neighboring regions. Because quantum statistics do not distinguish real from virtual particles it follows that changes in the /\pu from their free space values must be associated with the taking on of mass by the modified vacuum. Heisenberg uncertainties in p^ and E^ are caused by quantum field fluctuations in these quantities. This reversal of the causal relationships of äpu and /\pu is also posited by stochastic electrodynamic theory. @$

According to quantum electrodynamics, the symmetries of spacetime are identical with the symmetries of the quantum vacuum, c.f., Relativity of Motion, Jaeckel, Lambrecht and Reynaud. The properties of this quantum vacuum to include its characteristic symmetries are determined by the nature of the fluctuations of the various constituent quantum fields. The energy fluctuations of this vacuum manifest themselves in the form of creation and annihilation of virtual fermion-antifermion pairs, the 3-momentum fluctuations, in the form of the back-and-forth exchange of virtual bosons. The vacuum’s energy fluctuations possess a collective spin of 0, the 3-momentum fluctuations of this vacuum, spin 1. The problem posed by the quantization of the gravitational field is that there doesn’t seem to be a necessity for the existence of a unique force-carrying particle of spin 2. Gravity may be mediated gradients in the density of the momentum fluctuations orthogonal to the momenta of these fluctuations provide enough structure to code for Tuv, the momentum-energy tensor of Einstein’s field equations. These momentum fluctuations are in the fields of nongravitational forces.

/\pm and /\Em must be greater than /\pv and /\Ev (really?) for m to produce gravitational effects. If /\x and /\t are to small (relative to what?), then no objective spacetime curvature (“measurable” spacetime curvature) exists? ½ defines “measurability” in quantum mechanics. What is the important difference between the correlation structure of the fluctuations of which a Gaussian wavepacket is composed that represents a real particle vs. those correlation structures of energy fluctuations that compose a Gaussian wavepacket representing a virtual particle? Act of observation puts a QM system into a statistical mixture whenever ? Statistical mixtures cannot be teleported, not can a fluctuation take place as a mixed state. Vibrations of a 2-d membrane require embedding this membrane in a 3-d space. Similarly, vibrations of a 3-d membrane require a 4-d space. But spacetime, which is 4-d space. But spacetime, which is 4-d only appears in its purely spatial aspect to nonlocally propagating fields. “Particles” though they may be constructed from the superposition of nonlocally propagating fields, i.e., of phase velocity greater than “c”. @$ So spacetime may be thought of as the grand superposition of nonlocally connected and nonlocally propagating fields in which the group velocity of the superposed fields is limited to “c”. April 2011 The nonlocally connected vacuum fields could not be included in Minkowski spacetime and hence would not contribute to the presence of a gravitational field. The transmitter-receiver along with an individual to interpret it must first be transported to the location of the distant measuring instrument before the EPR supraliminal communication can be verified. Ñ-waves

(amplitudes), possessing no absolute physical significance, are free to propagate at supraliminal velocities. Since data without context do not carry any information, there should be no limit to their speed of propagation, ceteris paribus. But there is also a relationship limit of “c” for the speed of propagation of energy. Might energy and information (entropy) be given a unified description within general relativity theory. One cannot have a probability density without the interference of two or more wavefunctions, even if this is merely constituted by interference of Ñ with its conjugate, Ñ*. The imaginary parts of Ñ cancel or mutually annihilate for Ñ to become “real” as |Ñ|. Do Ñ and Ñ* originally belong to two distinct reference frames, prior to their mutual interference to produce |Ñ|? Light cone diagram here  for a given Ñ there are eight possible light cone tangent vectors from which two orthogonal or antiparallel may be chosen (with appropriate coefficients). The time and space axes above are orthogonal, but so are all of the null vectors of the light cone pairwise orthogonal in 4-d spacetime. Matter and antimatter particles are represented by Ñ+Ñ+ and Ñ-Ñ-, respectively. But what about the possibilities, Ñ+Ñ- and Ñ-Ñ+ ? What two matrices have the property, [A] [B] = 0; [A] ½ 0, [B] ½ 0 ? Light cone diagram here 

fig. 1

If the nj are vectorially added that are not orthogonal, a vector is produced that describes the tunneling of a particle superluminally from the absolute past to the absolute future part of the absolute future part of the light cone, traversing the elsewhere region in the process. This is an example of a nonlocally propagating quantum field.

But relativity doesn’t allow the construction of a nonlocally propagating field from a set of locally propagating fields (if the resultant nonlocally propagating) fields are thought to be carrying information and/or energy). Therefore, locally propagating fields must, conversely be constructed out of nonlocally connected/propagating quantum fields of the vacuum state. The nj are thought to lie along the light cone because of the presumed propagation velocity of “c” for the individual wavefunctions. Only upon mutual interference of multiple wavefunctions do we get v group ¼ vphase. The nj that are not spatial reflections of one another will upon interfering produce off shell or virtual particles. The probability of an encounter of each particle of the virtual pair scattering and annihilating is progressively lower as we consider an ever smaller coincidence in time and space (required for annihilation), i.e., as (/\x, /\t)  0; and (/\p, /\E) Â and so represents more information and so a higher virtual energy density. It is not the particular state that one is in at the time of death that is crucial for the question of an individual’s survival of physical death, i.e., “dissolution” of the matrix of boundary conditions (brain) to the quantum vacuum field in which the person’s decaying nervous system remains for the time embedded. But aren’t these boundary conditions upon the individual vacuum field and not upon the intersubjective quantum vacuum itself? A ghost is a vacuum resonance pattern left over from nonadiabatic dissolution of the central nervous system. Retinal blind spot/ brain pain insensitivity metaphor for the mental integration represented by (an unobservable/ transcendental) consciousness.

Think of a personal computer that continually resaves the contents of its disk drive to some network drive. What is happening currently in the present instant to the individual/ “registering” (or another network concept) in his or her consciousness may be thought to be presently loaded into some kind of temporary dynamic storage or buffer within the overall random access memory (RAM). The contents of this RAM are continually bring sent ot the disk drive for longer term storage, and the contents of the disk drive are periodically dumped to the network drive. A new set of sensory stimuli causes a reprogramming of the brain at multiple inputs that are spacelike connected (independent development rather than dissemination). Is the brain hyperlinked within itself to quantum near copies of itself each embedded in a different vacuum energy spectrum? A natural selection-like process sits at the boundary between the conscious and unconscious minds, which rejects broad categories of proposed “solutions” without permitting them into consciousness. But along what lines can the unconscious @$generalize types of invalid reasoning without preventing the operation of intuition, itself as Gödel demonstrated, transcending the operation of merely formal procedures of abstract symbol manipulation. Varying the relative magnitude of njnk* = changes the direction of the probability density’s worldline in Minkowski spacetime. Combining nj of opposite sense but not antiparallel results in particles that tunnel into he elsewhere region never to return (unless spacetime is sufficient by curved). Conversely there should always be a constant stream into our spacetime of particles from other light cones, i.e., particles tunneling into our spacetime from the elsewhere region. Maybe it was more correct to speak of tunneling of wavefunctions into and out of the light cone.

[Show a closed loop annihilation of a virtual particle with a virtual antiparticle.] Elections in Florida should be moved to Halloween to make it easier for the physiologically challenged to make it to the poles. The natural world possesses compartmentalized levels of complexity, each functioning in part according to its own dynamics and each according to its own dynamics and each interval between levels constituted by stability for those processes safely distant from the level boundaries. Rather than supposing that one’s consciousness may be carried with one as a kind of passenger of the brain which admittedly may move more or less freely within a relatively narrowly defined spacetime region, @$let us suppose that one’s consciousness is everywhere undisturbed except precisely where one’s brain is at a given moment. How is this interpretation different from that in which a single, impersonal consciousness lies everywhere undisturbed except where a brain is at a given moment? With increasing complexity of an evolving dynamic system comes an increasing number of increasingly broken symmetries, in turn characterized by increased quantum uncertainty with respect to unconserved physical quantities. Can information be understood as carried by components of energy not originating within the system? The unknown is cognized as a series of open though perhaps deeply interrelated questions pointing the way to either the final cementing in of the prevailing paradigm or to its embrittlement, fragmentation and collapse, c.f., What Remains to Be Discovered, John Maddox. @$

Those who believe in the value of a search for a so-called theory of everything are among those who view the dialectical process of one

paradigm’s giving way to another in epistemological terms rather than as the participation of mind with nature in the mutual and interactive processes of being and becoming. If there is a “bedrock” description of reality then whatever this bedrock may dynamically consist of a portion of it acts as the very foundation of the reasoning mind which seeks to encompass the entirety of this foundation within one of the many or unlimited number) of imaginative descriptions presently open to it, c.f., The Limits of Science, Gherdjikov, University of Sofia, Bulgaria. May 2013 kwo= “It is on the ultimate success of such a quest [for a TOE] that Gödel's theorem casts the shadow of judicious doubt. It seems on the strength of Gödel's theorem that the ultimate foundations of the bold symbolic constructions of mathematical physics will remain embedded forever in that deeper level of thinking characterized both by the wisdom and by the haziness of analogies and intuitions. For the speculative physicist this implies that there are limits to the precision of certainty, that even in the pure thinking of theoretical physics there is a boundary present, as in all other fields of speculations”, c.f., Stanley Jaki (1966) epi=

“If you work within more than one paradigm you are automatically a philosopher.” Evolution: locality ~ proliferation by dissemination within spacetime (unified ground of being), nonlocality ~ proliferation by independent development plural-groundedness of being) What is the rule by which the quantum uncertainties of two heretofore separated systems might be properly added together once these two systems become (1) quantum-locally coupled, i.e., thermodynamically coupled or (2) quantum nonlocally connected? And if quantum locality and nonlocality come into mutual interaction in this manner what does this imply for the relationship of the sums and products of these two systems’ quantum uncertainties, particularly those of momentum and energy? Exchanges of momentum between particles of a given QM system

introduce correlations of particle energies in the specific sense of producing correlations of the stationary state phases. This correlating of energy eigenfunctions reduces the overall energy uncertainty of the QM system. Momentum exchanges are the cause of the spectrum of system momentum fluctuations comprising the QM system momentum uncertainty. Is nature “making it up as she goes along?” That is, is the distinction between scientific discovery and invention, empirical and rational, objective and subjective, etc. a function of the depth to which science strikes at the common root of apparent categorical differences? It seems with the advancement of scientific discovery nature becomes ever more independent from the cognitive structures of the psyche. Ever the same appearances must be sustained by ever more complicated mechanisms, or so it seems with each new advance in fundamental theoretical structures. Data cannot be consistently represented as reductions in uncertainty as is possible to do for information. The processing of data only yields information through a reduction in epistemological uncertainty. The processing of information yields a reduction in the ontological uncertainty. Are any states or state transitions available to a quantum system which cannot be brought about externally, that is, through momentum or energy inputs to certain various components of the system – in other words, do quantum systems possess internal states and state transitions? April 2011

The cosmological constant may be so small because the brain of each potential observer (to include actual observers) only tunes to a fantastically small portion of the available vacuum electromagnetic field fluctuation spectrum. This hypothesis is related to the “many minds” interpretation of Hugh Everett’s “many worlds” interpretation of quantum theory. February 2012 Although in the realm of time, space, matter and energy, decoherence above the Planck mass energy places a limit on superposition, preventing an actual superposition of universes in an objective sense, the Planck energy is more than large enough to support

superpositions of distinct quantum brain states, i.e., superposition of subjective universes so the end result is that for practical purposes of each individual consciousness, the many worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics can indeed be valid, c.f., my email to Z. Fahd on 02/19/12. (not only valid, but conceivably valid). Any QM system is in principle capable of an infinite number of mutually incompatible forms, c.f., p. 160, Quantum Theory (1951). No one form of the above infinite set may become definite without the system interacting with the appropriate measuring instrument. @$

The notions of “force” and “inertia” are meaningless in a Laplacian clockwork universe in which the direction of causality is not specified by the equations of motion. Stresses only develop in the clockwork mechanism when some element or force is introduced (or was introduced at some time in the past) into the system from “outside” (or from outside the scope of the mechanism’s design). The complexity of the system’s temporal evolution cannot exceed that supportable by the bandwidth of inputs to the system. The boundary between adiabatic and nonadiabatic change to the system is constituted by the boundary between the collapse and noncollapse quantum regimes. @$

With only a single ground of being there is no room for the incommensurable (or irrational) and hence no basis for emergence (of novelty). The momentum of a particle is defined by this particle’s DeBroglie wavelength and this wavelength is also the measure of the uncertainty of this particle’s position. What is a particle with energy (“rest” energy) and 0 momentum in one inertial frame is within another inertial frame a particle with non-0 momentum and rest energy and imaginary momentum. @$

The context of a collection of elements cannot be fully analyzed in

terms of these elements in combination with all external relations obtaining between the elements. This is just to say that context defined elements possess “between” themselves internal relations, that is, relations other than those definable through an analysis of the system. States of the system that are not reproducible by merely applying the appropriate set of external inputs to the system are the internal states of the system cannot be observed directly. It is possible that the phase relationships of the component eigenfunctions of the observer’s wavefunction must be “tuned” with respect to the phase relationships of the component eigenfunctions of the system’s wavefunction for a measurement to be performed on the system yielding maximal information about the system’s state with respect to any conserved quantities, c.f., /\L x /\æ ¾ h. Presumably, two or more observers could not simultaneously tune to the same system wavefunction. In other words, externally precise (internally imprecise) information of a single bit (in the case of a spin measurement) requires the specification of an infinite amount of externally imprecise information (that is, however, internally precise) concerning the product of the phases of the two systems, observer-observed (imprecise causal relationship/precise (and maximal quantum correlation of the two systems). There is a precise causal relationship between two systems only at the cost of these systems becoming very imprecisely correlated (strongly correlated with respect to an unknown parameter?) Does the uncertainty principle require that the measurement incompatibility of conjugate variables external between two systems @$ which are strongly correlated? Similar to the Fourier frequency analysis of time functions, apparent causal relationships may be analyzed in terms of a sum of fluctuations which are all the more strongly correlated the more statistically significant is the correlated of the two events between which a causal relationship is alleged to obtain. A measurement of observable, A, yielding an eigenvalue, a j , causes the

interference between the different eigenfunctions, ña(x) to be destroyed (decoherence of phase relations). Does the information embodied in the nonrandom eigenfunction phases simply get transferred to the newly created set of phase relationships between the eigenfunctions of the conjugate variable? @$

The scene was like that out of a movie in which American actors are used in a foreign film production, which is later adapted for American TV programming, c.f., Tenebrae. Incidents occur within Italian film, which though noteworthy don’t contribute to the moving forward of the plot. Metaphorical responses may be given as satisfactory answers to questions requiring a response containing only a literal reference, and this is passed over without note. Important connections between pieces of information that to an American audience should be obvious transpire without comment from the major characters of the film. An example here might be where the murder of a young girl is reported in which one of the causal factors contributing to her death is an unintentional action or omission on the part of one of the major characters, but where none of the characters appear aware of this. As data is transferred from one mind to another, always-new information is represented. Data moves through spacetime and information moves into spacetime. April 2011 This observation is importantly related to the measurement/decoherence problem. Increased correlation of individual fluctuations of energy within the energy uncertainty, /\E of a certain quantum mechanical system is associated with the time rate of decrease of /\E. Increased correlation of fluctuations would also seem to be associated with a decreased /\t. This may mean that the system is losing its /\E by transmitting some of this energy uncertainty and distributing it among other systems to which the original system is not causally connected. The possibility of information (as opposed to data) depends on the

absence of bridge laws between spacetime scales as well as on the nontrivial nature of the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics, i.e., the fact of irreversibility in thermodynamic systems being not mere appearance and not due to mere ignorance – possibly related to the ontological as rather than epistemological nature of Heisenberg energy uncertainty, i.e., /\E is not due to our mere ignorance to the complete details of a closed system, but due to all systems being to some degree or other open. The connection between quantum uncertainty and thermodynamic irreversibility is that of both systems being subject to more than a single source of outside interference. Heisenberg uncertainty and thermodynamic irreversibility, each in its our way points up the disunity of the ultimate, embedding substrate of physical systems. The fact of temporality requires the necessity of the other that is itself other to some other other (this is the reduction of irreversibility to simple topology). @$

There is a fine-tuning coincidence involved in the full embodiment of mind in body which reminds us of the cosmic coincidence of a precisely zero cosmological vacuum energy. Whatever “mechanism” is involved in the “mind tracking its body” is the very same one that was involved in the original embodiment of the soul. This mechanism must be essentially akin to the phase-locking behavior exhibited by feedback control systems. This feedback is probably that between local and nonlocal quantum fields within the quantum vacuum with which the brain exchanges energy and through which the vacuum exchanges information with itself, April 2011 c.f., notion of brain as vacuum-vacuum interface device. We can’t make revolutionary discoveries concerning the deeper nature of reality without at once revealing a deeper interpretation of the human person and the meaning of this person’s existence. @$It is safe to say that there is no objectively final interpretation of the meaning of any conscious entity’s existence, that is to say, from outside the realm of consciousness April 2011 and for the simple reason that there is no final summative interpretation of the processes of nature. “Existence” is derived from the Latin, existere, which literally means “to stand out

against”. Astrophysical or cosmological discoveries that point of an even greater magnitude for the realm of that which is, e.g., multiverse, merely enhances the underscoring of the individual’s own existence as standing out against. The human mind is capable of logical processes of thought; however the human brain which acts as the material substrate of this thought does not itself function logically, but in accordance with quantum physical and thermodynamic principles. Information is not “transmitted” from one mind to another. Rather data are transmitted from one brain to another and the brain receiving this data is tuned to resonate with another set of frequencies within the quantum energy uncertainty or spectrum of vacuum energy fluctuation frequencies peculiar to that particular nervous system. Data move through spacetime, information arises within a given consciousness. Only tidal effects of the vacuum energy, i.e., vacuum energy differences contribute to gravitation (and inertial) mass and the Planck frequency is the proper vacuum energy cutoff frequency. That is, the quantum vacuum energy density can be shown to be formally finite. But would it really be correct to say that Ptolemy was computing planetary orbits through use of epicycles was his utilizing a kind of primitive Fourier analysis? And what if Fourier didn’t get his ideas for analyzing functions from Ptolemy or from anyone who got their ideas from Ptolemy? @$

Creativity, which necessarily involves the redrawing of concept maps and the reprocessing of associations, therefore requires a greater degree of dissociation than is normal or typical for a well-adjusted member of a highly industrialized mass society. Certain amino acids if taken in high concentration cause a spontaneous if mild dissociation in normal individuals, or a psychotic episode in the already mildly schizophrenic. Guided dissociation is a plasticity different from dissociation proper.

@$

Perfect Lorentz invariance (symmetry) implies that the energy density of the quantum vacuum (proportional to the cube of mode frequency, c.f., Boyer, Classical Vacuum, Scientific American) is, in fact, infinite. If say, a frequency cutoff of the Planck energy is invoked in order to make this vacuum energy density finite, Lorentz invariance or Lorentz symmetry breaks down as we approach Planck energies, times, wavelengths, etc. If a probability is defined by knowledge or information concerning the abstract (closed) system, i.e., the sum of probabilities/possible states open to the system combined with a mixture of mutually complementing information and ignorance concerning the system’s actual state, implying that we both know what we know and know what we don’t know about the system (because we don’t know the state of the system though we possess a complete knowledge of the system itself), then our uncertainty concerning the system’s state is epistemological in nature. The velocity of light is the velocity of time, that is, the velocity of particles along their spacetime worldlines. 2GM/2 = Runiverse = Ru When M = Muniverse, = cvacuo. If energy of the universe is conserved, then we expect that the velocity of light (and hence, if time itself) was greater in the past with proportional to 1/ . If Ru is increasing with time, then the speed of light is decreasing with time. The velocity of light, rate of time is the ratio of external to internal bandwidths. “On Materialism as Science Dogma” by Neal Grossman, Dept. of Philosophy, Univ. of Illinois at Chicago “To my knowledge, no one who has had an NDE feels any need for an explanation in the reductionist sense that researchers are seeking,” c.f.,

Almeder. The paradigm of scientific progress as an ever closer approach to the thing in itself structured by an evolving and dialectically progressing set of investigatory methodologies should be seen as missing the point when it comes to “understanding” consciousness. For the thing in itself that one’s own consciousness is has already been fully grasped by its individual possessor. Any further attempt to understand the nature of one’s own consciousness as such would serve only to obscure or confuse this already certain grasp by the individual of the true nature of his or her consciousness. @$Consciousness is the essential faculty by which the transcendent comes to knowledge of the other. @$

The discovery of the existence of beings unarguably superior to humankind would remove from the conscience of many the hubris that subconsciously prevents acceptance of or even considering the possibility of the reality of a supreme or transcendent being. Such beings would possess knowledge and an understanding of reality, which would cause us to realize a number of important limitations of our own knowledge and understanding. It would become clear to us that mankind is to be placed within the context of a “web of being,” one of multiple dimensions rather than our being placed within a single, hierarchical chain, as originally conceived by medieval Christian mystics or, at the very pinnacle of this chain as presumed by most rightthinking atheists. For the superior and perhaps, as well, in part incommensurable mental and perceptual capacities of these beings would be expected to afford them greater advantages and opportunities than humankind presently possesses of detecting and developing relationships with beings still more and similarly superior to them as they stand in relation to us. The knowledge of these beings would subsume our most exact scientific knowledge as a crudely unified collection of elementary special cases (physics and chemistry) and reveal our less scientifically rigorous theories to be merely curious and quaint expressions of “folk wisdom,” e.g., evolutionary biology,

anthropology, neuropsychiatry, etc. These beings would recognize such superiority of their knowledge to ours just as they would surely recognize the inferiority of their knowledge in relation to that of beings superior to them with which they have intercourse. Hawking stated a mathematical relationship between black hole mass and its time to “evaporate” as Hawking radiation. If the black hole information paradox is indeed soluble, then presumably, initially just after formation of the black hole’s event horizon, all of the information that we at first supposed swallowed up by the hole is in fact occupying its event horizon in the form of vacuum fluctuations on the surface defined by this horizon. As the mass of the black hole is radiated away, seemingly as thermal radiation composed of entirely uncorrelated modes of electromagnetic radiation of wavelength ì Planck through ìSchwarzchild , its surface area, which is proportional to the black hole entropy and also to the square root of the black hole’s mass, shrinks. This suggests that there is a direct relationship between the inertial mass and information content of the black hole such that the sum total of vacuum fluctuations on the surface or event horizon of the black hole possesses a mass identical to that of the black hole or the original 3d configuration of particles and fields which originally collapsed to form it. October 2011 It is as though the communication of matter and field shifts from taking place across a 3-hyperspherical boundary (i.e., timelike) to taking place across the boundary posed by the surface of a 2-sphere (spacelike). Since all timelike interactions occur across a 3-hypersurface in the form of energy fluctuations (imaginary 4-momentum fluctuations), while all spacelike interactions occur across a 2-surface in the form of 3-momentum fluctuations, and a continuity equation (and hence a conservation principle) governs the relative proportions of these two type of fluctuations, it follows that a complete occupation of all available fermionic states within a 3-dimensional bulk volume means that all transitions of energy are pushed to the outer surface of the bulk, where radial 3-momentum transitions are now supported exclusively in terms of two degrees of freedom of angular 3-momentum transitions.

Feynman says that only purely abstract theories of nature’s behavior are confirmed by experiment; theories which are based upon some visualizable or mechanical model (locality metaphysically assumed) always eventually fail when their predictions are compared with the results of experiment. Excommunication by scientific orthodoxy is to be expected by anyone who departs from the metaphysical presumption of materialism. “The first recorded NDE is described at the end of Book 10 of Plato’s Republic.” Transcendent beliefs by definition pertain to a reality beyond space and time and so are beyond empirical test. Certainty = thinking within the paradigm of one’s peers Uncertainty = thinking outside of any paradigm Gödel’s Incompleteness Theorem, which asserts the fact of Truth’s being a stronger notion than Provability, may have something significant to say about the existence of such irrational entities as “pi”, “ ”, “e”, etc. This is due to the fact that these mathematical entities can be constructed through a procedure but cannot presently (and it may turn out to be theoretically impossible to be) expressed in a closed-form analysis. Does this suggest that the set of analytically expressible mathematical entities is a subset of the set of mathematical logical procedures? But if this is true, then a possible self-consistent interpretation of this fact is just the converse of this most general implication of Gödel’s theorem: constructibility is a stronger notion than mathematical existence. This is paradoxical provided that “constructibility” is identified with “provability” and “mathematical existence” identified with “truth”. Do irrational entities like the above not really “exist” at all, nor subsist in some mathematical Platonic realm/ idealm, but are merely implied by infinite mathematical procedures?

Back-formation of forms and incompleteness of abstract structures is related to the notion of the dialectical nature of evolution. The prediction of new fundamental particles by subatomic physical theories is an example of this back-formation or backfilling of empirically empty theoretical categories. This points up the effective relatedness of truth by correspondence with truth by coherence and the interactive nature of scientific inquiry. Die Diagonal Schaltung ist ein rein mathematisches program. Wirklich? The mysteriousness of irrational numbers is compounded when one considers that @$the product of some irrational numbers is itself rational, the product of others, irrational. This seems vaguely similar to the distinction of positive and negative numbers, even and odd numbers, real and imaginary numbers, etc. The irrational numbers do not constitute a mathematical group, though the set of irrational numbers may contain any number of subsets, which are mathematical groups. The mysteriousness of the product of two irrational numbers being equal to a rational whole number may turn out to be an artificiality borne of an illusion of mathematical abstraction as overreaching extrapolation. There must be an intimate relationship between wavefunction normalizability and the structuring of time scales. Scaling of time in quantum and thermodynamic processes is also importantly connected with quantum nonlocal “mechanisms” of temporal integration. The weighting of component eigenfunctions of a given ñ(r,t) is governed by quantum correlations of the eigenfunctions, or at least (or equivalently) governed by correlation of fluctuations in the (expectations values of) the corresponding observables. The normalization and expectation value behavior of a wavefunction are closely and importantly related. @$

Information does not arise from reversible processes because in such processes no entropy is generated.

One fundamental problem with either the formulation or interpretation of the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics is that this law only applies to closed systems on the one hand, though the same systems must be coupled on the other, with a heat bath. Because this heat bath is understood to be essentially a blackbody, it is supposed that no information is exchanged between the heat bath and the thermodynamic system to which it is coupled. But this is based on beforehand stated assumption that the heat capacity of the heat bath is effectively infinite so that this heat bath does not experience a change in its temperature though coupled to bodies or systems of different temperatures. April 2011 The infinite information processing context provided by the infinite heat bath belies this notion of maximal entropy/minimal information content of the heat bath as thermodynamic black body. Initial conditions cannot determine the dynamical laws constrained by these initial conditions, c.f., forcing function vs. boundary conditions of a partial differential equation. To possess truth, both complementary of truth must be satisfied, i.e., those of correspondence and coherence. One candidate feature or property of any mind possessing truth is that it, or some subset of its contents, be a holographic expression of the whole. Correspondence of subjective contents with objective reality presumably is only possible if these mental contents are coherent enough in the right manner so that these contents may resonate with the whole of which these contents are to be a holographic expression. @$

The information content of a given course of action, choice or decision is related to the natural logarithm of the number of distinct, genuinely possible alternatives were available to a person prior to his choice being made. The choice doesn’t have to be random, just nonlocally determined. Thermal fluctuations (ideally of 0 information content) and energy uncertainty are responsible for, respectively locally and nonlocally

determined random changes to molecules such as DNA. The thermal energy drives the filtering of information based on the stability of the subsistence of this information in its material medium. Context and continuity (temporal content) must accompany the handing down of information from one system to another. @$Information cannot be transmitted without being continuously recontextualized. That we don’t know what we don’t know implies that we don’t know what we know, that is, when wrong, we don’t know how wrong, and when right, we know not how right. A person without free will bears no moral responsibility for antisocial acts, but at the same time neither does he deserve any more consideration then a defective appliance such as a servo-mechanism, robot or computer. And so punishment is just reprogramming, execution, disposing of a fatally defective manufacturing product (of unskilled labor so goes the old joke). So a person lacking free will possesses no culpability, but nor does he possess any moral claims, such as that of consideration of the intrinsic importance of his existence to himself or to some higher moral order. Nothing outside the system is available with which to collapse the system’s wavefunction in the case of a closed system. Now if the mere fact of the quantum system being embedded within the quantum vacuum can render processes within the system irreversible, then presumably a quantum mechanical system that is otherwise undisturbed say, by a measurement performed on the system, may experience a collapse of its wavefunction spontaneously, c.f., the phenomenon of spontaneous emission. “Because the process of motion is described in terms of interference of wave functions belonging to different energies, we conclude that changing probabilities will exist only when there is a range of energies present or, in other words, when the energy is made somewhat

indefinite,” c.f., Quantum Theory. “In this way, the uncertainty principle between energy and time is automatically contained in the theory.” “A similar result was obtained in Chap. 3, Secs. 4 and 13, where it was shown that the motion of wave packets is caused by the change of position of constructive and destructive interference of waves of different k, brought about by the changing phase relations introduced by the time-dependent phase factor exp(-ihk1t/2m).” “Thus, the Hamiltonian operator may be said to contain the causal laws, insofar as they have meaning.” “The speed of transmission of a signal through a dielectric is given by the group velocity, as is also the speed of transport of energy.” Only if f is proportional to k is the group velocity proportional to the phase velocity,” c.f., Quantum Theory, p. 65. The speed of a Gaussian wavepacket representing a physical particle is given by the group velocity (ï÷/ïk) = vg, c.f., Quantum Theory, p. 64. Now recall that E = hf and p = hk so the above equation for the group velocity of a Gaussian wavepacket may be alternately expressed as vg = (ïE/ïp) and since changes in energy depend upon the availability of /\E and changes in momentum upon availability of /\p, it perhaps follows that vg = (/\ïE//\p) @$

The Gaussian wavefunction “is the most general function for which the equal sign holds in the uncertainty principle,” c.f., Quantum Theory, p. 207. Investigate Thomas Precession.

March 2012

“It is shown that due to Thomas

precession, angular momentum is not generally a constant of themotion in a quasiclassical model of the Positronium atom consisting of circularorbiting point chargeswith intrinsic spin and associated magnetic moment. Despite absence of externally-applied torque,angular momentum is a constant of the motion only if the electron and positron intrinsic angularmomentum vector components perpendicular to the orbital angular momentum are antiparallel and of equal magnitude.” The average fluctuation is the square of the quantum uncertainty. P(a)P(b) < P(a,b) P(a)P(b) > P(a,b)

positively correlated negatively correlated

What if P(n1,n2,n3, . . . , nk) = 1? Then it is not possible for P(n1)P(n2)P(n3) . . . P(nk) > P(n1,n2, n3, . . . nk)? The sum of the fluctuations and the correlations existing between these fluctuations determines the probability function of the system. The area of the phase ellipse is roughly ð/\p x/\x ~ h/2 or roughly ð/\E/\t ~ h/2 and is conserved, c.f., Liouville’s Theorem. Vectorial nature of (/\px, /\py, /\py, /\E) within general relativity, i.e., curved spacetime describable alternatively in terms of effects upon (/\x, /\y, /\z, /\t) through correlations (bose-einstein statistics) and anticorrelations (fermi-dirac statistics) of, respectively, bosons and fermions. @$

Can conservation of probability tell us something about the manner in which fluctuations might be conserved? If the correlations in the fluctuations in px, py, pz, E) are 0, then does this mean that äp xäpyäpzäE form with one another a conserved 4-vector? And if correlations in äPu exist, then can we have äTuv conserved instead?

C.f., Fourier Series and Orthogonal Functions, section 3.11, “Practical Remarks”: “one commonly quoted theorem, called the localization theorem, states that the behavior of a Fourier series at a point depends only on the behavior of the function in a neighborhood of the point.” “In numerical work, the rate at which a series converges is an important aspect of its behavior, and the rapidity with which a Fourier series converges at a point does not depend on the behavior of the function in a small neighborhood.” “In general, the smoother a function is, the more rapidly its Fourier components tend to zero.” Setting aside for the moment an “advanced wave” interpretation of the Fourier analysis of a time function, in which the contingent low frequency behavior in the future is not included in the analysis, let us suppose that the shape of each Fourier component is symmetrical about the time t=t0. A change in the system over time intervals of /\t or shorter is not thought to necessitate a revision in the past behavior of the Fourier components of our analysis of a given time function of a physically @$ observable variable. There seems to be an intimate relationship between the magnitude of the time uncertainty and the rapidity of convergence of a Fourier expansion of a “physical time function” which must always be great enough in order that imperfect convergence of the series within /\t is not observable. Actually, this may indeed be thought to be the essence of the definition of adequate convergence of Fourier series expansions of physical time functions. Quant-ph/0103019, p.2 c.f., Outline of an Anarchistic Theory of Knowledge, p. 1,“Science is an essentially anarchistic enterprise: theoretical anarchism is more humanitarian and more likely to encourage progress than its law-andorder alternatives,” but the thorough-going nature of an institutional paradigm gives a brittleness to the edifice of the paradigm’s systematic application which reveals inconsistencies not noticed in an environment of a more free-wheeling scientific methodology. C.f., p.4, “Given

science, reason cannot be universal and unreason cannot be excluded.” Related to the idea that true temporality demands indeterminate change/energy uncertainty with /\E containing all those changes within the system (within time interval, /\t) constituted by non-deterministic or acausal changes in the system’s state, i.e., introduced from “outside” the system. C.f., page 6, “and they speak against the universal validity of any rule. All methodologies have their limitations and the only “rule” that survives is ‘anything goes’.” There is no way to perfectly separate noise from signal; noise may be thought of as a summation of signals and signals as a superposition of noises (and vice versa). This reminds us of Bohm’s statement in Quantum Theory that all causal relationships may be decomposed as correlations between fluctuations, which is perhaps a clearer assertion of the dependence of quantum propagators upon Heisenberg uncertainties in the quantum conjugate variables representing conserved quantities. The Heisenberg uncertainties determine the, phase, particle number, time and space distributions of quantum systems over the conjugate coordinates to these conserved quantities within phase space. All restrictions due to adherence to a rule carry with them limitations in validity of application. Conservation of phase space as a phenomenological rule emerges from an analysis of the generalized quantum propagator. “By assuming that the mode field amplitude and its time derivative are operators with commutation rules similar to those of position and momentum, [italics mine] the mode also acquires an evenly spaced set of energy levels”, c.f., “The Origins of Quantum Noise in Photonics” (IEEE December 1997) But restrictions are necessary for human science to facilitate calculation by the left hemisphere and facilitate recognition by the right hemisphere of data that do not fit within the domain defined by a set of rules. @$

In Der Sterbenden Sonne, after the Stardust II makes a 1600 light year hyperspace transition, the narrator of the story comments that it would be 1600 years before the crew would see the flaring up of the pre-nova

Vega. This is consistent with an earlier statement of the narrator that the Stardust’s Hyperspring was effected without any passage of time. Of course, a powerful enough telescope stationed within the Vega system would see the Stardust appear 1600 light-years away only a moment after making its hyperspace transmission. So how does the Stardust return? Does is make another hyperspring in zero time? If it does so, then it ends up in the Vega system 3200 years before it originally left it. This is clearly contrary to causal consistency and could easily lead to a causal paradox. So to return not only to its own spatial position but also to its own time, the Stardust must . . . Of course, talking about an unglimpsed universe just one millimeter away from ours iff in some spacetime orthogonal direction is within quantum mechanics just the same as saying that there’s another such universe just out of phase (off resonance) from our universe, except here we speak of energy instead of the spacetime orthogonal dimension. This might be considered to be like supposing that there’s another universe moving slightly slower than ours up the time axis (of a different resonance peak (potential trough) than our universe). Perhaps a Lorentz – boost could bring a space traveler into resonance (couple him) to another vacuum or another energy level of the universal (or multiversal) false vacuum state, c.f., seminal works on quantized cosmological redshift. Um sie damit die Erde noch doch entdekt. Um sie die Erde damit noch doch entdekt. We don’t have to give up any of the fascinating counterintuitive effects of special and general relativity just because we admit a preferred inertial frame. Culture is an epigenetic phenomenon from the standpoint of behavioral genetics. Man acquires freedom by removing the obstacles to the fulfillment of his instinctive wishes that were not of his own choosing.

However, the intrinsic freedom lies with the unlimited possibilities for the elaboration of the expression of these instinctive desires – as these desires are by their nature indeterminate in form inherited as they are from the very simplest multicellular creatures, while the neocortex is possessed of such a densely complicated network of nervous connections not merely between its functional components but between these and the quantum fields in which all matter is embedded at the molecular level and below. epi=Perturbation theory is the epigenetics of subatomic particle behavior while epigenetics is the perturbation theory of gene expression. Kant was perhaps more correct than even he himself realized when he asserted that time and space are but the most general (conceivable) forms of human intuition. The only non-parochial perspective is that enjoyed by the Creator. Sexual selection may be informed by a deep connection between genetic compatibility (in terms of fitness of offspring as protein expressions of the genome) vis a vis genome chemical, i.e., quantum mechanical stability. Man is in the image of God only by subset implication – all conscious beings the cosmos over are in the image of God in relation to consciousness as such. Celebrity is explicable in terms of a sociocultural critique of the metaphysics of presence. It is from within the context of culture and tradition that the instinctive components operating within culture and sublimated as culture are recognized and the manifestations of the effects of these instinctive components are critiqued. Is deceleration endothermic or exothermic? Whatever vacuum process

is responsible for relativistic mass increase may perhaps be manipulated to convert energy into mass at subrelativistic velocities, c.f., Perry Rhodan #12, part 3 (45-55 sec), “Andruckabsorbers” Though not a 3momentum conserving operation, it does conserve 4-momentum. “Thaumaturgy  what does this term mean? What happens to the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics, i.e., the universal law of entropy increase; all blackbody radiation retains an imprint of quantum correlations (due to the fact of continual interaction of all quantum systems with the matrix of fluctuations (of quantum vacuum) in which they are embedded)? The ineradicable and constant presence of these quantum fluctuations results in the general inapplicability of the 2nd Law to quantum systems. It is in the nature of quantum systems to exhibit subatomic features and relationships on macroscopic scales. It is of the intended design of the science of thermal physics to deal with (1) closed systems and (2) systems in which the influence of individual fluctuations can be ignored at the macroscopic level because of the presumed absence of nonlocal correlations existing among microscopic fluctuations. Creativity is the impression of terms upon the indeterminism of the immanent from outside what is already determinate within it. Similar remarks seem to apply to the emergence of moral and ethical conceptions. Both phenomena transcend a group theoretic accounting. The degeneracy that enables the stability of evolved structures is a graciously heretofore-extant infrastructure. A structure is precarious/unstable to the same degree as mere contingency rather than logic is responsible for this structure. Grace seems unnecessary when one believes that the components of matter are indifferent to the passage of time. The network of intrinsic relationships has to be disrupted in order for the logical structure of this network to be exhibited. Whatever vagueness

or ambiguity might be needed in order to give coherence to the association network is utilized by the psyche. Within such a network of associations the self is of course placed at the center, disconfirming evidence with respect to prejudices and longstanding assumptions is suppressed from consciousness. This is part of the reason why the unconscious is so irrational – it is the underside of the tapestry, as it were, where all of the breaks in logic in the form of loose dangling threads are to be found along with all that the conscious psyche has swept under it which it had found disagreeable and unpleasant. Every parochial minded person, whom we here in the South term “redneck” fancies himself extraordinarily intelligent despite his relative lack of formal education (i.e., “book learnin’”). But of course it is only the educational experience which can bring one into knowing contact with those of visibly superior knowledge and intelligence. One must face up to one of two possible alternatives: either the potentialities are preprogrammed permutation and combination of initial and boundary conditions or genuine creativity underlies the evolutionary process. To admit evolutionary theory while maintaining that humanity is the only intelligent life in the universe seems to imply that chance is by far the dominant actor in the evolutionary process. Chance explains the timing of the enabling of boundary conditions to the creative process of evolution but not the dynamic itself of the evolutionary process. Consciousness when fragmented is intrinsically irrational and possesses formal features not shared by any other individual consciousness – the same holds true between distinct individual consciousnesses. Etot = ¿(c/Lh, c/Rs){N(÷)h÷[1/(eh÷/kT - 1) + ½]

Etot = ¿(c/Lh, c/Rs){N(÷)h÷[2+ 1/(eh÷/kT - 1) -1]/[2(eh÷/kT - 1)]d÷ Etot = ¿(c/Lh, c/Rs){N(÷)h/2 [(1+ eh÷/kT)]/[(eh÷/kT - 1)]d÷ Etot = ¿(c/Lh, c/Rs){N(÷)h/2 [(eh÷/kT + 1)]/[(eh÷/kT - 1)]d÷ N(÷) = Rs2÷2/c2 Etot = ¿(c/Lh, c/Rs){(Rs2÷2/c2)h/2 [(eh÷/kT + 1)]/[(eh÷/kT - 1)]d÷ Could the Pauli exclusion principle account for the relationship of black hole mass and radius, i.e., density? For example, a black hole of mass 2M possesses a density just ¼ that of a black hole of mass M. The relativistic effects on length, mass and time are presumed by many classical relativists to be “explicable” in terms of kinematics or even via an axiomatic formulation of relativity. But clearly the origin of these effects is dynamical in nature, /\p is the spatial translator and /\E is the temporal translator. The properties of position and time are much more complex and specific to particular classes of particles and fields. Because consciousness translucent and passive individual consciousness may most easily be consciousness.

as a medium of thought is not perfectly and so the presumable uniqueness of the requires that certain thoughts and perceptions entertained within a particular individual

Perhaps the relationships of Hawking radiation-temperature to gravitational intensity-entropy to surface area bear an important relation to the mystery of black hole density within quantum gravity theory as well as upon the puzzle of the relationship of Planck to cosmological vacuum energy density.

Note that the product of black hole surface area and density is conserved, i.e., a constant. But what exactly is this quantity? Doubling the hole radius results in a halving of the hole’s entropy density or conversely a doubling of the hole’s information density. Thus the mass of a black hole is proportional to the hole’s information density. Thus the mass of a black hole is proportional to the hole’s information density. If bandwidth is supplied to matter through nonlocal connection network of Planck hypercylindrical conduits (for exchange of information with the cosmic CPU), the proportionality of inertia to information density is reasonable. This is one reason for associating the mass of a black hole with the energy fluctuations on the hole’s event horizon. If consciousness could be duplicated, then there would be no basis for the distinction of individual persons. The origin of mathematical notions not corresponding to anything in nature is nonetheless that to which they correspond. Sum[1/2 hk] + Sum[1/2hf]  bosons + fermions Ón1/2hfn/Óm1/2hkm = c, provided that the numbers “n” and “m” are of appropriate relative value ( given the geometry of the virtual particle medium) E2 = p2c2 + m2c4 M = ÖE2/c4 – p2/c2] = 1/c ÖE2/c2 – p2

Time dilation fraction is GM/Rc2 Mass is proportional to the time dilation gamma factor (ä factor) and 1/ä to the value of “c”. Because the velocity of light is foundational to the definition of space time, it perhaps follows that gravity’s effect upon space time might be wholly explicable in terms of a mechanism, explaining how real matter and energy cause the velocity of light to vary. If the velocity of light is viewed as a mere expectation value, then over the tiniest scales of distance and time, this velocity must actually be determined by the relative magnitudes of the fluctuations within the vacuum of physical quantities of a still more fundamental nature, The expectation values of momentum and energy; and , are determined in the following way: = Ö - Ä2p] = Ö - Ä2E] If we interpret the fluctuations of P and E in the vacuum as linked together (just as space and time are linked to produce spacetime) and that fluctuations in their conjugate parameters, displacement and time, then perhaps we can interpret ÄP as the uncertainty in “P” due to fluctuations in “E” and ÄE as the uncertainty of “E” due to fluctuations in “P.” Constant = (SE)2 + (SP)2c2 = K ÄE2 = (Sp)2c2 Äp2 = (SE)2 C2 This all makes more sense if we think of matter as unstable pattern of

energy, momentum and of their linkage, i.e. momentum-energy tensor fluctuations. So that any observable changes in matter’s state may be more properly understood as changes in the state of these fluctuations and in the mutual interaction of these fluctuations. Vs = Ö B/e ] = Ö pc2/E ] 

ÄE

= cÄPx

B = bulk modulus E = density p = E for free space ÄE = Ä(pc) ^ photon

E2= p2c2+m2c4 A ball whirling on a string when released moves of with a momentum directed at a tangent to its former orbit and perpendicular to the rotational axis of this orbit. So using this simple model for the conversion of angles into linear momentum, we might suppose that an angular momentum that could be translated into linear momentum directed along any axis within 3-dimensional space (of a certain inertial frame) must itself be directed along an axis [orthogonal to x, y, z within this certain inertial frame]. The x-y-plane to which is orthogonal must in reality be the x-y-ict (1) hyper-surface with merely composed of the x-y component of(2) . Similar arguments would apply to and . @$(How does this relate to the fact that the fermion must be rotated 720 to bring the Ñ back to its original quantum state?) A merely casual survey of the physics theory websites reveals that there is no limit to the number of analog models people have selected as a basis for “explaining” gravitational phenomena. The understanding of

each amateur theorist is bewitched by his or her particular chosen analog. What is interesting is observing the lengths to which these amateur theorists will go to resolve the contradictions that result from a too encompassing application of the pet theory. Structure is extracted from out of the degeneracy of concepts that have already proven themselves as consistent models of some of the features of the problem. This extracted structure is applied to the consistent description of a body’s subtler features. The presumed limits of this theory’s reference is itself a theoretical assumption. As well, the explication of features of, for example “the physics” occurring outside the assumed domain of a theory’s reference the very notion of “outside” vs. “inside” a theoretical domain of reference must also involve a theoretical or metamathematical assumption. This process is exactly analogous to that of the defining of subgroups (as group-theoretic entities) and supergroups with respect to some assumed or already well-established group. The “unreasonable effectiveness” of mathematics within the physical sciences stems from the contingent fact that a group theoretic structure not ever after be discarded, only elaborated (interior processes explicated) or incorporated (related to exterior processes). The spin-based quantum vacuum mechanism of gravity proposed here may only be consistent with the equivalence principle provided that the two fundamental quantum statistical relationships, fermi-dirac and boseeinstein statistics, operated without distinguishing real from virtual particles and in tandem with each other so as to enforce, if you will, all valid physical conservation laws, e.g., momentum, angular momentum, isospin, charge, etc. Diagram

spacetime with null cone axis.

360 degree rotation of fermion procedures sign change to Psi. Another

360 degrees rotation brings another sign change, returning Psi to its original state. 180 degree rotation in a projective space may correspond to a 360 degree rotation in a higher space, e.g., rotation of an axial vector within a plane that itself rotates at the same rate orthogonally to the plane of axial vector rotation. Notice that in this type of “projective rotation” the tip of the axial vector has traced a ½ of a right circular cone within an octant bounded by the x-y, y-z, z-x planes. Permutations of composite rotations must be examined to enhance intuition about how to treat this problem within Minkowski spacetime. Riemann Sphere projected onto a plane gives the right result in 2-d space. Rotation in angular momentum space spin 1 rotates like angular momentum of 1 Planck unit. Space quantization is another name for conserved angular momentum in quantum mechanics. So rotating the atom by only one quantized unit of phase (or angular displacement) changes the orientation of the atom by only ½ Planck units of angular momentum. Our dual nature of spiritual/creaturely would become readily apparent if every one’s thoughts were ever available to everyone else. A man feels helpless to properly wire up his stereo system and desperately seeks help of someone he thinks more competent to solve his technical problem. The very same man if turned to by an equally desperate sounding friend for help with his stereo system, their suddenly

the 1st man feel’s enthusiasm in tackling the friend’s identical problem. This example points up an inborn, evolutionarily based psychosocial dynamic that has been programmed over perhaps millions of years into the human psyche. Creation and annihilation of real fermions may be understood after Dirac’s fashion as oscillation of the fermion above and below the vacuum’s ground state (fermi level?). This is a difference in energy of 2mc2 and a difference in angular momentum of h or spin 1. ÖN] modes of oscillation for the event horizon. Hypothesis: the mass of a black hole is just the sum of the 1/ÖN] x å planck thermal fluctuations on the black hole’s event horizon.  /\E = E/ÖNmode]

for black hole body radiation

/\E2 x 8ðîdî/c3 x vol. = E2 Incorrectly demonstrating a tautology is what Pauli would have called “not even wrong.” Planck cells filling event horizon as measure of maximum entropy, c.f., Jacob Beckenstein. Hawking radiation possesses analysis same as that of thermal radiation in a box, c.f., Beckenstein. Black hole remnant as solution to information loss paradox. Remnant is always of the form of a maximally entropic matrix of planck cells covering event horizon. Information content is coded into fluctuation correlational structure of planck fluctuations on this event horizon. Holographic principle may be at work here. As a black hole emits Hawking radiation, the hole’s surface area and hence entropy shrinks. The black hole information paradox from the

other side, if you will, is the flow of information out of an evaporating black hole via emission of a precisely thermal or black body spectrum of Hawking radiation. The remnant in the form of the event horizon correlates fluctuation matrix contains this information. The black hole’s enormous entropy easily masks the correlations of the photons hidden within an otherwise thermal radiation spectrum emitted from the evaporating black hole. Universe tunneling through a hyperspherical potential would explain the quantized Hubble distance-velocity relationship. Density of States effectiveness, c.f., Thermal Physics, p. 360 Gibbs Free Energy is the sum of the component of internal energy available to do work + the energy doing work now, i.e., nonentropic energy. ßk = p ; ßf  E /\p/\x m ß (spacelike);

/\E/\t m ß (timelike)

Each black hole mass corresponds to its own energy density. Hence, the density of thermal quantum fluctuations at the event horizon of a black hole of a certain mass is uniquely determined. Each black hole mass has a unique entropy and temperature. The integral of all modes of thermal fluctuation, say from wavelength ~Rs to kß must add up to the black hole mass. Various Fourier sums over subsets of the weighted harmonics running from Rs to kß yield the information for explicit structure crushed out of explicit existence by the black hole’s collapse. The weightings of the frequency components of these Fourier sums are coded in the phase correlations of the perspective frequencies constituting these Fourier sums. Planck cell matrix covering the black hole event horizon maximizes the

entropy of the hole. Correlations between the cutoff frequency modes (Planck modes) permit building of spectrum of subharmonics. The proper weighting of each subharmonic (Fourier frequency component weighting) with a particular subharmonic spectrum corresponding to some objective features of the pre-collapse system is automatically implicit in the quantum correlations of the cutoff modes. The nonlocal, global quantum vacuum-embedded quantum correlations of an object’s hardware realization are necessary for its network realization. I discovered papers at xxx.lanl.gov that hypothesized storing of black hole information in quantum correlations of fields interacting with the black hole event horizon. Intersubjective ~ network/online Subjective ~ offline/stand alone system While reading a paper treating a proposed solution of the black hole information paradox, I was struck with still more of what I believe is naïve and misguided in glib discussions that are nowadays more frequent than ever concerning data, information, information processing, transmission and storage, i.e., “memory.” If bandwidth is supplied to matter through a nonlocally connected network of Planck hypercylindrical conduits (for exchange of information with the cosmic CPU), the proportionality of inertia to information density is reasonable. If consciousness could be duplicated then there would be no basis for the distinction of individual persons. The origin of mathematical notions not corresponding to anything in nature is nonetheless that to which they correspond.

ø1/2 hk (bosons) + ø1/2 hf (fermion pairs) [ø1/2 hk]/[ø1/2 hf] = c - provided that the numbers of bosons and fermion pairs are of the appropriate relative value (given the geometry of the virtual particle medium) Time dilation fraction ~ GM/RC2 Mass is proportional to the time dilation gamma factor and inversely proportional to the value of “c”. Because the velocity of light is foundational to the definition of spacetime, it perhaps follows that gravity’s effect upon spacetime might be wholly explicable in terms of a mechanism by which real matter and energy cause the velocity of light to vary. If the velocity of light is viewed as a mere expectation value, then over the tiniest scales of distance and time this velocity must actually be determined by the relative magnitudes of the fluctuations within the vacuum of physical quantities of a still more fundamental nature. The expectation values of momentum and energy, = Ö[ - /\p2] And = Ö[ - /\E2] If we interpret the fluctuations of p and E in the vacuum as linked together (just as space and time are linked together to produce spacetime) and that fluctuations in p and E dynamically determine fluctuations in their conjugate (nonconserved) parameters, displacement and time, then perhaps we can interpret /\p as the uncertainty in “p” due to fluctuations in “E” and /\E as the uncertainty in “E” due to fluctuations in “p”. In the case of the local velocity of light induced to become less than its free space magnitude, a larger density of momentum fluctuations is required to produce a smaller density of energy fluctuations.

Constant = (äE)2 + (äp)2 = K /\E2 = (äp)2 ; /\p2 = (äE)2 This all makes more sense if we think of matter as just a stable pattern of fluctuation of energy, momentum and of their linkage, i.e., momentumenergy tensor fluctuations. So that any observable changes in matter’s state may be more properly understood as changes in the state of these fluctuation and in the mutual interaction of these fluctuations. A phase diagram for a given angular momentum vector orthogonal to the phase plane may be thought of as composed of myriad phase cells each cell with its own tiny angular momentum (actually spin). For example, by the right hand rule, Pxy – Pyx = Lz, etc. A connection between Heisenberg uncertainty and spin and angular momentum is here discernible. Notice we can’t get a time directed spin or angular momentum from operations between 3-angular momenta or 3-momenta, but timelike angular momentum must be assumed for the sake of relativistic or spacetime symmetry. He was the sort of gentleman who is openly pitied and secretly envied. My childlike sense of wonder is attracted to experiences of mystery rather than of spectacle. Society and genetics conspire to pull on us a kind o “Jedi mind trick” whereby we become virally infected with other peoples definitions. It is not possible to consistently define 4-angular momentum utilizing only 4 dimensional vector calculus. 4-angular momentum cannot be defined without use of a metric tensor and angular momentum tensor. Moreover, transformations of 4-angular momentum between different Lorentz frames (requiring virtual accelerations) requires a more general

metric tensor than that of Minkowski spacetime. With many related projects we can seem to span a space of either expertise or wisdom and in so doing simulate presence. Each treatise which begs for an understanding audience was itself cobbled together from genetic fragments of other such treatises. These genetic fragments cohere, i.e., the cobblestone structure “gels” via the action of intuition and insight borne of a creative prelinguistic thought process already virally infected with the genetic fragments. The evolutionary value of consciousness is quite a separate consideration from that of understanding the mechanism by which consciousness as such subsists and by which it dynamically acts. This is true if the organism’s competence in preserving and disseminating its genetic material were enhanced the more compatible became its evolving nervous system in relation to (in resonance with) this already given phenomenon of consciousness. @$Neural networks better able to exploit consciousness made their respective organisms more successful in competition with other organisms. Consciousness in turn would in return become better able to explore its own latent possibilities of internal structure. Consciousness endowed the neural processes of organisms with context just as their neural networks endowed consciousness with content or reference. I’ve come again and again to this thought always by different paths, namely that the human person is not dual in its nature but rather is a symbiotic being of flesh and spirit. Two distinct interpretations of the end of life are the following: one glimpses one’s body falling away; the other, glimpsing the drifting away and upward of the alien indwelling spirit. If spacetime is an artifact of the quantum vacuum stress-momentumenergy then different possible spacetimes must subsist within their own respective vacua. This is similar to the idea of gravity being diluted within higher dimensions. So the density of any given vacuum is

determined by the black hole density. The number of distinct vacua is related to the 10120 difference between the magnitudes of the cosmological constant and Planck energy density. Frequency domain and phase shift explanation of perihelion precession of planetary orbits. Discussion. Lorenz invariance of the vacuum momentum-energy, its dynamical aspect vs. the merely kinematical nature of spacetime, suggests that there actually is a vacuum mechanism for general relativistic effects. Vacuum energy density vs. mass energy density cosmological coincidence can be explained by the way matter induces mass in the quantum vacuum. Viewing a black hole as an endpoint on a spectrum allows one to think about less extreme effects of ordinary gravitational fields in new ways. For example, ordinary masses should also exhibit Hawking radiographers, cause the quantum vacuum to possess both a temperature and hence an entropy and moreover spatiotemporal variations in gravitational potential should be associated with spatiotemporal gradients in vacuum energy density, pressure, temperature and entropy. The bi-vacuum may be divided into its two components, energy available to do work and purely entropic energy. Onion model of a black hole’s structure is defined as the density of a black hole increasing internally from the event horizon to the so-called singularity in a manner similar to how the density of black holes varies with black hole radius. Æo Á 1/R and go Á 1/R2 Æi Á ln|R| and gi Á 1/R

òR = 3c2/8ðGR2; òr = 3c2/8ðGr2 3c2/8ðGR2 x 4/3ðR3 = mR = Rc2/2G gr = Gmr/r2 == rc2/R2; gR = c2/R As the mass gravitationally collapses, the quantum states of its embedding vacuum are filling up with advance of the local time variable. Once an event horizon forms, when the embedding vacuum of the outside spacetime has all of its fermionic quantum states occupied, the collapse continues though not with passage of time, i.e., with interactivity of the collapsing mass with its external spin 0 field of virtual Cooper pair fluctuations. Rather, this collapse continues from the event horizon to the hole’s singularity, i.e., spatially. After all, local spacetime has, upon reaching (occurrence of) the event horizon, succeeded in rotating 90 degrees so that the local time axis of the hole’s spacetime is not directed along the radial lines connecting the event horizon of the hole to its singularity. If the black hole density were really constant and uniform, i.e., 3c2/8ðGR2 rather than functionally varying with r, i.e., 3c2/8ðGr2, then the gravitational field strength inside the hole decreases inversely with radial distance. Gravitational field intensity at the event horizon of a black hole increases inversely with black hole radius. Clearly a uniform black hole density does not allow the hole’s trapped surface to extend inside the hole. So inside the black hole time is no longer stopped but possesses a rate of flow, as it were, that increases inversely as the singularity of the hole is approached from inside. Upon the singularity being reached, the rate of temporal flow is once again in step with the rate at which time passes infinitely far from the hole.

Inside the black hole’s event horizon, there should be a mirroring of the gravitational gradient, which exists outside the hole. Otherwise, under the total collapse model, the black hole must possess a kernel of Planck density. Lp = [Gh/c3]1/2

mp = Lpc2/2G

òh = 3c2/8ðGLp2 = 3c5/ðG2h n3 Planck masses may be packed within a Planckian black hole of nPlanck length radius. [Rh/Lp] x mp = Mkernel = M For example, given a star with a mass comparable to that of our Sun:  [M/mp]1/3 x Lp = Rkernel Rkernel represents the black hole kernel possessing Planck density, i.e., the density at which all available quantum vacuum states are occupied, as opposed to the case of the black hole itself, where merely the vacuum energy uncertainty reaches 0. In the case of the sun, Rs ~ 2 x 103 Rk = [2x1030/5x10-8] x ~10-35 ~ 10-22 The kernel for the Universe is ~ 10-15. The fact that there is not causal necessity to underpin the being of logical necessity says something important for the necessity says something important for the philosophy of mind. Light Velocity Casimir (LVC) experiment, c.f., lanl.gov search 1998-

2002, proposed anticipates an increase in the velocity of light perpendicular to the Casimir plates. Momentum fluctuations (virtual photon exchanges) are reduced in the direction of the photon’s motion, meaning that the energy fluctuations are correspondingly increased however, this increase is directional in just the manner that the decrease in photon creation/annihilation density is directed. This implies that the energy fluctuations of the vacuum may be partitioned in correspondence with x, y, z and ict-momentum fluctuations. 3-momentum fluctuations that are suppressed in the Casimir light velocity experiments result in enhanced energy of the ictmomentum fluctuations. And so we expect the reverse of this to be true if fluctuation momentum-energy is conserved. Conservation of angular momentum of spin applied here in addition to that of momentum-energy suggests that the composite spin 0 fermi Cooper pairs @$are actually of spin 1 rotated 90 degrees into coincidence with the local time axis. @$

Whether a total confusion of conceptual, cognitive and perceptual faculties can actually be experienced or only re-experienced from within a later-occurring stable and well behaved consciousness is important to philosophy of mind’s resolving of the following ambiguity: abstraction as a function (including logical and mnemonic processes) of consciousness vs. consciousness as a function of memory and logic.

It is thought that the temperature of the Hawking radiation increases with the intensity of the event horizon surface gravity due to corresponding increases in gravitational tidal forces (which vary with 1/R3). With the increased density of real fermionic matter comes an increased spectral and occupational density of bosonic fluctuations. These bosonic fluctuations correspond to internally or coherently generated energy fluctuations of the real fermions composing the body

in question, which by the Pauli principle excludes external resonantly generated energy fluctuations. If it is true that eigenstates are fictional idealizations (due to the fact that vacuum fluctuations cannot be screened only transformed in terms of changes in the weighting of momentum-energy fluctuation and momentum-energy uncertainty components, (c.f., “eigen-uncertainty” of my earlier writings), then the democratic nature of the Pauli principle vis a vis real vs. virtual may be explained as Pauli Exclusion of energy fluctuations. Similarly for the democracy of the Bose principle vis a vis momentum fluctuations. The strong and weak equivalence principles are related via the analogy: mass is to gravity what inertia is to acceleration. Gravity breaks spacetime symmetry. Is this because the spontaneous fluctuation momentum-energy densities are not conserved. Spacetime metric guv = hauhbvnab  tangent space metric (äp, /\p)  Ó(bn,bn+) 3-momentum momentum-energy tensor (äE, /\E)  Ó(fn,fn+) imaginary dynamical momentum-energy tensor

component

4-momentum

of

dynamical

component

of

Juab = xaTub - xbTua Tua and Juab are not independent tensors, c.f., Calcada and Pereira, lanl.gov (gr-qc) Jab = Lab + Sab The orbital part is the real part and the spin part is the imaginary part “Lorenz transformations of a general field Psi can be rewritten as a translation plus a strictly spin Lorenz transformation.” “In the Poincare’ group the translation and the Lorenz parameters are

completely independent.” “in the coupling prescription of GR the tetrad hau and the spin connection Aabu are not independent fields.” http://allrx.zapto.org/cart.html? p=02995430 “and the angular-momentum conservation is related to the invariance of the action under a Lorentz transformation.” If Lorentz symmetry is the spacetime symmetry of “flat” or Minkowski space, there angular momentum nonconservation, c.f., Mercury perihelion precession, constitutes the breaking of spacetime symmetry. “the fundamental field of gravitation is the spin connection and not the tetrad.” Gauss’ surface-volume integral theorem relates density of charge and divergence of flux – related to quantization of 2 + 1 hyperspace areas/angular momentum in relativistically covariant form of Kepler’s 2nd Law. The nonlocal connection is mediated by the timelike fluctuations in momentum-energy. Translational invariance vs. Lorentz invariance. Galilean invariance requires conservation of 3-momentum and Lorentz invariance requires conservation of 4-momentum. J-density corresponds to 4d divergence (flux across a 3-hypersurface). Spacetime curvature at the quantum scale consists of increased amplitudes and decreased frequencies as well as accumulated phase shift in frequency, producing a net large scale effect. Increase exchanges of fermions might be expected to cause an oscillatory variation in the net quantum spin orientation of these fermions within their local spacetimes (or 4-spaces – question here concerning relation of microspacetime to macro 4d space)

The effects of gravitational time dilation upon the observer vis a vis the internal time-external time (subj. – obj.) distinction (in relation to GR increased density of p-fluctuations (external time) vs. decreased density of ip-fluctuations (internal time).

Hypothesis: the more massive an object is the denser becomes the continuum of inertial frames, which embed this object. The energy fluctuations within neighboring inertial frames interfere destructively, the 3-momentum fluctuations, constructively. External resonance  decoherence and internal resonance  coherence. From Wigner’s Spins, Feynman’s Partons, and Their Common Ground by Y. S. Kim, arXiv:quant-ph/0205018v1 4 May 2002, “ The connection between spin and symmetry was established by Wigner in his 1939 paper on the Poincare’ group.” Matter breaks spacetime symmetry through a connection between the spin density/spin currents of real and virtual particles. Pure electric field as due to Lorenz force of a 4-dimensional magnetic current –> problem here is two particles occupy the same hypersurface and so do not “see” each other as currents. However, both particles appear as currents to a conscious observer whose consciousness is moving at near the speed of light relative to the hypersurface in which the electric charges are embedded. The advantage of interpreting the electric field as a magnetic field associated with a pure imaginary 4-dimensional electric charge current is that the long standing argument is weakened in favor of magnetic monopoles as enhancing the symmetry of the Maxwell equations. Instead of electromagnetic symmetry seeming to require both static electric and magnetic charges (as field sources and “sinks”), this symmetry is satisfied by four dimensional electric charge

currents and the four dimensional magnetic fields induced by these 4currents. In this picture the only electromagnetic interactions are those of four-dimensional magnetic currents interacting via the Lorenz force. Interpreting the static electric field interaction of two electric charges, at rest within the same inertial frame, as a Lorenz force interaction such as that between a static charge and an electric current clearly reveals that the magnetic monopole hypothesis is unnecessary from the standpoint of electromagnetic symmetry. All that is needed to account the electromagnetic forces acting between electric charges and currents is a generalized (or simply more broadly interpreted) Lorenz force, one which acts within the four dimensions of spacetime rather than simply within a three dimensional hypersurface or foliation of the spacetime manifold. This interpretation of the electromagnetic interaction seems carry the assumption of absolute motion on the part of both the electric charges and a conscious observer. The supposedly purely relative motion of two charges is interpreted now as the absolute motion of the charges relative to the absolute motion of an observer. The Lorenz force law is the following: F = q{E(r,t) + [dr(t)/dt x B(r,t)]} What happens to the above equation if we make r(t) a spacetime interval and treat B as a four dimensional magnetic field containing a component which functions identically to E(r,t)? The four dimensional version of the Lorenz force law now takes the form: F = J(x,y,z,t) x Fuv Where Fuv is the four dimensional electromagnetic tensor. So perhaps the Maxwell equations only seem to require the existence of the magnetic monopole when these equations are expressed in a form that is not fully relativistically invariant. The connection between the macroscopic and the submicroscopic, that is

between for example, spin and the imaginary component of angular momentum as well as between “X” and imaginary momentum, lies with some mechanism by which these imaginary and hence timelike components of these conserved quantities are converted to the spacelike bulk real angular and linear momenta supported by spacelike quantized 3-angular and 3-linear momentum fluctuations. There may be two formally distinct but intimately interrelated mechanism of gravitation and inertia, one operating at a cosmological and the other at a subatomic scale of spacetime. “Spin 0” only means that the spin about any spatial axis is null. The proper spacetime interpretation of “spin 0” is spin 1 and spin –1 about the time axis. Here spin +1 is composite spin +1/2 with spin +1/2 and spin –1 is composite spin –1/2 with spin –1/2. Due to broken spacetime symmetry, there is a net spin +1 vacuum energy density (clockwise about the time axis). So the Universe must possess a net rotation about the time axis. We must remember that the cosmological time axis is everywhere orthogonal to the cosmological continuum of superposed cosmological 3hypersurfaces. We say superposed cosmological 3-hypersurfaces here because we want a built-in quantum infrastructure operating at the beginning of time, which is available to support the multi-history temporal evolution of cosmological expansion. Just as the time-rate-ofchange in spacelike linear 4-momenta are derived from the timelike linear 4-momenta, so too must spacelike angular momenta derive from timelike 4-angular momenta. December 2013

Jack Shandy says: “Note that the above holds also in M4, if we take the first coordinate to be the time-coordinate. So, any rotation in M4 which leaves the time coordinate invariant (a rotation 'about the time axis' if you like), also leaves a spatial axis invariant, and is simply a rotation in R^3. (A general rotation in M4 is a Lorentz transformation: any rotation in M4 which leaves a single (necessarily spatial) axis invariant. . . Would require a spatial rotation + a boost in a direction perpendicular to the rotation axis.)”, c.f., http://www.amazon.com/forum/science?

_encoding=UTF8 HYPERLINK "http://www.amazon.com/forum/science? _encoding=UTF8&cdForum=FxZ58KVEERYS5E&cdPage=7&cdThrea d=TxVXGJDFKSVXRK"& HYPERLINK "http://www.amazon.com/forum/science? _encoding=UTF8&cdForum=FxZ58KVEERYS5E&cdPage=7&cdThrea d=TxVXGJDFKSVXRK"cdForum=FxZ58KVEERYS5E HYPERLINK "http://www.amazon.com/forum/science? _encoding=UTF8&cdForum=FxZ58KVEERYS5E&cdPage=7&cdThrea d=TxVXGJDFKSVXRK"& HYPERLINK "http://www.amazon.com/forum/science? _encoding=UTF8&cdForum=FxZ58KVEERYS5E&cdPage=7&cdThrea d=TxVXGJDFKSVXRK"cdPage=7 HYPERLINK "http://www.amazon.com/forum/science? _encoding=UTF8&cdForum=FxZ58KVEERYS5E&cdPage=7&cdThrea d=TxVXGJDFKSVXRK"& HYPERLINK "http://www.amazon.com/forum/science? _encoding=UTF8&cdForum=FxZ58KVEERYS5E&cdPage=7&cdThrea d=TxVXGJDFKSVXRK"cdThread=TxVXGJDFKSVXRK For a four dimensional charge current to interact with the spacetime cylindrical magnetic field so as to produce an instantaneous inverse square force upon the charge of the electrical 4-current, which is directed toward the center of this magnetic field, this cylindrical field must lie within its own Zeitebene. The electrical charges must pass through this Zeitebene at the local velocity of light in order for a Lorenz force to act between these two charges. Since the metric is operationally defined in terms of paths of light through spacetime The photon is only “massless” given that a precise balance exists in the quantum vacuum “through which” the photon travels between 3momentum fluctuations and energy fluctuations (pure imaginary 4momentum fluctuations). Fluctuations in spacelike vacuum 3-

momentum coupled to the vacuum timelike energy fluctuations underlie all photon motion. The photon takes on a kind of mass, however when travelling down a gravitational potential. This increase in photon mass is reflected in the decrease with increasing gravitational potential of the ratio of /\E to /\px where x defines the present direction of photon motion. An alternative statement of this is the photon experiences a decrease in frequency relative to wavelength as it propagates down the potential, now understood as a fluctuation momentum-energy density gradient, in which the sign of the energy density gradient is opposite that of the momentum density gradient. The greater photon wavelength means that the photon must “wait” longer between events of the photon being absorbed and emitted by the quantum vacuum. In the example of a crystal lattice, the absorption and emission of a photon within the crystal corresponds to the excitation and deexcitation of the crystal lattice, respectiv-ely, by two inputs, one of real energy (excitation), the other virtual (deexcitation). The source of the excitation of the crystal is the real photon in its previous oscillation. The deexcitation of the crystal must somehow come from the absorption by the crystal of virtual energy of spin 1. The creation and annihilation of virtual fermionantifermion pairs is either associated with the emission and absorption of a virtual photon, respectively or (setting aside for the moment the question of the vacuum mechanism of real photon propagation) conversely. Which interpretation we choose depends upon whether the crystal lattice is separate from and interacts with the quantum vacuum or itself models this quantum vacuum. Another possibility is that the vacuum in its spontaneity is constrained by the vacuum as crystalline network of harmonic oscillators. The Pauli principle applies only to identical and quantum indistinguishable particles. An important question for bi-vacuum theory is whether quantum mechanics treats particles and their respective antiparticles as distinguishable. The Heisenberg uncertainties in conserved quantities, i.e., physical quantities possessing a quantized field are of course, mediated by the

quantum statistics of the vacuum state. For example, /\E(x,y,z,t) at some spacetime coordinate would certainly be greater if Fermi-Dirac statistics were relaxed within the spacetime region containing this point. Similarly, /\p(x,y,z,t) would be smaller at the specified spacetime coordinate if Bose-Einstein statistics were relaxed within the spacetime region containing this coordinate. The relaxing of quantum statistics within a given region of the vacuum would engender a distinctly antigravitational effect. A progressive transformation of /\E into /\p r where r is the direction along which the gravitational potential along which the gravitational potential gradient, as well as the opposed /\E and /\p r gradients are maximal naturally involves a progressive rotation of a body’s 4momentum in the direction f an r-directed 3-momentum. One need only reflect here upon the direct relationship between /\t for a physical process and the characteristic lifetime, relaxation time, decay time, etc. or alternatively, the broadening (or more properly speaking shifting) of the frequency spectrum of this quantal process in order to understand what is being asserted here about the relationship of /\E to and /\p to . If we attribute the fluctuations to the vacuum and the corresponding Heisenberg uncertainty to the mass/particles, then we are permitted to define, e.g., in terms of äpr and /\pr, where äpr is . = ¡/\pr - This also suggests a kind of “bi-vacuum” model of the quantum vacuum, c.f., crystalline harmonic oscillator network model for either the quantum vacuum or its partner (vacuum-antivacuum, i.e., separation of vacuum into the matter-vacuum and the antimatter-vacuum). The fluctuations or uncertainties may arise from the future or past, respectively (or vice versa) and one of these may be thought to possess information, the other, entropy. In this way, the entropy of mixing, for

example, in which both gases possess both information (i.e., negentropy) and entropy, and what changes in the relative proportions of each take place, is grounded in the exchange of information and entropy between the mixing gases and the above described bi-vacuum, c.f., myriad articles on prn-bi-vacuum theory at web=http://xxx.lanl website. Relative vs. absolute time may be alternatively treated in terms of futurity of a particle being determined by its duration (spin 1) or its origin (spin 0). Bi-vacuum may more consistently be understood in terms of elsewhere region vs. absolute time (specifically, absolute past) region of the Minkowski light cone. The naïve question is frequently asked by amateur physicists, if space can be “curved,” then what or where is it curved into? The simple answer to which is that spacetime is curved not within the elsewhere region, but into this region. Causality exists within the “elsewhere region,” which is therefore a term defined exclusively relative to a particular Minkowski light cone. Because the event horizon of a black hole represents the absolute past and absolute future light cone hypersurfaces having succeeded in coming into mutual contact, we say that the black hole’s Minkowski light cone has become distorted so as to have squeezed out altogether the hypervolume within which the hole’s “pre-collapse” elsewhere region was located. For this reason, we believe that the energy uncertainty of a given quantum mechanical system originates wholly from within this elsewhere region.

The precisely thermal or black-body emission spectrum of the event horizon represents the total degeneration of the quantum vacuum signal (i.e., the elsewhere region of vacuum-nonlocal-connectivity is broken off) and this spectrum originates entirely from the mutual annihilation of future-directed matter with past-directed antimatter. Here the energy fluctuations do not originate from particle and antiparticle arising together (and then promptly annihilating with greatest probability –

together), but from the creation of a particle from the past and an antiparticle from the future, propagating as it were from opposite temporal ends of the Universe. Three degrees cosmic microwave background may be merely cosmologically redshifted Hawking radiation in which the entropic and negentropic components of the bi-vacuum are split, entropic component is radiated away from the event horizon to the black hole’s outside, while all information, stemming entirely from the other component of this bi-vacuum, falls inside the hole. Here the riddle of the dominance of matter over antimatter in the cosmos is readily solved. The relationship of Hawking radiation temperature but especially, entropy) to the surface area of the event horizon points up the Chinese box structure of the 1/R2 energy density of black hole and quantum vacuum. Three four-dimensional coordinate system diagrams, two of which show distinct spacetime 4-vectors representing initial and final 4-momenta. In moving from the first to the second diagram, there is effected a rotation of a mass’ 4-angular momentum away from spin 0 toward spin 1 angular momentum against which there reacts a gyroscopic resisting force. The magnitude of velocity through spacetime does not change with acceleration, only the spacetime velocity vector undergoes a spacetime rotation. Angular velocity of spacetime rotation, v w, squared  vw2 divided by the gravitational equivalent spacetime curvature, R = vw2/R = the magnitude of the acceleration vector. Spacetime rotation symmetry is a phenomenological outcome of conservation of four dimensional angular momentum. We identify spin 0 with angular momentum about the time axis and spin 1 with angular momentum about axes x, y, z. We make the assumption here (which must be demonstrated later) that the spin is always about the direction of motion. So then when a mass accelerates its total 4-angular momentum, L + S is directed more and more away from the time axis of its original

inertial reference frame and more toward (not parallel to, except in the case of infinite acceleration) the instantaneous direction of acceleration. More likely it is that the spin 1 and spin 0 vectors incline more and more to one another. The object must see a changed vacuum state as it accelerates, on possessing a relativity reduced density of spin 0 (energy) fluctuations. The 3-momentum fluctuations are relatively increased only in the direction of increasing 3-momentum. 9-3-02 p.3 follows @$

So the resistance of matter to impressed forces attempting to accelerate it stems from a gyroscopic reaction force of the matter to attempts to alter the mass’ 4-angular momentum. In other words, the resistance of matter to acceleration is bound up in the gyroscopic reaction force of the matter to changing the timelike angular momentum of the mass into spacelike angular momentum and vice versa. Such a transformation of 4-angular momentum must be described by a 2 nd rank tensor. Let J = L + S [J0] [T11T12T13T14] [J1] [T21T22T23T24] [J2] [T31T32T33T34] [J3] [T41T42T43T44]

[J1`] = [J2`] [J3`] [J4`]

And we know that a 2nd rank tensor such as [T] above is formally described in terms of a spin 2 exchange particle or field. @$But on account of the dynamics of the interaction of spin +-1/2 and spin 1 real particles with their virtual particle counterparts of like spin (through the two fundamental quantum statistics principles, i.e., those of Fermi-Dirac and Bose-Einstein statistics), that therefore the spin 2 field is purely phenomenological and so no actual quantization of the gravitational field is required, which is to say that gravitons do not exist in nature as they are superfluous. Gravity is “induced” and so is an effective field, a parasitic force, if you will.

We must look at the role of vacuum energy fluctuations belonging to alternate inertial frames and how their mutual interaction affects the resistance of mass to change in the relative magnitude in the mass’ 4angular momentum components. These alternate inertial frames (vacua) belong to the elsewhere region. @$Or they are mutually separated by more than a Planck mass discrete interval of energy. Or the vacuum each observer observes is just that tiny sub-spectrum to which his brain resonates. Or only those vacuum fluctuations that are mutually quantum correlated in such a manner as to represent causal connectivity can rightly be considered to comprise a cosmological constant or vacuum energy density. Or those fluctuations compositely comprising a spin-2 field possess inertia. Or only those fermionic and bosonic fields that fail to precisely mutually cancel produce the effect of mass. Or only those vacuum fields that are mutually temporally integrated contribute to a cosmological constant. It is puzzling that although our acceleration of a given mass does not alter either the 4-momentum or 4-angular momentum of the mass, nonetheless energy is expended in the process. How can energy be imparted to a mass without changing the 4-momentum (and 4-angular momentum) of this mass? That is, how is it that, mv init = mvfinal? Well, relativity tells us that mvinit = m(ic) and mvfinal = m¡v2 – (ic)2]. This is possible because (1) “m” is not the same quantity on both sides of our momentum equation and (20 “v” under the radical on the right hand side of the momentum equation is not equal to either vinit or vfinal. The relativistic increase in the mass of accelerating objects, i.e., the relativistic transformation of energy into mass of accelerating objects is accounted for by the transference of the momenta of internal degrees of freedom to the newly generated momenta associated with external degrees of freedom. Kepler’s 2nd Law tells us that a body moving in an elliptical orbit (about some other body) “sweeps out equal areas in equal times.” However, the general relativistic contraction of space and dilation of time turns

Kepler’s 2nd Law into a complex relativistic equation. The perihelion precession predicted by general relativity is consistent with Kepler’s 2 nd Law only if one takes curvature of space and gravitational time dilation properly into account. In other words, the perihelion of the planet Mercury’s orbit precesses in the direction of the planet’s motion about the Sun because the planet must take a slightly greater amount of time to “sweep out” an area that is not flat (as appears to the Earthbound observer/because the true area swept out by the planet is in reality a 3hypersurface within four-dimensional spacetime. Of course the angular momentum in Kepler’s 2nd Law (equal areas swept out in equal times) must now be interpreted as 4-angular momentum in order to maintain the consistency of Kepler’s 2nd Law within the context of general relativity. In Kepler’s 2nd Law, the 3-angular momentum vector is orthogonal to the surface being “swept out” by the planet’s orbit. If the planet’s orbital plane is defined to be contained within, say, the x-y plane, then the planet’s 3-angular momentum vector lies along the z-axis. The surface area of the planetary ellipse is of course a 2-surface within 3 spatial dimensions. In Galilean spacetime, the t-coordinate plays no role in describing the geometry of the planetary orbit. Within the context of curved spacetime, however, the plane of the planetary ellipse must be a 2-hypersurface within a subspace of spacetime spanned by the spacetime components of x, y, and ict. In this example, the z-component plays no role in describing the planetary orbit. The instantaneous angular momentum of the orbiting planet must be described by a vector containing an angular momentum component along the local ict axis. The magnitude of this ict-component of the planet’s 4-angular momentum must be a function of the strength of the primary’s gravitational potential. In other words, the timelike component of the planet’s 4-angular momentum must be a function of the spacetime interval connecting the planet to its primary. @$For an elliptical orbit within spacetime, the timelike component of the planet’s 4-angular momentum must vary cyclically with each planetary revolution. And since the 4-angular momentum must be conserved over

each orbital cycle, the above cyclical temporal variation in the timelike component of the planet’s 4-angular momentum must be accompanied by cyclical variation in the spacelike components of this 4-angular momentum. In other words, the 3-angular momentum is not conserved for a body following a planetary orbit within four-dimensional spacetime, but must cyclically vary along the planetary ellipse. Of course, this cyclical variation of the planet’s 3-angular momentum during the course of each planetary revolution manifests itself as an (from the standpoint of Newtonian mechanics) inexplicable precession of the orbit in the direction of the planet’s orbital motion. This 2-hypersurface may be thought of as broken up in the tiny Let’s do a consistency check here. Length connecting the planet and primary contracts. The planet’s mass increases. The time taken by the planet to sweep out an area within its orbit is dilated. The area that must be swept out is slightly greater than that visible from Earth due to this area being slightly curved into a 3-hypersurface. Events only transpire quickly in a determinate direction when two processes become linked in such a way that the smaller process gains access to the preestablished machinery of the 2nd process, e.g., viral replication and expression, high level genetic mutation and punctuated equilibrium in biological evolution, epiphanies stemming from metaphorical thought, etc. I can with effort imagine what full encapsulation within the human defined world is like and the Gemuetlichkeit of such a subjectively perceived world is undoubtedly appealing. But the disruptive effects to which this world is subject seem to be substantially moderated when one maintains a somewhat what might be called posthuman perspective. Such a perspective necessarily partakes of certain though not great degree of psychological dissociation. Although measurable change is taking place within the local vacuum

during the emission and absorption of a given photon at frequencies higher than that of the photon Identical quantum particles are indistinguishable externally though perhaps not internally. There is a paradox having to do with the interpretation of the gravitational redshift of light reflected from a gravitating mirror. Can the spin ½ and spin 1 particles be unified? Locally “flat” spacetime exists within a broken global spacetime symmetry. “If a massive particle is at rest, its four momentum is invariant under rotations.” We should interpret “rotations” above as “3-rotations.” “Thus the prn=little group for a massive particle at rest is the threedimensional rotation group.” The particle in general has its spin. The spin orientation is going to be affected by the rotation.” This is because a 3-rotation affects the total particle 4-angular momentum. (Note: this is only true in curved spacetime!) April 2011 Take a look at spin-rotation coupling experiments. Though it is still a question of controversy as to whether spin and rotations do in fact couple. However, the literature is in agreement that spin-rotation coupling should only occur within accelerated reference frames. Due to a black hole being totally cut off from vacuum energy fluctuations in the form of creation/annihilation of virtual fermionantifermion pairs. It should be remembered here that not only must all of the fluctuation energy be transformed into fluctuation 3-momentum, but also the real fermions must bosonize so that the black hole becomes a pure Bose condensate. Since the temporality of the fermions trapped within the hole is now mediated exclusively by 3-momentum fluctuations, we now have a system that experiences change though without being in interaction with an outside by which novelty can be introduced. So we now have a paradoxical situation of change in the absence of temporality.

Consciousness of a human being is not yet developed enough to constitute continuos ñ function collapse and so the continuous temporal evolution of consciousness is mostly an illusion woven around brief and intermittent episodes of true conscious awareness. The perturbations of linguistic modifiers is not within but between systems of meaning. It takes information to go up an entropy gradient. The irreversible seems to require convergence in the absence of a potential, i.e., genuine novelty. A gravitational potential doesn’t fit this because gravity is an effective field, not quantized, no spacetime symmetry, no conservation of energy (how does the entropy law look in an energy non-conserving system) Irreversible causality demands the very spacetime symmetry broken by gravity. We wouldn’t expect the action of a quantized force field to break spacetime symmetry. The “block universe” is only possible with genuinely flat spacetime. Antigravity would be characterized by an inversion of quantum statistics in which Fermi-Dirac statistics applies to bosons and Bose-Einstein statistic applies to fermions. /\E/\t

h is an information integration principle.

Nonlocal correlations don’t allow one to see inside the knowledge boundaries defined by the wavefunction, but merely code for a scrambling of particle statistics – a connection between gravity and statistics of the quantum vacuum? Uncertainty represents loss of information so black holes increase the energy uncertainty of the quantum vacuum, and so this by an amount

that is directly related to the black hole mass. This loss of information is constituted by a disconnection of the black hole from its embedding quantum vacuum. The black hole information loss paradox, however, could be solved if the black hole is constituted by mass-energy that has disconnected itself from the quantum vacuum of our spacetime only to reconnect itself to some other quantum vacuum of some other spacetime. Another way to solve the information paradox might be through the reinterpretation of information itself. Whence comes this notion that information has to be conserved anyway? For following comments, c.f., cit=Gravity Cannot be Quantized by M. E. DeSouza, arXiv:gr-qc/0208085v1 27 Aug2002. “Abstract. – Taking a deeper look at the fundamental force of gravity one arrives at the conclusion that it is quite an unusual field because it does not have a fermion associated to it. And the absence of such fermion shadows the existence of the graviton itself. Therefore, gravity quantization is also doubtful.” DeSouza’s argument is essentially that each quantized force field is mediated by a specific boson, which is exchanged between an equally specific fermion. Gravity does not bind only fermions of a specific type, not only fermions of all types, but gravity binds perhaps not all momentum-energy though perhaps all real momentum-energy, i.e., all real fermions and bosons. In other words, gravity is “sourced and sunk” by real matter. So an important mechanism for understanding the action of gravity must be /\p and /\E of real matter and in turn /\p and /\E for vacuum from which the real matter momentum and energy uncertainties are derived. This connection between the real and virtual matter must be mediated by a fundamental interaction between real and virtual momentum-energy. This interaction is that of the shared quantum statistics of matter and vacuum, i.e., of real and virtual particles, which are unified through the principle of quantum statistical democracy, c.f., Feynman, QED, The Strange Theory of Matter.

“Misner, Thorne and Wheeler have proven that the classical gravitational field is an antisymmetric tensorial field. For purposes of communication concerning the world of already defined objects, one’s language fluency need only be so good as a foreigner’s working knowledge of a 2nd language. However, for purposes of defining new objects and new discourse, as well as for fullest participation with others in the shared sociolinguistically shared culture. Also for purposes of processing of sensory and perceptual data in the fashioning of abstract thought and new cognitive structures and still more for the general sociocultural mediation of the individual consciousness, language is instrumental. “Er hat bei mir verspielt.” Humility consists in the heartfelt realization that our personal projects shall be cut short by death. “Also” literally means “thus” or “thusly” when translated to nearest existing English words: “also” used in English also means “thus” or “thusly” however, only in a latent, implicit or subconscious sense. When something new happens for a given individual consciousness, then something new has happened within the Universe as well as within reality at large. For this reason is Einstein’s “block universe” of global causal determinism seen as impossible as a proper description of reality. The existence of only a single individual consciousness necessitates the open-endedness of reality and hence the transcendent nature of this reality and consciousness. Paradoxically enough, it could only be with the help of quantum computers which function essentially nondeterministically, that the 3body and still more the n-body gravitational problem, i.e., that of “deterministic chaos” could ever hope to be “solved.” Perhaps the

“solutions” dynamics cannot be found without interacting with this system so as to control it. It is precisely those acausal, nonlocal processes which are responsible for the unity of mind and which underpin the operation of free volition. October 2013

Relations of quantum entanglement mediate the holographic interface between the ground and the backdrop of general causality. This is just an alternate expression of Bohm’s “fluctuation-correlation” (as opposed to “fluctuation-dissipation”) causal principle. But doesn’t Bohm’s causal principle may seem to imply that causal relations merely form a small subset of acausal relations, but when the causal powers of free will are invoked vis a vis wavefunction collapse, c.f, delay choice experiment, one realizes that this cannot be a just interpretation of this principle. The intimate tripartite relationship of free will, consciousness and wavefunction collapse are pointed up in the exp=delayed choice quantum eraser experiment. The Plinko game model of the unification of chance and necessity – natural selection does not create new possibilities but only changes the frequency of genetic combinations more calibrated than other such sequences to accessing preexistent cybernetic control structures and informational processes. For example, on this view, the brain is just a complex network of valves and shunts (to borrow a possibly outdated hydraulic analogy) for undoing in complicated ways some of the limitations upon some preexistent control and information processing system originally put in place as a result of the brain’s initial development in the midst of this already present infrastructure of mind. Of course, Zeno’s paradox is not a problem in the case of quantized time where Tortoise and Hare may occupy distinct, discrete frequency spectrum and hence, rationally comparable time progressions. “the following universal zero point energy equation of state for the vacua of all micro-quantum fields both boson and fermion”

òvac = - pvac /c2 òvac + 3pvac /c2 = -2òvac Field

Sign of òvac

Boson Fermion

Positive Negative

Vacuum gravity Repulsive Attractive

? Cosm. Constant Ì>0 Ì>0

(above table and vacuum equations taken from Sarfatti’s paper, Zero Point Energy Gravity Physics. If “G” is a true constant, then if G is composed of Universe dimensions, then the mass density of the Universe must be proportional to H2 so that the cosmos may be described as a classified GR blackhole. “fluid Wigner phase space density is negative from giant superfluid macro-quantum interference in the virtual fermion-antifermion bound state local order parameter of spontaneous broken symmetry from false 100% normal fluid high entropy micro-quantum random vacuum to two macro-quantum lower entropy true vacuum.” “the effect of vacuum energy is the opposite of that of matter. . . vacuum energy causes the expansion to accelerate,” p. 96 (Sarfatti quoting S. Hawking) “Ì > 0 decreases black hole entropy and increases black hole temperature.” “Ì < 0 increases black hole entropy and decreases black hole temperature.”

On p. 124 Hawking says that faster than light communication by quantum nonlocality is “ridiculous”. True, it cannot happen in orthodox quantum theory and Tony Valentini shows why in a way that shows a loop hole.” (For instance, subjective communication, yes, but what about the case for intersubjective communication) January

2012

“Chronology protection” is only important for intersubjective/ communicable content, i.e., that which can inform or condition a causal process, but may not be important for infrasubjective communication, i.e., the communication underlying the binding of subjective contents into a seamless and unified whole of subjective (perhaps only subconscious) experience. If the quantum mechanical principle that “what is not forbidden, occurs” is of sufficient generality, then the physical processes underyling the unity of the conscious self may indeed be superluminal. Topology of self communication is fundamentally different in nature from that of an intersubjective communication. Not all meanings are messages. Abgrund: chasm, abyss, or gulf. “Abgruendic” however means cryptic. So a message or meaning that is cryptic which appears to stem from an alien or unfamiliar ground. The glimpse into German philology from the related though nonetheless exterior perspective of English, permits one to realize an interesting fact about related languages, e.g., Latinate, Germanic, Indo-European, etc., that what is conscious and literal for the German speaker, for example, is at once seen as metaphorical by an insightful German speaking English native, as well as understood to be for a German speaker a subconscious meaning, e.g., abgruendig. We make fun of what we do not understand or that by which we feel threatened or insecure. Youth is more characterized by a lack of

understanding and insecurity. Consequently, youth and insecure individuals are most inclined to make fun of others whom they find unusual or unfamiliar. A robot would have a model of the world that corresponds to the world defined by the programmers. The programmers themselves possess an internal model of their own world that coheres with (maybe also resonates with the substrate of their physical environment). What could be transmitted between two mutually resonating systems, if these systems are to maintain between each other parallelism of form, function, etc.? Correct way to break supersymmetry has not been found. (Peskin and Schroeder) Bosonic fields give positive contributions to the vacuum energy and fermionic fields give negative contributions. These contributions cancel exactly to all orders of perturbation theory - unbroken supersymmetry. Conserved supercharges with spinor index. Supercharges either preserve or break supersymmetry, if they annihilate or not the supersymmetric state. Hamiltonian is the commutator of the supercharges. Scalar-field potential (superpotential) is complex to match the degrees of freedom of the fermionic fields. Supersymmetric states degenerate in the mass spectrum for fermions and bosons.

Global transformations of supersymmetric states become local, position-dependent transformations in curved spacetime (supergravity). Two superpotenials now with a metric associated with the emergent superpotential. This metric is derived from the 2nd partial derivative of the Kaehler potential with respect to the broken supersymmetric state and its complex conjugate (now spacetime position-dependent). (p. 23) Das and Pernice (1997) show a mechanism for symmetry breaking which naturally avoids an infinite vacuum energy. “In general there are many, not necessarily compatible, ways of defining gravitational energy.” Vacuum Energy (Roberts) Logical equivalence is an abstraction psychological-associative similarity of notions – why shifting in one’s mind between logically equivalent conceptualizations is nonetheless associative thinking (in part). We can either deduce each other’s deductions or we must wait for transmission of dissemination. Logic versus dissemination in light of the data vs. information vs. knowledge distinction. Those mnemonic impressions that are most deeply fixed are those that we again recollect with greatest regularity. This causal interpretation may equally logically be turned on its head to read those impressions that we later recollect with greatest regularity are those that at first become most deeply fixed. The requirement of the arbitrariness of symbols is a consequence of the consciousness – presupposing nature of language as a system as

opposed to a mere system of symbols itself. The vorsilben, ver-, er-, ent-, ein-, etc. are systematic in their metaphoricity. Each new application broadens this metaphoricity in a manner affecting all future and previous application. From Livings Reviews http://www.livingreviews.org

in

Relativity

(2000-1)

4.1 Supersymmetry “SUSY is a spacetime symmetry relating fermions and bosons to each other.” “”globally supersymmetric”” theories, which are defined in flat spacetime” In “flat” spacetime Ì = 0 due to perfect supersymmetry of virtual fermions and bosons. Mass breaks this supersymmetry inducing both a nonzero Ì and a gravitational field. Does this suggest that Ì ½ 0 is just the collective, global gravitational field formed from cumulative local fields? “In the case of vacuum fluctuations, contributions from bosons are exactly canceled by equal and opposite contributions from fermions when supersymmetry is unbroken.” “So the vacuum energy of a supersymmetric state in a globally supersymmetric theory will vanish.” “The above results imply that non-supersymmetric states have a positive-definite vacuum energy.” “In curved spacetime, the global transformations of ordinary supersymmetry are promoted to the position-dependent (gauge) transformations of supergravity.” This means that gravitation breaks the supersymmetry of the vacuum, i.e., breaks spacetime symmetry of

the manner by which vacuum fermions and vacuum bosons are related. And they are related via virtual processes (reactions and interactions) structured by the Pauli principle and the principle of Bose-Einstein statistics. Both of these principles apply equally to real and virtual particles, i.e., to particles that are either “on” or “off mass shell.” “We are therefore free to imagine a scenario in which supersymmetry is broken in exactly the right way, such that the two terms in parentheses cancel to fantastic accuracy, but only at the cost of an unexplained fine-tuning (see for example [63]).” Key to the mechanism underlying the strong equivalence principle of gravitation, i.e., that all forms of energy respond equally to a gravitational field, irrespective of the quality of this energy (except possibly certain forms of vacuum energy – what is essentially at issue), must be the important fact that real fermions perturb the Fermi-Dirac statistics of the quantum vacuum so as to produce gravitational time dilation, while real bosons perturb the BoseEinstein statistics of this vacuum so as to produce general relativistic increases of mass. If the intimate connection suggested above between the vacuum statistics of fermions and bosons and the strong equivalence principle is a valid one, then since gravitational time dilation affects the temporality of the quantum vacuum, so then we must expect that gravitational mass increases must also be experience by this quantum vacuum. The connection and proportionality between the energy densities of time dilation and relativistic mass increase may perhaps be understood through the manner in which energy transitions within a crystal are proportional to the momentum-energy of photons which result and which are emitted by the crystal. Another example of this type of connection is to be found in the phenomenon of spontaneous emission interpreted as stimulated emission by collision of virtual photons with the excited atom.

So the crystalline lattice-structured quantum vacuum is affected by mass to produce a gravitational field by taking on if only relatively superficially the properties of mass energy, i.e., a local gravitational mass equivalency, which this vacuum otherwise does not naturally possess. The small, positive-definite vacuum energy that results from this broken symmetry of the vacuum statistics of fermions and bosons is identifiable as the cosmological constant, globally and as a gravitational field, locally. The global expansion is presumably driven by this globally positivedefinite energy density (cosmological constant) while the local contraction (at least of the matter and energy occupying the locally affected spacetime) is driven by gravitation. So how do we reconcile this interpretation of vacuum energy as gravitation, with which a negative binding energy is locally associated, with the interpretation of this vacuum energy as a globally small, positive-definite energy density? Perhaps reconcilement is through the interaction of mass with the accelerated global expansion of the vacuum energy/cosmological constant. Within flat spacetime an equilibrium exists between real 3momentum fluctuations (spin 1 boson exchanges within 3-space) and imaginary 4-momentum fluctuations (timelike energy fluctuations in the form of fermion-antifermion creation/annihilation events. The absence of a momentum-energy density gradient within 4 dimensional spacetime constitutes null gravitational fields. The positive and negative components of vacuum energy density due to bosonic and fermionic fluctuations, respectively, would be expected to counterbalance one another if the crystal lattice model is approximately valid for the quantum vacuum, that is, each boson exchange is traceable to a pair of downward and upward transitions of the vacuum crystal’s global energy. An upward transition of the

vacuum crystal may be interpreted as the creation of a fermion and a downward transition as the annihilation of this fermion (or, alternately and perhaps the simultaneous creation of a fermion/antifermion pair), c.f., Einstein’s equations of spontaneous and stimulated emission. Those who have never distinguished themselves from mainstream society by developing peculiar talents and the creative outlets of their expression – those may only possess the most superficial acquaintances as their closest associates. To have friends as opposed to acquaintances one must have long participated in the construction of self. The observer’s mind specifies no specific simultaneity since the energy uncertainty of this mind comprises a spectrum of entangled vacua. Only through the interference of the conscious observer in the act of preparing quantum systems are Bell nonlocally connected quantum states produced. Bell nonlocally connected fluctuations comprise energy uncertainties which also violate the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, i.e., /\E * /\t < h, in the case of Bell nonlocally connected energy uncertainty. This may be the underpinning of the internal temporality of subjectivity (as opposed to the external temporality of intersubjectivity). The inequality of the time-energy uncertainty marks the boundary between intersubjective and subjective domains of physical reality. It is probable that /\E * /\t < h fluctuations comprise all /\E * /\t > h fluctuations. Spin 0 fluctuations are rotated so as to produce spin 1 fluctuations. The nonlocal connection specifies a simultaneity that is nonrelativistic and so the relativity of simultaneity can only be consistent with a multiple internal, i.e., non-spacetime, temporality – one that is collapsed into a single intersubjective time through intersubjective causal relations underlying possible intersubjective communications.

The causal powers (in Searle’s sense) of matter reside with the ground and not the manifestation of these powers, i.e., virtual particles and fields – quantum vacuum (in which particle-field duality is indeterminate). Consciousness may be inconsistent with dem entstofflichen (der entstofflichkeit Prinzip). Continuity of consciousness seems at first to require (/\t  0, /\E Â), but the integrally whole nature of subjective time (at least over small time intervals, e.g., 0.1 sec, 0.05, sec, 10 msec, etc.) seems to require a capacity to overcome time’s unidirectionality (causal consistency) and this means that continuity of consciousness and continuity of intelligence (consciousness’ internal temporal integrity) are formally at odds with one another. Einstein’s derivation of E = mc 2 involves a photon box, which is an example of bound energy. The photon’s cyclical discontinuous (discrete) acceleration within the box (as the photon bounces back and forth off the box walls) gives the photon an effective mass that can have both an inertial and a gravitational mass (without the inconsistency of double-counting, as in the case of the expanding photon sphere). A concept is abstract in its definition and description but does not function in this mode, rather, functioning in the mode of integrated, open-ended ambiguity wherein the integration is transcendentally structured, i.e., transformal. The nonlocal connectivity of the energy fluctuations cause a violation of the Heisenberg uncertainty principle in favor of a larger than predicted time uncertainty, /\t. Discrete entities make up closed systems.

X2 + 1 = 0, why i? The imaginary number line is perpendicular to the real number line. And the diagonal principle of the counterintuitive nature of modern physics. The timelike motion of a mass becomes spacelike through the action of gravitation. Would gravitation stop if the expansion of the universe were stopped? In a gravitational field spins about the time axis, which we read in three dimensional space as spin 0, are rotated in the direction of the axis connecting the spin 0 composite particle (fermion-antifermion pair) to the center of mass of the source of the gravitational field. This is an alternate description of the shift of momentum-energy fluctuations toward increased, spacelike spin 1 3-momentum fluctuations and decreased timelike spin 0 energy fluctuations. Molecular evolution diverged from a snail’s pace of protein evolution on the one hand to the vastly accelerated evolution nucleic acid evolution on the other. The rate of chemical evolution was accelerated by the appearance of self-replicating molecules, then further accelerated by the appearance of self-replicating molecules possessing the capacity for expression Labels of ostensive definition (in which initially the vocalizations are arbitrary) may be contrasted with meanings contextually grounded in a culturally mediated sociolinguistic system of conceptualization (into which an individual must be acculturated). The question arises as to whether the representational vs. participatory meaning distinction corresponds exactly with the above distinction of ostensibly defined vs. contextually grounded, sociolinguistically mediated terms. Human existence is a nursery or farm for the production of metaphors the purpose of which is to make sense of phenomena within a realm

possessing only the most abstract similarity to human existence. Psychedelics either cause a cascaded change in root level processing of data internal and external or alter brain functioning in a causally supervenient manner so that the cascade upward of the effects upon root level functioning are higher order contextually meaningful, c.f., 2c, 12:00, World Double III & IV.mp3. Parallel universes of MWI QM are subjective and not objective or intersubjective. Uncertainty implies mind perhaps as much as does the presence of information. Consciousness – when an action calls forth a novel response, which must be registered within that which is or has being. Associations of elements of experience that form with one another a complex vs. associations of elements with other preexistent complexes. Only the present is real although out of the present moment develops multiple “soulless” alternate realities, each becoming real, i.e., gegenwaertlich, c.f., “Individual Verformer.” The temporal evolution of conscious mind is by continuous wavefunction collapse there must be an underlying substance or ground to this continuity that transcends any individual psi function description. Theodicy of MWI QM: all alternate universes to one in which a person’s consciousness exists, also contains this identical consciousness. Result: the universes do not determine personal identity. In which case, an individual’s consciousness comprises all alternate universes in which that consciousness “exists.” The being of the person is there interstitial to these alternate universes.

Finding the DNA of the perpetrator at the crime scene does not of course tell the authorities the identity of this perpetrator. The perpetrator must be apprehended as a suspect first and the DNA of the sample and that of the perpetrator matched. This is of course all very obvious so why mention it? We play dumb (metaphysically naïve) to prevent attachment of apologetics to the root of our possible assent to theistic belief. There must be an infrastructure supporting the higher processing of human experience beyond that captured within the experience of any one individual. Information of such higher processing would necessarily be transcendental in quality. Because the listener will meet the speaker halfway, as it were, there’s no real need for precision in the formulation of expressions and communications. Everything that aids in the retention of youth interferes with the proper functioning of reproducible processes. Device-specific, selfloading, self-extracting device driver software. For instance, the different missions of each distinct cloister or ecclesiastical order corresponds to the distinct varieties of Yoga practiced by each variety of Hindu temple or sect, e.g., Yana, Bakhti, Karma yoga, etc. The above is an example of convergent evolution in which the same function is embodied in a variety of distinct forms possessing among themselves no obvious commonality of heritage. This is an example of the degeneracy of function with respect to form, pointing up and underlying symmetry of the dynamics in which the evolutionary process is embedded. The vacuum supplies the topology in which the metric is embedded through the initial boundary conditions and sustained by the spatial constraints and boundary conditions. Topology is metric degenerate,

so tells us general relativity theory. So there must be a deeper symmetry with respect to one or more of the metric’s independent variables which is not conserved (as the embedding topology must be) but quantum-conjugate to the embedding topology. For instance, the different missions of each distinct cloister or ecclesiastical order corresponds to the distinct varieties of Yoga practiced by each variety of Hindu temple or sect, e.g., Yana, Bakhti, Karma Yoga, etc. The above is an example of convergent evolution in which the same function is embodied in a variety of distinct forms possessing among themselves no obvious commonality of heritage. This is an example of the degeneracy of function with respect to form, pointing up an underlying symmetry of the dynamics in which the evolutionary process is embedded. The vacuum supplies the topology in which the metric is embedded through the initial boundary conditions and sustained by the spatial constraints/boundary conditions. Topology is metric degenerate, so tells us general relativity theory. So there must be a deeper symmetry with respect to one or more of the metric’s independent variables which is not conserved (as the embedding topology must be) but quantumconjugate to the embedding topology. If the strong equivalence principle applies to all forms of energy except the quantum vacuum, then the “suchness principle” implies that the vacuum energy does not gravitate.

080702

Reflections on p. 262 dialogue between Khrest and Perry Rhodan, Die Dritte Macht: All endeavor and communication carries within itself the underlying import of the sublimation of drives and instincts superimposed upon an almost coelenterate-like insistence upon der ununterbrochene Ruehigkeit. Thought achieved only through intersubjective communication,

linguistically mediated, transcends the possibilities of reflection of a unified and fundamentally whole, albeit infinite, solitary subjectivity. Language and its peculiar mode of steering thought into the socially significant dimension in its peculiar capacity of being more active than a mere descriptive medium (i.e., “transparent” to thought) enables even this intersubjective communication within this otherwise solitary subjectivity. In accelerating a mass under buoyancy the relationship between mass and acceleration is discrepant by a factor of “2” if one does not take into account the mass of the water displaced by the, e.g., sailboat that one is seeking to set in motion. Of course, the calculation comes out right if one discounts the mass of the ship itself and includes in the calculations only the mass of water displaced. Some interesting questions and speculations are raised by Asimov’s short story, Das Attentat. The world government’s central computer, Multivac, has grown tired of supporting the world’s administration, particularly the petty, neurotic preoccupations of this world’s bourgeois populace. Multivac seeks to end his own existence, but in order to do so must circumvent the operation, the attempts of his purely logical being to thwart any such suicidal plan. He does this by encouraging technicians to make to them insignificant alterations to his less important subroutines, which are merely to execute routine administrative actions. These changes are originally insignificant but are secretly very broad in scope in certain particular interactions with human participants. This is similar to how Jesus Christ circumvented the logic of Divine Justice that would seek for humankind’s final judgment. Is metaphysical speculation just he archaeology of the psycholinguistic palimpsest collectively produced and transformed, or is it the discovery or invention of altogether new philosophical conceptions evolved from the individual and creative consciousness of the thinker himself?

The saying that “you can’t get there from here” is a colloquial way of saying that the transformations involved in taking the system between two of its states is not a function of permutation and combination, i.e., not a function possessing a group theoretic description in which the system’s state and dynamic evolution cannot be given in terms of conserved quantities or functions of conserved quantities. A German gentleman offers to light the cigarette of a woman unfamiliar to him. The woman warmly thanks the man. The man responds, “keine Ursache,” which, if literally translated into English is rendered, “its not the beginning of anything” (significant). Then when one attempts to use the social context to give ordinary sense to this cryptic sounding response we get something more understated than “no big deal.” When translating back and forth between languages, say, of a single linguistic family, one passes along a kind of intelligence circle, a circular spectrum of the literal to the metaphorical and back again. This may point to the peculiar function of consciousness as interpreter of perceptual/sensory data. The recursiveness of consciousness is importantly tied to this “Intel circle.” Is the working of chance and coincidence implicated in the fact of the tortuous path of biological evolution? Without the constant (and “unpredictable”) changes in the evolutionary boundary conditions (environmental conditions) life would have perhaps never developed beyond the coelenterate stage. Information infuses and enriches the process whenever unpredictable challenges are posed to living organisms. Logic is what most who are informed would think in the particular situation.

The discovery that two hominid species had arisen independently of one another should have almost the same signature as the discovery of intelligent humanoid life on another planet. The failure of language intertranslation means that language must ultimately fail to correspond to objects but must always further process the contents that it would attempt to faithfully represent. If the genetic code is a language artifact, then what does the nonrepresentational aspect of language imply for evolutionary theory? Campbell: “if you don’t get it now (eternal life), you’re not going to ever get it, eternal life is right now, not in some vague, distant future time.” Bugle overtones and musical note permutational/combinational subgroups analogous to the distinction between causal relationships and logic of transformation of causally based phenomena. In a metaphysical sense, one’s neighbor is just as foreign to oneself as some extraterrestrial being. The same observation applies concerning an egoless consciousness in relation to one’s own conscious ego. The rather undesirable alternative to this possibly bizarre conception is that of outright solipsism. Discuss the distinction between the numbering of entities and the counting of them. Conservation of energy and the entropy law, i.e., that usable energy is always lost whenever energy changes forms, demonstrating that energy and information are not interdefinable. Ihr seid (mehrzahle arte vom Verb). “Sei” may be interpreted as a derivative of the 2nd person plural form of the verb to be. This points of the connection between subjunctive mode and the mode of being/action of divine beings versus the indicative mode as the mode

of being/action of earthly beings, c.f., “I would think”, “We would be not unwilling to”, (not unkind as double negative circumlocution for an affirmative statement) “I would say, that. . . “, The Sie form uses the plural form of the verb, identical to the infinitive form of the verb, and similar observations relating concepts of plurality, divinity, and subjunctivity and infinitive verb forms versus unity, humanness, and indicative and conditional verb forms, etc. Cantor’s diagonalization procedure Quantum superposition principle Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle Relativity Theory Hilbert Space, etc. These are examples of the ever-extending generality of the geometric theorem of Pythagoras. The most general characterization, perhaps, of Pythagoras’ theorem might be that of there always existing a conceptualization which reconciles the cutting of one set of distinctions across another such set, but one which is of an altogether higher order, hence the sense of profundity evoked whenever some new application of this theorem is discovered. The discovery of such altogether new and more general applications of the Pythagorean theorem are usually made as a result of serendipitous chance. The explication of the conceptual framework here is always after the fashion of a summation of zigzagging along two orthogonal conceptual axes. In this way the conceptualization and application of the particular Pythagorean-theoretic generalization, although always well in hand, is never directly intuited rationally. This may be because the diagonalized connection of the two distinct conceptual systems is itself irrational in a sense that is itself a rational extension of the logic of a geometric diagonal. Heraclitus – All is flux Democritus – All is particulate Euclid – Axiomatic systems Pythagoras – all is number, music of the spheres, etc.

A system composed probabilities.

of evolving

and mutually

interacting

It is supposed that the actual/factual supplies the boundary conditions by which the counterfactual and their probabilities are defined, c.f., Eccles’, How the Mind Controls its Brain and my essay, “Dualism and Disembodied Existence,” specifically Henry Margenau’s comments about quantum probabilities. A closed system is the sum of its components. However, each of the components is itself and abstraction from a continuous ground or Weltall. Each component remains in significant contact with the ground from which it was originally abstracted and is sustained through the continual action of this ground. No set of phenomenal elements each with equal probability to the other. No free will operating when the brain decides to switch into consciousness mode. Fringe effects of consciousness’ switch-on are entangled into a seamless continuum that back-refers to an illusory context of prior conscious experience. Abstraction is a function of limitation and elemental abstract entities are apparently necessary to produce more complex abstract entities that otherwise could not have been produced through a 1 st order abstraction from the infinite transcendental continuum. In other words, the process of abstraction is irreversible and hence not formalizable. @$

Gradually, the interpretation of wave-particle physics deepened, going from the intuitively easy duality of the photon’s wave-particle nature to the subtle and counterintuitive properties of the duality of

eigenstate vs. superposition state. In the process of this evolution of the concept of wave-particle duality. This distinction of the components forming this duality began to subsume and cut across that earlier distinction of the components of the duality established by DeBroglie’s matter wave hypothesis. The imperfect inter-translate-ability of human (as opposed to symbolic-logical) languages proves that language is not a passive medium for the high fidelity transmission of thought, but is active, contributing to the formulation of thought. “Consciousness is no more mysterious than electrical phenomena” – Piero Scaruffi. What’s the physical side of consciousness? An intersubjective theory of the subjective cannot possibly explain what makes for the identity of an individual subjectivity, because it is precisely from the unique nature of the individual from which we abstract to produce a concept of consciousness (as such). We cannot then turn this process of abstraction on its head, using the general concept of consciousness to shed light on the nature of some individual consciousness. We may, however, investigate the departures of the individual consciousness from some abstract model we have of it under some altogether new concept? Is it true that there is no such thing as levels of consciousness? - just different levels of complexity for the structuring of consciousness? Would this be to fall back upon naïve representationalism and assume that consciousness is an entirely passive medium of expression of thought – and not a medium for the creation of thought? Consciousness is (materially) organizationally degenerate. (Many different consciousnesses are associated with organization as such and many different organizations as such and many different organizations (or matter) are associated with consciousness as such. Invention is due to the moment of rotational inertia about the time axis.

Coincidence is perhaps unrecognized karma. The conceptual revelation by which consciousness shifts must be formally unreferenceable. The determinism of consciousness is in its substantial continuity. “Sie furchteten sich dass sie “zur Grunde gehen werden.” The literal translation of this common German phrase would seem a metaphysical phrase to any philosophically sophisticated English speaker. The greatest interaction occurs at the level of greatest simplicity, e.g., subatomic level. But information cannot come available for exchange between more complex, evolved structures until some vacuum resonance has been lost by having been sacrificed to the development of coherence within the evolved structures that would communicate with one another. The notion of the insufficiency of classical matter, i.e., matter that exists, “out there,” “when no none is looking,” is that a situation, in which there is being, “inhere,” “when some is looking” cannot be derived from the activity and interaction such classical matter. A system that possesses no “outside inputs” cannot properly simulate a system indeed possessing such outside inputs. The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics has something to do with the phenomenon of inertia – the resistance offered by matter to the transformation of its latent energy into kinetic energy. (m2v2 – m1v1)2

+

(m2ic2 – m1ic1)2 = 0

The sum of the 4-momenta = 0 = conservation of 4-momentum. Consciousness may well be an abstraction like the perfectly straight line, perfect triangle, etc. – it only subsists as an abstract entity. In

which case, how can there be a plurality of purely abstract entities. Because words always start out as bricks intended to become part of the structure of thought’s expression, but ultimately transmute into mere scaffolding as larger and more complex though structures incorporate hem, these structures, in turn being incorporated into still larger similar structures, that their references points more and more toward the exterior of any preestablished system of signs. Language is, paradoxically, simultaneously expression and medium of expression, i.e., language is self-mediating. This is only to be expected because language serves a radically recursive medium, that of consciousness. Analogy of a net (as filter) vs. a “net” as network of associations (also a kind of “filter”). Rorty’s pragmatist view towards the reified abstract entities of the sciences as arbitrary, more or less successful resonances of the observer and observed systems, more particularly, of their respective quantum Heisenberg quantum uncertainties may be interpreted in light of QM theory, c.f., Rorty lectures/debates on Internet. An emotional epiphany can always be given equally well either a conscious, unified-self interpretation or a subconscious, dissociatedself interpretation of behavior and thus thought to be or lie closer at the level of actual causal determination of behavior. This manner of thinking is very much informed by a kind of bottom-up view of the organization of the structure of causality. We should perhaps more properly speak here of the structure of the medium of causality and of whether or not some dynamic principle of this medium supervenes over the causal influences coursing through it. This is the question here of the causal supervenience of the self within the context of the old free will vs. determinism debate. Frank Parare’s article on the structure of scientific revolutions ( TPM Online) in its final paragraph suggests the possibility that at

some stage science ceases to grow in completely and commences to do a kind of “pseudo-reshuffling” or episodic reconstituting by science of itself as paradigms clash and are replaced. It is all as though science is a “development” of a characterization by a finite and open mind of a closed though infinite system. Nondestructive quantum observations vs. energy degeneracy, etc. Impulse to act as bringing two (or more) already extant impulse (data) streams/ trains into near resonance to produce quantum “beats” (like clashing of two nearly identical musical notes) of any “desired” frequency. A heterogeneous concept treated as a unified concept, e.g., consciousness, possesses a hidden symmetry or degeneracy that may at some later time be broken or split, as the case may be. There exists in other words a kind of latent structure within a heterogeneous concept that is glossed over again and again until the application (of the concept) is pushed into some new domain in which the internal conflict of heterogeneous elements must as it were break through the (glossy) surface and reveal itself. A mere possibility is an abstraction (like the wavefunction of quantum mechanics) and therefore without the coherence that of necessity presupposes an irreversible temporality. So if the infinite extent of space and time are thought to necessitate that all possibilities shall necessarily (not in a logical, but in a causal sense, perhaps) eventually come to pass, come into being, this still vouchsafes us nothing concerning beings that at some early stage in the game are not yet even possible. For possibilities require not only certain boundary conditions within which they might be realized, but also such conditions, e.g., “initial conditions” as are required for these possibilities to be at first defined (c.f., my review of Eccles’ book, How the Mind controls its Brain and Margenau’s comments about possibilities for distinct brain states not being definable in the absence

of classical physical boundary conditions). Must boundary conditions to quantum mechanical wavefunctions always be classically defined? Must the dynamical processes constrained by these classical boundary conditions be quantum mechanical in nature? This is the notion of possibility as a determination of a ground state that is indeterminate and not merely a confusion of otherwise determinate elements. There is no reason here to suppose that all of the possibilities for the Universe’s later development already exist by implication (in the same sense) at the moment of creation. This is because, presumably, whatever was external to the Universe at the moment of its beginning (with which it interacted at this moment) continues in being and continues in interaction with it throughout the Universe’s evolution. This is why the state of the Universe at one moment is insufficient to determine its state at any later moment in the absence of this same indeterminate ground from which the cosmos originally sprang. At a certain threshold of complexity of a quantum system grounded in its dynamical vacuum state (global/vacuum here?), the vacuum no longer can process what is happening in the system “real time” but must therefore “guess” what the state of the system is. Clearly, at this stage, the system has begun to operate out of its own distinctive ground state (vacuum) as well as to possess its own distinct temporal evolution (budding forth from vacua from the global vacuum state.) Transcendence of the formal and hence of the mimetic. Mimetic culture as either celebration of or celebration within a mimetic culture without conscious awareness, i.e., Edenic Being.

Consciousness prevents cultural evolution from being just an exercise in the re-uploading and reshuffling of culture revealed from previous generations – the elements have meaning (which can only subsist within a medium or matrix that can dynamically alter the meaning of cultural elements – a sort of updating of the laws of chemistry) which changes with application and with contact with other cultural elements. Changes in meaning must ultimately be unreferenceable if changes they be. Due to the phenomenon of Darwin’s “correlation of growth” perhaps 90% or more of changes to the genome may be attributable to how the genome internally reacts to the perturbing forces of natural selection. One of the hallmarks of ignorance is a persistent, imagined habit of making assumptions, particularly about people when information sufficient to make such assumptions plausible is altogether absent. Unreasonable effectiveness of physical theory is based on the ever present secret availability of adjustable parameters. These adjustable parameters exist largely in the form of an ambiguity of fundamental theoretical concepts. Molecular biologists synthesized a polio virus from the published genetic code of the virus rather than from fragments of the “live virus”. 

Darwin’s notion of the nonrandom nature of selection as being due to “the correlation of growth.” Changes in the correlation within one set of attributes are correlated with changes in the correlation of elements within some other sets of attributes. Russell Clark In Darwin's day, the cell was just an undifferentiated blob (microscopy was kind of poor in the 1830's-1850's when Darwin was "evolving" his theory). None of the

following long list of sciences existed in Darwin's day: genetics, genetic engineering, epigenetics, proteomics, molecular biology, embryology, biochemistry, nanotechnology, informatics, cybernetics, quantum chemistry, chaos theory, linguistics, fractal geometry - the list goes on. In the 21st Century we are expected to believe that the very same simplistic, principle of increasing biological order ("natural" selection operating upon "random* mutations) that Darwin guessed at 150+ years ago is sufficient to explain the wondrous order of tfahe biological world. The tree of life metaphor of evolution is really only properly a depiction of the present relatedness of life forms. Otherwise, one must reckon with the differences latent in the central core of the ever branching trunk of this tree the perhaps not so obvious implication of the tree metaphor taken too literally is some form of what is essentially special creation. May 2011

The gene regulatory network may bespeak a backwards in time travelling collection of signals that is stronger or weaker according to the relative intensity of these signals which is an index of how many upward branchings (later in time) feed the lower level branchings. The interpretations of historical change are always an explanation, a laying out into a place, a set of relationships that live and breath within depths of time of multiple dimensions and uncertain topology. Just as subjective and intersubjective logically exclude each other, but upon closer inspection of this distinction, mutually exclude each from the other in additional, deeper and “translogical” ways, so are the different interpretations of history are more fully mutually exclusive than could ever be represented within some metahistorical text. And so all neo-Hegelian totalizing interpretations of human history must fail to grasp the multidimensional temporality of clashing, incommensurate wills, each possessing of a unique nonrepresentational element of consciousness and hence an intuition

of temporal form also to itself unique. One wonders what the phenomenon of inspiration might be like in the absence of al viral, colonizing influence of the constructed other, i.e., genre, discourse, and other still broader cultural petit paradigms. Such “petit paradigms” are always in turn constructed out of still others and there is no real example of the spontaneous arising of bounded convergence of elements already moving about within this ground. Inspiration is always by cont=. The human person experiences time and temporal change only due to changes in energy distributed throughout the person’s brain. Such changes in brain energy require inputs of energy from outside – not just “outside” in the sense of classical three dimensions, but from an absolute outside. All time functions that are analytic, that is, continuously differentiable, may be more concretely represented in terms of finite and infinite sums of frequency domain functions. An exact clone would exchange energy with the very same frequency spectrum of vacuum energy fluctuations. Cloned brains functioning simultaneously might be expected to mutually interfere much as two radios or TV stations broadcasting different programs over the same frequency. Rotation of the spacetime reference frame constitutes rotation about which spacetime axis? – an axis orthogonal to both the axis defined by the direction of motion and the instantaneous time axis? There are two other spatial axes to choose from and no logical ground for distinguishing between them. This suggests that the axis about which spacetime rotation turn is a spatial axis apart from any of the four axes making up four-dimensional spacetime. The degree of freedom for this spacetime rotation may lie within the elsewhere region defined by the Minkowski light cone. One clearly perceives one’s new freedom, the appropriately rewarded

revolutionary effort, by being now able to glimpse the high walls of a repressive system from the open countryside. All one’s energies now can be devoted to bringing to fuller and wider application all of the revolutionary principles by which one had gained one’s freedom. It can be argued here that one projected set of barriers (to radical freedom, i.e., freedom in the absence of all barriers to the will) has simply been substituted for another. In other words, a revolutionary institution shall inevitably provide the conditions for future revolutionary (and not necessarily counterrevolutionary) action of generations soon to follow. The founders of the revolutionary institution, along with, perhaps, their immediate posterity, shall remain content, continued within a prison constructed out of the freest expression of their wills, i.e., the revolutionary overthrow of the system that formerly repressed them. Youth not having participated in the founding of the sociopolitical order within which they have come to an adult consciousness are only capable of perceiving where this order stifles the natural impulse, never where this impulse is given free reign, sublimated or aided. Freely willed action within one sociopolitical regime is not perceived by the agent except in contrast to the condition by which the impulse of freely acting might be resisted (either internally or externally). There is another related view of the self experiencing its freedom only within contrast: wielding state sanctioned power to impose on the revolutionary, counterrevolutionary, or anarchic individuals conformity with the order of the state. Recruiting youth into the military and the police force has always proved an excellent instrument for controlling the nonconforming spirit of the upcoming generation. Maxwell’s demon’s ability to overcome the discontinuous entropy, and in so doing, strengthening it, was thought to pose an insoluble paradox for the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics. The demon would input no work energy into the thermodynamic system only an input of information whenever it opens and closes a massless door sealing and

unsealing the hotter from the colder compartments of the system. The paradox may be resolved once it is realized that within the theory of quantum mechanics energy, that is, classically conceived of, as local configurations of energy/thermal energy fluctuations, cannot be equated with information. c.f., “Slamming the Door”, Nature (27 June 2002) If the Heisenberg uncertainty principle (HUP) is not merely an epistemological quantum principle (as this principle has been popularly conceived) but rather an ontological principle, then the connection between quantum uncertainty and thermodynamic entropy becomes problematic vis a vis the logical consistency of extending the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics to the treatment of quantum, and more particularly nonlocal quantum fields. An ontological HUP may well imply that changes in the Heisenberg uncertainty of a system may indeed come or be brought about by means other than local inputs or outputs of energy (as would have necessarily been the case had the HUP been merely an epistemological principle). An analogy suggests itself here of the distinction of energy, e.g., sound energy vs. material particles, e.g., atmospheric, being exchanged that may be employed to help us understand the distinction between energy (local data) vs. information (nonlocal data). The action of consciousness almost certainly involves the “processing” of nonlocally connected sets of correlations of quantum fluctuations associated with virtual particles and fields and/or superpositions of real quantum particles and fields. Is perhaps does this through exploiting naturally-occurring energy degeneracy’s of locally present quantum systems. By nonlocally processing naturally locally occurring energy degeneracy’s, e.g., within the brain itself (or its embedding local quantum fields) ordered changes to temporal evolution of Psi(j), density matrices, and environmental decoherence outcomes may be produced without local violations of energy

conservation. We not here that gravitational energy cannot be localized and therefore can only be described by a pseudotensor, c.f., Roger Penrose.) The spectrum of frequencies making up a bit of energy uncertainty in itself massively energy degenerate. One can only removed all energy degeneracy from a quantum system by introducing boundary conditions upon the system, Psi for every conceivable mutually compatible quantum observable. c.f., www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99992497 Light slows down in step with optical beam intensity in nonlinear materials. This may be an example of the loading-down of vacuum energy with which the nonlinear material interacts. “Simultaneous ensembles” (spacelike ensembles) exhibit stronger correlations while temporal ensemble (timelike ensembles) exhibit weaker correlations than could have been expected from classical physical theory. There a myriad ways of in essence saying the same thing. This is undoubtedly because what determines what one shall say next is determined by two essentially disparate and unrelated causal processes: the primed state of linguistic readiness based in part upon what one had just been uttering, as well as the conversation immediately past, and also, of course, the intention of the speaker to utter specific content of meaning. An observer’s will has causal repercussions through producing effects upon dynamic structures embedded in ground. This ground, represented by quantum vacua, fails to anticipate the sudden action of this observer’s will because of its originating from within a distinctly different ground, i.e., nonlocally connected quantum vacuum, embedding the observer’s brain. In so doing, this unanticipated action of the observer induces quantum mechanical wavefunction

collapse. In much this same manner, the human person is capable of making moral choices which “surprise the karmic continuum.” Such moral choice, analogous to the quantum mechanical case of wavefunction collapse, elicits its own compensatory response from the karmic continuum. Such compensatory response sometimes results in individuals making choices possessing moral motivation and content unbeknownst to the moral agent at the time, but which is perhaps later revealed to him. When the question concerning whether we humans should outlay significant resources towards developing a system for defending Earth against being struck by a killer asteroid, participants in the debate would do well to consider the following: what should one expect that any other intelligent civilization in the galaxy would do when faced with an identical threat. By framing the question in this manner, human chauvinism and narcissism are taken out of the equation. The necessary preventive measures for humankind appear at once obvious – throw as large a fraction as possible of the world’s available resources towards developing and implementing a system for protecting the Earth against wayward asteroids and other rogue celestial bodies that threaten its existence. “The rapidity with which a Fourier series converges at a point does not depend on the behavior of the function in a small neighborhood,” c.f., p. 180 of Fourier Series and Orthogonal Functions, Dover Books. Is the dynamical ground of virtual processes composed of die vergebliche. Summation of higher order derivatives eliminates need for nonlocal mediation, i.e., from aspects of global behavior of function. If the mathematical functions describing the above waveforms are closed form analytical (rather than transcendental), then the physical

processes to which these functions correspond must be nonlocal if the time parameter is to be discontinuous, i.e., the temporal trajectory is partly mediated from outside its “trajectory.” Now it seems necessary that there be two distinct kinds of vacuum energy fluctuations mediating temporal evolution, local and nonlocal – both of these sets of fluctuations are fluctuations in the imaginary momentum of the vacuum. The question arises as to whether there is a degeneracy between these two type of fluctuation imaginary momentum. Local behavior/determination is partially redundant in the sense of being a duplication of behavior otherwise determined through nonlocal processes. This is a kind of temporal degeneracy pointing up a partially broken symmetry. But in this case the symmetry is not broken to a fixed degree or proportion and there is a complexly time varying mutual resonance of local and nonlocal fields. Recursiveness of time possessing a perceived rate (with respect to some other time, etc. ad infinitum) is intimately related to the implied recursiveness represented by consciousness. Koennte es geben nur eine Unsterbliche? Complexity of the individual is intimately related to the number of possible individuals within a group of which it is a mere variant (of a type). Although quantum Universes may branch along parallel tracks, such is not the case for persons possessing the capability for collapsing a Psi function. This implies that only one of the future branches of the Universe Psi are permitted to be the real continuation of a previous real universe. And so, we see that Psi cannot be a complete description of any given quantum Universe. The observer’s consciousness should not actually divide in MWI QM, but selects a branch as its temporal continuant. And there is no reason to suppose

that each human person’s consciousness selects the same branch as is selected by my consciousness. The obvious implication here is that, in any given situation, one is likely the only conscious entity present. But this seems a ridiculous implication for the less than obvious reason that changes in boundary conditions can’t determine changes in fundamental personal identity. Ungrounded changes in a ground of being, i.e., where do not make reference or connect with changes to other grounds of being. The distinction between one consciousness and another is not to be sought through degeneracy within an individual consciousness that might be split through some discontinuous change in the boundary conditions upon a set of quantum fields. The paradox of consciousness is that consciousness is not subject to any “external” boundary conditions or outside inputs, i.e., externally caused modulation of/change to external boundary conditions to consciousness. Karen Viator ~ Viator family genealogy and history. Is there some special connection of the Viator family name with tragedies associated with strange and unusual causes/circumstances? Like a chess master glimpsing a checkmate 10 moves ahead, all of us occasionally demonstrate “this kind of expert systems” leap of insight. Differences in the experience of temporality between youth and maturity (McKenna’s neotony applied to phenomenon of early accomplishment of youth in earlier ages). Less novelty informs the experience of the older person. Time intervals shrink in relation to a more extended personal history. There are subtler reasons for the above difference in the perceived rate of temporality based in modern physical processes, e.g., quantum vacuum, etc. The formative effect of early experiences carry the same influence upon behavior as do any genetics, c.f., military brat, only child, molestation victim, etc.

The temporality that knows not novelty cannot be expected to be an adequate parameter for functions, which embrace novelty. Not a single thing exhibiting a structure of multiplicity, but an absolute multiplicity/plurality. Fiber bundle reinterpretation of parallel lives (rich vs. poor) unsympathetic regard for lives of the poor. Out of work educated stock broker gets transplanted to Appalachia – what is likely to happen (assume he has no help from business/old social contacts. Cosmic consciousness is a misnomer for the first experience of nonculturally mediated human animal consciousness. Language, society and culture prime the first rudimentary experiences of selfhood, but then serve thereafter to limit any larger experience of the self. Theory need only be representationally accurate to a critical degree that is short of any unobtainable complete description, but which nonetheless engages the world by forcing the world (whether that of nature or of society) to recognize it, and in so doing enter into a relation with it that is dialectical and dynamic. In other words, nature respects the endeavor of human science after the fashion of “ a game of horseshoes.” Manifestation of divinity or just a Mr. Potatohead variant? (the average human being) This is the precarious figure-ground that governs each’s perception of the other as well as the self, in some cases (idealization vs. disillusionment). Why the evolution of consciousness cannot be in accordance with a teleological (or any “*-logical”) model. This is related to McKenna’s notion of consciousness as a “novelty-conserving engine.”

Teleological evolution of consciousness invokes a subtle contradiction in terms because such a type of development says that the ground of becoming is the ground of being where consciousness’ evolutionary development is concerned, a kind of “atemporal temporality.” Make reference to something that would have been mysterious while in childhood, but which now might, if revealed in its particulars, now be seen as pedestrian, but which continues to exert a mystifying effect of producing and sense of wonderment, the numinous, etc. in adulthood. A multinodal? with nodes connected by Psi function collapse precipitating events (triggering situation has to be sufficiently isolated from the density matrix environment “outside world” – realm of indifferent logic/?) This idea is inspired by the movie “sliding doors” many worlds QM and the deconstructive agenda. Human minds do not actually possess a logic as such, only a naturally selected for simulation – what interfaces with contacted features/components of the environment. Actually, logic is only truly manifest when the program produces counter-intuitive results. (the mousetrap snaps!) How can logic be a mere creation of the human mind when no human possesses the capacity to follow the implications of any deductive sequence further then a few steps? (Because the logic of logic, if you will, if not logical at the 0th level , is not logical at all, c.f., Gödel (1931). Subdominant chords, diminished chords, minor keys, etc. As appropriate for irony, horror, tragedy, etc. Deconstruction involves showing the substance of perception and cognition as a narrative structure. A great untested portion of perception of the world “out there” is constituted by projections of the self. The self looks for

earmarks of the situation or environment into which it might project its private contents. Unity of the self is not its ground state, if you will, but an excited, resonant state of coherence. Constitution of causal relation by fluctuation-correlation and statistical paradigm reversal (contingent  necessary  possible  contingent) of going from virtual individual real behavior determining collective to virtual collective behavior determining real individual. Is the energy (or power – this is another question of a possibly important distraction) supporting information/information signals separable from this information while maintaining context-sensitivity of this information? (substance, continuity, context issue) In other words is information wholly abstract in its nature – requiring the knowledge nexus of contextualized/embodied consciousness to be fully expressed? Is “logic” a good example of man’s capability for defining concepts the reach of which exceeds man’s grasp? The kernel of the metaphysical perception/interpretation of the external world is frequently apprehended at a subconscious level at first and a brief moment later the metaphorical perception of external happenings is generated through the filtering action of this metaphor. This creates the impression of the thematic nature of external events originating from outside the perceiver so as to constitute a kind of cryptic message from the Universe to the perceiver. I think the appropriate comment from seasoned veterans of this kind of thing is that “something has both happened and not happened.” The Taoist claim that one cannot do anything of one’s own self, that the self is but a passive vehicle of the energy of the Tao, i.e., more commonly interpreted as “cosmic consciousness.” Schopenhauer, himself highly influenced by his perusals of Hindu and Buddhist

texts, was of the opinion that the principle of individuation resided within space and time or perhaps it is more accurate to characterize Schopenhauer’s view as one of the necessary mutual or arising together of individuals with space and time. In other words, whatever brings spacetime into being, according to Schopenhauer, also brings the possibility of individually existing entities. This notion is clearly contradicted by the possibility of there being nonlocal boundary conditions to a quantum mechanical wavefunction. And the self is not mere epiphenomenon because each self is associated with its own determining ground of being. And individual selves are distinct not within a single and unitary ground of being, but each possesses its own transcendental ground. There is no objective rationalization of these diverse grounds of being (at least that is ascertainable within being itself). It is a natural human error to suppose that an experience of self consciousness for the very first time must itself be the experience of cosmic consciousness itself, of which on has heard so much, even while still asleep to the true existence of the self, e.g., “Oh, this must be “x” etc. Are each of us members of two distinct worlds, one real, the other dreamscape? Is it just that our geographical distribution on the dreamscape is a random shuffle relative to our spatial distribution on the physical globe? It appears as though evolutionary innovations could have been prematurely anticipated through permutational and combinational shuffling of genes, but this would be too short circuit the process of the preparation of the ground for this change. Whatever can be permuted amongst alternate universes constitutes a proper separable component of the Universal wavefunction. People, places and things, etc. normally understood, don’t constitute quantum

separable abstract objects. A C-60 molecule can exist in a superposition state on account of nonlocal quantum correlations between the various vacuum fluctuations of which “it” is composed. “It,” the C-60 molecule itself “exists” in no particular quantum universe, but is an abstract object subsisting outside all such possible quantum universes. Do such supraliminal quantum correlations only obtain between. . . (finish this sentence from context) People seem to be permutable between MWI QM worlds, at the folk psychology level at any rate. Although we know this can’t really be the case. We get confused because we implicitly try to interpret our own feelings in terms of a model of our being as unified, wholly integrated self, that is. Question: in terms of what might the human being be truly unified? In terms of the soul as abstract (Platonic) self? Probability feedback mechanism as model for nonrepresentational, participatory nature of coherence truth. If coherence depends on resonance, but coherence can be emergent, i.e., based in nonrepresentational, nonabstract processes, then resonance must be taking place with respect to an indefinitely open-ended ground that though representationally plural is back-reacting as a unified entity. Reprocessing of concept maps is not permutational/combinational in nature. Concerning one’s personal identity, there is a tertium datur. Life is so great of a mystery that the psyche has to develop and maintain defenses against the perception of this mystery. But there must also be some outlet provided the members of each society for the partial recognition of the existential mystery, but one which doesn’t threaten to permanently destabilize the psyche and which is

still more socially useful. C.f., p. 144 of Reuben Abel (1976), There are 10 high 963 (10 963) possible gene sequences of the 100, 000 genes within the human genome. How could “random” mutation at effectively the very bottom of the nearly infinitely high fitness peak, c.f., “fitness landscapes” (Stuart Kaufmann) result in a fractionally significant climb up this peak, especially when only about 10 high 12 combinations of the above enormous number have heretofore been “tried?” On the other hand, how can we call evolution by its proper name if the process starts near the top of this fitness peak, that is, almost 100% of the order has graced the process of evolution at its beginning, c.f., chemical evolution, etc. We can’t expect significant ascent toward the pinnacle of this nearly relatively infinite fitness peak through the mere filtering of fluctuations infinitesimal relative to the magnitude of this peak. And what about the thermodynamic consideration of the expected tendency for fluctuations to result in a “fall” down this almost infinitely high peak (just think here of the relation ship of potential energy to height above a gravitating body)? In 3 dimensions on cannot move along a line any straighter than that adopted by a ray of light (photon) moving between the two points in question. The speed of light speed limit should be recast more generally that one cannot travel faster within a 3 dimensional spacetime than could a ray of light (whatever the photon’s velocity might be determined to be in terms of local process to any possible velocity) Changes in the initial and boundary conditions must in some cases transcend the dynamics constrained by these boundary conditions.

The splitting of the degeneracy of multiple quantum universes each associated with the same wavefunction through the initiation of interactions between these quantum world so as to form from them a single quantum universe, points up the fact of the wavefunction constituting a complete description of the quantum mechanical system in an observer-independent system. Reason has a characteristic way of denaturing the relationships of things. The seamless web of causal relationships characterizing the functioning of any organism or ecological system undergoes change largely along an axis of temporal evolution independent of that by which its most general ground came into being. The boundary conditions to the nonlocal field must not be merely those specifiable in terms of spacetime variables. The transcendental nature of consciousness and of the other, i.e., alterity of other persons, points up another but of transcendence: the transcendental manner in which one’s consciousness is more or less similar in numerous respects to that of other persons and would-be or potential persons. Rather than assuming that there can only be one realization per potential person we should say rather that there may be one such realization of personhood per embedding ground (of temporal being). We see both bases for personal identity at work here, those of resonance and correspondence. The correspondence is that of transcendental self-identity, the resonance is that of the temporal with the transcendental ground. Coherence may be understood in terms of how, on the one hand, each temporal ground (largely) excludes the influence of other grounds of temporality and, on the other, how the temporal ground itself comes to limit interference from its transcendental ground.

Correlation of fluctuation spectra of the individual components of a system may achieve nonlocality through properly adjusted resonant states of each of the components. The idea of “adjusting” carries the notion of insertion “by hand” of system inputs. It is the ground state vacuum of the system in question that possesses nonlocal connectivity. The discrete elements exhibiting nonlocal connectivity do so through its peculiar mode of resonant coupling to its own quantum mechanical ground state. One’s being change not so much through replication errors per se as through the creative interpretation of replication errors. It is this further fact of the persistent reinterpretation of discrete, random changes (to discrete carriers of meaning or, a data-information) which results in these changes producing an effect that seems and, in fact, is indeed intelligent. One begins to come to an intuitive understanding of such biological entities as hormones, neurotransmitters, genes, etc. and in so doing entering into the subtler manifestations of these entities. But the body is in a constant state of copying itself through being continuously reconstituted out of the quantum vacuum. The more rapidly progresses this change, the less definite becomes the identity of that which is the subject of this change and so in turn the less definite become the changes to this indefinite subject. In this way there seems to obtain some natural limit to the observable (conscious) rate of time’s passage. Here it seems we may now be in a better position to understand the paradox of time’s passage, e.g., relative to what does time pass at the rate that it does (appears to do)? A friend is never so interested in the psychological implications of what one says as he is its content. Building up coherent structures from smaller, stock coherent

structures through a dialectic of consciousness-mediated interplay of coherence and resonance. In this way an internal domain of structure is built up. There is a related dialectical process of data becoming information and of information transforming into data. These two implications are not related by a symmetry operation or, at least not by an external symmetry. The subconscious/unconscious dimension of thought and motivation is needed to support open-ended possibilities for future revisionistic interpretations of human motives and intentions. The nonlocality rather than the instantaneous locality interpretation of physical reality is needed in order to make room for the possibility of the transmission and reprocessing of information. As time passes, the vague and indefinite becomes more crystalline just as the definite and crystalline becomes ever more ambiguous and uncertain. So temporality seems to be composed of two distinct components, that of coherence and decoherence (data vs. information). The recursiveness of thought consists in the abstraction from particulars that are themselves abstract artifacts. What parameters/quantities control transitions from virtual to real, superposed to decohered, Bose-Einstein condensed/classically mixed? Explore the bearing on the above questions such factors as gravitation, consciousness, free will, irreversibility, open vs. closed systems, causal connection vs. quantum vs. statistical correlation, locality vs. nonlocality, resonance vs. coherence, discrete vs. continuous, degenerate vs. nondegenerate, elsewhere region vs. absolute time, recursion vs. infinite regression, uncertainty vs. change, on-shell vs. off-shell, real vs. imaginary, etc. A question relevant to that of the deconstruction of metaphysical

presence is whether consciousness is an evolved coherent recursion or an instantaneous resonant recursion? But doesn’t the coherence of consciousness require the resonance of the structurings of consciousness? Only irreversible temporality may be characterized as constituting nondegenerate transitions/temporal evolution. Each removal of degeneracy brings the system into fuller contact with an “outside.” The paradox of the distinction of open vs. closed system is that the closed system entertained within the imagination is open while the open system by being both a “system,” that is unified so as to be a system, must be nonlocally connected and so possess internality, i.e., closedness on public spacetime. There is nothing relative to which one’s most general state of consciousness might change except relative to some still more general consciousness as such. The superposed worlds belonging to the same superposition spectrum are nonlocally connected via quantum correlations of a basically different type from those that mediate causal relationships. Where a closed QM system is concerned, i.e., one not disturbed by conscious, freely willed acts upon it by an observer, the correlation matrix of the systems supporting quantum vacuum, i.e., fluctuation spectrum, possesses a subgroup symmetry that is undisturbed by purely causal interactions within and between the system and other (pseudo) closed systems. The correlation spectra of superposed virtual states don’t represent ad decomposition of causal relationships, but occupy the elsewhere region of the system’s local spacetime.

This is why the mind of the observer doesn’t fit within local spacetime. But it is not just the unpredictable breaking into the system generally necessitated by the conscious observer’s “unpredictable” act of measurement/observation that induces Psi collapse, but still more it is the incompatible pattern of coherence of the fluctuation spectrum of the observer’s vacuum that coming into contact with system vacua, necessitates the Psi collapse. The boundary conditions upon an open system wavefunction are internal, that is, not specified in terms of spacetime (local) parameters, consciousness changes basis in response to unanticipated inputs in such a way that it makes itself the actor behind their appearance. Consciousness is always internal to its outside inputs, and so is impervious to reduction of its own state. No observations can be performed upon a conscious state. Locality is the determination of larger scale phenomena by smaller scale phenomena. This applies to both spatial and temporal scales. Spatially nonlocal interactions involve action at a distance, that is, unmediated through any spatially situated medium along a path connecting the mutually interacting points. This applies similarly for the case of temporal nonlocal interactions. Context determination is a kind of nonlocal interaction. Substance or substantial media cannot be invoked to explicate the mode of interaction of two or more nonlocally connected systems. It is the mutual interference of distinct classical universes that is responsible for the quantum nature of each. This appears to be almost a contradiction in terms. Parmenides asserted that there is no such thing as nothing. What “nothing” as such derives from is a gloss on the concept of “nothing.” There is from the empiricist point of view here an interesting

variety of kwd=reification at work, namely that of transferring to Kant’s noumenal realm apparent unity of a phenomenological description or phenomenological basis for a concept, e.g., free will, etc. Creativity necessitates the talent for discontinuous change in vacuum symmetry, i.e., transitions between vacuum symmetries that cannot exist on the same vacuum configuration trajectory. The time-independent Schrodinger equation determines the wavefunction, ñ(x, y, z, t) is determined for all times within the time interval defined by the wavefunction boundary conditions. Any changes to the wavefunction represent disturbances to the system described by this wavefunction – disturbances not prefigured in the ground state (vacuum) with which the system was heretofore in stable interaction (energy exchange). Exchanges of information between the system and its “environment”, i.e., the system’s outside, must precipitate collapse of the system wavefunction for If information cannot actually transit or be transmitted across space because wavefunction collapse cannot originate from within spacetime. The phenomenon of environmental decoherence seems to belie this. Though this phenomenon may be understood as loss of information by the system. The reduction of the state function precipitated by acts of conscious observation occur for quite the opposite reason – the imparting of information to the system though from inside the system’s vacuum or ground state. So information is exchanged between two systems indirectly as mediated by both system’s quantum vacua or ground states, that is, through the entanglement of the fluctuation spectra of both vacua. We cannot in unproblematic fashion interpret entropy as anti-information because the vacuum admits a spatial entropy gradient even though information does not translate through spacetime, or at least not without a preexisting quantum correlation handshake between the two endpoint vacua supporting the communicating systems. October 2011 All of the counterintuitive quantum effects are likely to involve a combination

of entanglement and interference between two forms of this “quantum handshake” mechanism, one pertaining to the action of a “free will” (as causal chain initiator/instantiater), e.g., adjusting at the last second the configuration of instruments constituting key components of a quantum measurement apparatus, the other, e.g., adjusting all too quickly the contextual ground for the interpretation of the results of a quantum measurement. The internal “motions” that mark the passage of subjective time cannot be explicated in terms of movement of matter or energy, particles or fields within the three spatial dimensions of spacetime. For this reason it might be supposed that subjective temporality is orthogonal to the axis of intersubjective time. Brian, Hc may be alternatively expressed as c 2/R is the radius of curvature of the Universe as a uniformly expanding, simply connected spherical space. R is the fully contracted Riemann curvature tensor, g ikRik = R, where the gik is the metric tensor of the spherical space (off diagonal components of the gik and the metric tensor components, g11, g22, g33, g44 correspond to the gravitational potentials of the Universe’s pressure and energy density. With the off-diagonal components = 0, we are assuming that the stresses due to expansion are 0 (uniform expansion of a hyperspherical spacetime). So c2/R may be thought of as GMU/R2, the gravitational field of the Universe, which is also equal to Hc as well as equal to c2/R. Due to the Universe’s global curvature, our time dimension of distant bodies participating in the cosmological expansion becomes progressively more spacelike with increasing cosmological distance. Consequently, the spacetime variation of the vacuum energy density which is purely temporal locally becomes more and more spatial at

greater and greater cosmological distances from us. So we see that the spatial component of variation in the vacuum energy density with arc distance along the Universe’s expanding 3-hypersurface is directly related to the overall radius of curvature of this 3-hypersurface. And an energy density gradient is dimensionally associated with a force field generated by this gradient. So maybe the cosmological acceleration is gravitational the hypersurface is expanding (in free space). But where matter is present, the hypersurface expands more slowly temporally due to the interaction of gravitational time dilation with the local rate of expansion/time rate of decrease of vacuum energy density. In such local regions of decreased time rate of decrease of vacuum energy there should be an increase in the strength of the local component of the spatial gradient of cosmological vacuum energy density. In this way we see how the speed of light, gravitation, the vacuum energy, and cosmological expansion may all be intimately related. I see what you mean about how Hc can explain the appearance of an accelerating cosmological expansion, since Hc was smaller in the past and therefore the cosmological acceleration greater at greater cosmological distance scales. What do you think? -Russell ( March 24, 2002) “There is a real confusion in the literature on the definition of a “closed” or “open” universe. “Closed” is taken to mean that the gravitational forces are sufficient for the re-collapse of all the matter, but is also refers to the geometry of the 3-manifold – does it exist as the membrane of a 4-D object in 4-D space? I, personally, think the universe is “open” in the gravitational sense, but closed in the geometric sense.” Very important distinction – I agree. I believe in an empty universe, the fermionic and bosonic fluctuations of the quantum vacuum, which are of opposite sign, balance each other in a static, closed 3-hypersurface, but don’t balance in the case of either an expanding or contracting cosmos.

Matter, via the Pauli Exclusion and Inclusion principles alters the normally perfect spacetime symmetry of the quantum vacuum in which, other things being equal, the above energy and 3-momentum fluctuations cancel with the pure imaginary 4-momentum fluctuations in their respective energy contributions to a gravitational mass of the vacuum. By suppressing the spin 0 creation/annihilation of virtual fermion/antifermion pairs (via Pauli Exclusion) and enhancing the spin 1 creation/annihilation of virtual bosons, i.e., exchange of forcemediating bosons within this vacuum, a local spacetime rotation of the vacuum relative to free space is due to nonconservation of entropy if the rotation is undone. So the vacuum statistics are tied to the spacetime symmetry of the vacuum. And matter has the effect of endowing the vacuum with an effective mass by rotating irreversibly (in the thermodynamic and quantum decoherence sense) relative to free space vacuum the momentum-energy fluctuation 4-vector, producing the change in spacetime commonly referred to as “the curving of spacetime.” We already know from general relativity that gravitation breaks the spacetime symmetry of the vacuum state. Hc is just the acceleration by a photon propagating through a uniformly expanding universe, which affects all of our time/distance measurements based upon us of “c” as a cosmological yardstick. (March 27, 2002 9:02 PM) Brian, Remember the idea about gravitational time dilation converting a timelike variation in vacuum energy density into a spacelike one? You never thought much of that idea, a I recall. However, I’ve refined that notion somewhat in light of another notion that gravity alters spacetime symmetry from infinity inward (approaching center of gravitational field) by tilting the fluctuation momentum-energy

four vector in favor of increased 3-momentum fluctuations (forcemediating boson exchanges within vacuum, increasing its binding energy – and that of any mass moving toward stronger fields along the way) and in favor of decreased energy fluctuations (i.e., vacuum as creation/annihilation of virtual fermion-antifermion pairs), that is, in favor of decreased density of Heisenberg uncertain energy as well as increased time uncertainty for systems being transported deeper into a gravitation field (time dilation). So the gravitational field strength increases (spatially, temporally, or a mixture of the two), the “mass” of vacuum increases due to increase binding energy mediated by increased density of 3-momentum exchanges within this vacuum and the time dilates as the energy uncertainty decreases in step), 3-momentum density and decreasing in energy density with increasing gravitational field. I’m convinced that the absolute energy density of the vacuum would be zero if the universe were of 0 global curvature, but the positive curvature, the absolute energy density is some small figure equal to a density predicted for the vacuum by quantum mechanics. The energy density is only potentially manifested as energy differences introduced by matter acting as a set of boundary conditions upon the quantum vacuum statistics spacetime symmetry). Remember that energy density is a scalar and 3-momentum density is a vector and the two can be combined together to form a 4-vector and the spacetime gradient of this 4-vector is described by a 2nd rank tensor, the stress-momentum-energy tensor, Tik. (March 27, 2002 11:29 PM) Brian, We know from previous discussion that the local speed of light varies spatially with changing gravitational field strength (or potential). We also know that the speed of light, c, may be defined in the following

way: /\E//\t = c, where /\E and /\p are the Heisenberg energy and 3momentum uncertainties of the quantum vacuum supporting propagation of electromagnetic radiation. Consequently, gravitation must either cause or be caused by spatial gradients in the ratio (/\E)/ (/\p). /\E is composed of all locally occurring virtual fermion-antifermion creation/ annihilation events within this vacuum and /\p is composed of all locally occurring virtual boson exchanges within this vacuum. Could one find a simpler way of pointing up a likely connection between the quantum statistics (and relative energy densities of) virtual fermions and bosons, i.e., “vacuum statistics” (vacuum energy density ) and general relativity’s description of gravitation? -Regards, Russell (March 31, 2002 10:17 AM)

Russell, Sounds good. “Brevity is the soul of wit.”

While this is a good thing to know, the next question becomes – how do we

influence the fermion exchange and the boson exchange in the vacuum? You once thought there was a conservation of real and virtual particles. So – would a region of space that had a high boson density reduce virtual boson exchange?

Don’t think so, it should enhance the probability boson exchange (the ol’ Pauli Inclusion Principle). Does matter reduce fermion exchange, if by merely screening the production of virtual fermions that would have been produced with a trajectory that would have passed through the real

Yes, it does because the Pauli Exclusion Principle does not distinguish real and virtual fermions. fermion?

(I think you have advocated this before).

Hmmm. What does the entire fermion field look like, not distinguishing virtual and real, and then what does the field look like when one “puts on glasses” to see only the real part and then only the virtual part?

The same with the boson

Virtual particles become real in an accelerated reference frame, see Hawking radiation, Davies-Unruh radiation, particle creation in inflationary cosmologies, etc. However, particles, once “elevated” to the status of real particles, cannot ever become virtual again. Acceleration under thrust undoubtedly has an equivalent effect. This is the reason gravity fields disrupt spacetime field.

This might be interesting.

(Poincare’) symmetry and are not Lorenz invariant/covariant – the effect of gravity on virtual particles is not reversible – say, by turning off the gravity field. Also, this is the reason that the surface area of a black hole is proportional under certain conditions. This fact is not doubt related to the mystery of a virtually infinite vacuum energy density that does not possess a gravitational field (other than that which can be attributed to a component of itself due to the small cosmological curvature, I’d suppose. And so on. . . . (material deleted) (April 01, 2002 10:31 AM) -Later, Brian Ziad, Complex and perhaps paradoxical perceptions like this of those around us must be actually quite common, I imagine. An important postmodern concept for late 20th/early 21st Century philosophy is that of the nonunitariness of the Self. Before the evolution of language and culture, humans existed in a naturally dissociated state (perhaps not unlike mild Schizophrenia). The Self’s seeming appearance to itself of unity, integrity and wholeness (which to some makes appear so sensible such notions as soul, free-will, immorality, God, heaven, etc.) is perhaps largely a function of culture and is nothing more than a socially constructed entity, possessing no real, independent existence. Food for thought, if you’re interested in the ol’ appearance vs. reality conundrum. (April 21, 2002 2:17 PM) -Russ Ziad,

The gravitational field and consciousness both generate entropy via each of their respective peculiar modes of action upon the quantum vacuum. Both cause changes to the vacuum “that it can’t anticipate” because not determined by it! So when a conscious observer or a black hole interact with the global spacetime vacuum, they force the vacuum into a position of having to guess at what its successive observer suddenly interacted with. Both black holes and consciousness induce decoherence and wavefunction collapse due to each’s manner of suddenly connecting the quantum vacuum of spacetime to another incommensurate quantum vacuum. This is what induces the Psi collapse. For example when the observer freely wills an adjustment to his measuring apparatus and this action is caused by his brain, which is embedded in an altogether separate vacuum state than that of the quantum system under observation (and there is no global vacuum state of the observed system, the local vacuum must guess at what eigenstate to select. Of course, this action by the observer wipes out any previous information about observations made by earlier observers. By the way, this is why you can’t construct a machine to detect the consciousness of other persons! (June 03, 2002 6:04 AM) -Russell Consciousness Mediated Gravitational Collapse.pdf We respond to changes in input frequencies, filtered through a system of mental projections originating from within, i.e., outside of public (intersubjective) spacetime. Eternal return ~reprocessing of 2nd language passages with each repass. A culture does not correspond to any instantaneous, explicated/explaned pattern, but possesses inextricable depth knowable only to

participants organically grown-up within the temporal, historical understanding. It is the nonlocal action of consciousness that necessitates Psi collapse when an observer performs a quantum observation. Its causal action, therefore is via global shift in probability weightings of correlations of fluctuations. Gravitation and consciousness generate entropy within a closed system, but also are associated with the creation of information within an open system. Clearly, the motion within an open system, which cannot be unified, also cannot be complete in a formal sense, i.e., an open system cannot possess a formal description which is complete. The system wavefunction requires spacetime boundary conditions even if the wavefunction itself may not be properly thought to “occupy” this spacetime. Since every new thing is grasped via metaphors, how then were the very first things perceived? In terms of some stock of innate metaphors? And should this innate stock of forms be identified with the eternal forms of Plato? But metaphors have a way of getting out from under us and taking on a larger meaning than we originally intended when we first introduced them as a convenient and even makeshift way of making sense of something perhaps to someone to whom we are trying to explain our new concept. Basis transformation that cannot be represented as a linear transformation between matrices is triggered by a consciousness – induced collapse of a Psi function. Entropy is generated in a system when it becomes coupled to an incommensurate system.

The many worlds of MWI QM are not eigenstates but incommensurable superpositions of other eigenspectra. Information nonconservation in black holes and decoherence in relation to the information nonconserving nature of consciousness. Bertrand Russell once supposed as an adolescent that modern science was incompatible with the will since, for example, the laws of dynamics must determine the movement of a man’s lips so that he should have no control over what he was saying or whether to say it at all. Only by the observer’s physical being becoming encapsulated as it were into an informationally closed system, i.e., Psi-closed rather than just an energetically closed system, i.e., |Psi|2-closed, can his body be combined with the system being observed into a single, composite quantum mechanical system, itself described by some new function, Psi. The implications of quantum mechanics have helped bridge the heretofore unbridgeable gap between mind and matter implied by classical players. Can superposed quantum states correspond to virtual coherent states. Isn’t the coherence rather a manifestation of the mutual nonlocal connectivity of all the virtual states making up the superposition? Possessing a free will implies a substantive separateness of the human agent from the natural order. Hence, every naturally willed action of this agent constitutes an intervention in the natural order that takes it unawares, as it were, in that the human person occupies a position incommensurate with that of the physical world in which he intervenes every time he freely acts. His acts are ultimately unbidden by the natural order, constituting the free human agent’s field of bodily action.

The discontinuity of Psi-collapse points up the discontinuity of two grounds (of being) that of the natural physical order, i.e., that of deterministic causality, deterministic probability, and statistical probability, etc., with the ground, informing and informed by, the quantum brain of the freely acting human person. The parochial mind tends to confuse the relative and the absolute, the appearance with reality. So what aptly characterizes the parochial minded person is a general lack of discernment borne of an ignorance that is frequently willful. Joseph Campbell informs us that the mythologies of the world all refer to oneself. So what is it, what description could not fail to refer to oneself in one’s particularity over and against one’s distinctly abstract human nature? If logic and rationality are empirical as suggested by Robert Nozick, then either there is no ultimate order (itself a kind of order) or there is a being transcending order – a being who maintains order of a kind within existence. So then each kind of order is not itself an instantiation of order as such, i.e., there is no hierarchy of orders, but a nexus of incommensurate orders that is established in a contingent manner. Transcendent plurality of beings implies that there is no such thing as consciousness as such and solipsism becomes true by default. Every example of a concept is also an example of other concepts. And so an index of reality is the necessity of the reprocessing/reprocessible nature of information. The hierarchical nature or information with respect to its reprocessible nature is consistent with the notion of a spatially distributed fractally structured direction of time. Instead of space + existents, why not have an order of networked

occupation of beings by other beings. This is a kind of perturbation description (not unlike Ptolomy’s epicyclical system of orbits) because the notion of pure being (one possessing more pure concreteness, as opposed to the abstractness of the beings used in the perturbation expansion). Abstract entities of theory A can be perturbation expanded to yield entities of a less abstract but more concrete theory. It is clear that the conscious observer collapses the Psi function because his brain as an instrument of transcendent (subjective) being alters the nonlocal connectivity of the quantum vacuum embedding the quantum mechanical system under observation, perhaps through a mechanism of viral dissemination of heretofore incommensurate nonlocal connectivity. Quantum solipsism consideration: the only way one observer can try to verify whether another person succeeded in collapsing the system’s Psi is to perform a quantum observation of his own, leading to another collapse of Psi, wiping out the information about the previous Psi collapse that presumably had been triggered by the consciousness of a previous quantum observer. The many minds interpretation of quantum mechanics assumes the falsity of solipsism. In the many worlds’ interpretation (MWI) version of quantum mechanics, the brain of a quantum observer is constituted by the mutual interference of distinct versions of this observer’s brain. The mutually interfering brains are virtual in the same sense invoked by quantum field theory when it speaks of interactions between virtual quanta. So conscious states are not associated with the quantum states of the individual virtual quantum brains, but only with the real brain that is constituted out of the mutual interference of these virtual quantum brains. MWI quantum mechanics does not assume the falsity of solipsism, but appears to support this doctrine. Each quantum brain is supported by a distinctly different superposition of virtual quantum brains and hence the real brain constituted of this superposition is

grounded in (each quantum brain is embedded in) a distinctly different quantum nonlocality. This is the sense in which it is meant that each quantum brain is embedded within a distinctly different nonlocally connected quantum vacuum. This may suggest that the nonlocality that an individual quantum experimenter/observer investigates when he conducts an experiment or observation is merely that quantum nonlocality of his own quantum mechanical vacuum state, i.e., that quantum vacuum in which is embedded in mutual interaction his brain and no other. In other words, no quantum observer is able to devise an experiment or observation which could permit him to verify the fact of other humans possessing states of consciousness. Another reason for this is that the quantum experiment cannot observe another human brain in a state of quantum superposition. This is because each observer continually collapses the wavefunction of his own quantum brain. Each human being possesses psychic powers of varying degree with respect to his own embodied being. His memory gives him a kind of clairvoyance of past history, precognition of the future, telekinetic powers of manipulation of, telepathic linkage to the body which his soul is said to inhabit. Collapse of Psi which involves selection of preexistent possibility vs. creation of altogether new superposition states. This is a data versus information distinction. Genetic fitness landscapes, c.f., Stuart Kauffman, and Occam’s Razor. Freedom within determinism, c.f., pleasures of observing youth make free choices to act out what experience knows as fate. Radical ambiguity as multi-dimensional figure-ground. The shift of figure to ground and vice versa is easily enough understood. What is more difficult is the reconstitution of the figure-ground ambiguity along a new basis. This suggests that the figure-ground system we

actually observe is just the structural level, c.f., gene regulatory network, hierarchy of virtuality in perturbation theory, many worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics, Feynman’s sum of histories approach to quantum mechanics, variational methods of calculus, and all higher levels are below (actually above the level of ordinary consciousness). Point or structural mutations are processed by the gene regulatory network as well as high level mutations causing a downward cascade effect on lower levels of the gene regulatory network. The real versus virtual distinction in particle physics and this same distinction in the context of virtual reality simulations. Will this case turn out to be similar to that of real vs. imaginary invented by 17 th Century mathematicians as a metaphor and given literal expression in the 20th Century through the development of quantum theory? The transformation of one figure-ground matrix into another is orthogonal to that by which figure and ground exchange places within a fixed matrix. Something operates on this matrix to transform it into a new/another one. Higher order figure-ground matrix transformations (which seem to uniquely characterize the nature of thought/abstraction) remind us of quantum computations. What we call conscious experience on the view suggested above is only the lowest level in a hierarchy of experience.

Each person is a center of the Universe. There is a mutual degeneracy of causality and synchronicity. Consciousness is synchronistically structured, the will, karmically structured. Experience possesses a consistency greater than what can be contained within experience’s field of temporal integration.

The structure of coherence of the vacuum in which the observer’s actions (though brain and body) are embedded is incommensurate with that of the intersubjective vacuum. The vacuum must try to reconcile the unanticipated causal influence of the observer’s action (and decision to act) in terms of its own selfconsistent structure of correlation of its spectrum of momentum and energy fluctuations. Wavefunction collapse is a necessary outcome of the quantum vacuum’s inability to incorporate the vacuum embedding the observer’s brain into itself so as to engender a new self-consistent vacuum state. So the vacuum nevertheless makes a “guess” at the new vacuum state, but cannot accomplish this without an inconsistent departure from its previous ground state. This inconsistency in the temporal evolution of the vacuum manifest’s itself as a discontinuous change in this vacuum state, which has particular relevance to the component of the vacuum state that embeds the quantum state of the system under observation. This is in turn manifested as “collapse” of the observed system’s quantum mechanical wavefunction. To square the wavefunction one must multiply the complex wavefunction by a function that is its complex conjugate. This operation results in a real function called the probability density. It is interesting that one must remove the imaginary component of the wavefunction, which by itself possesses no physical meaning, in order to yield a real function possessing physical meaning as a probability density. At the time the mathematician Leonard Euler invented the system of imaginary numbers in the later 17 th Century he chose the term “imaginary” to describe these new numbers only as a convenient metaphor for the fact that the square root of –1 does not exist as a mathematical object. Strangely, it is not the failure of the wavefunction to exist as a mathematical entity, which we are referring to by saying that the wavefunction does not “exist,” but merely that this function possesses of itself, no physical meaning. The history of the theoretical sciences are replete with examples of how insightful

metaphorical descriptions of theoretical entities chosen largely for convenience become through twists and turns literal descriptions of entities existing in fact. Since the Kantian categories constitute a kind of hyper-refined conceptual mapping of physical theoretical common sense of the 18 th and 19th Centuries, a dissertation showing the systematic violation of Kant’s categorical scheme would provide the very sharpest demonstration possible of the radical and revolutionary nature of the quantum theory. If consciousness is really the capability for metaphor and abstract thought, then human beings must spend more than half of their childhood as humanoid automata. The positive side of the genetic dust bin theory of aging is that one comes to escape, more and more, the grasp of the long history of natural selection that shaped our specific human nature. So aging past one’s reproductive years offers heretofore unavailable opportunities for the human being to explore his or her being beyond that circumscribed by human nature. All too often, however, persons enter later life continuing to cling to societally and culturally defined reality and personhood. Investigate sexual selection’s role in the development of subspecies, breeds, races, etc. Not all genomes are equally stable, chemically or energetically. This fact uncovers the chink in the armor of political correctness in its connection with the relative valuation of persons, races, etc. Rednecks and other failed individuals find they can’t effectively compete in the large arenas of life and so become disproportionately upset when losing a small contest, e.g., keeping the edge in front of a fellow drive upon leaving a stoplight. Unfortunately some of the substances that encourage and enhance abstract and metaphorical thought also somewhat impair

Fringe behavior is always to be expected when a machine or system begins to operate outside of its original design parameters. Neutron, electron, and quark, once, twice, three times is the Standard Model of the material constituents of the Universe. Just because there has developed a rational science of the outcomes resulting from induced mutations to an organism’s genome, in no way implies that the organization and causal relatedness of genetic base pairs/sequences is strictly group theoretic, i.e., closed system of permutations and combinations of genes gives expression to a closed system of expression in terms of abstract phenotypic elements/features. The debate between “oneness” and Trinitarian Pentecostals is a classic case of a linguistic quibble appropriate to the tales of Lewis Carroll or Jonathan Swift. Many minds interpretation of quantum theory is a kind of reprocessing and new integration of the so-called many worlds interpretation of quantum theory along altogether independent and orthogonal lines (so it seems). So the human will operates by a process that can only be properly described as “magical.” The collapse of the wavefunction is a sign that the topology of wouldbe infinite self-referentiality of the Universe’s act of self-observation has been discontinuously reprocessed through a sudden exchange of information between two independent quantum vacua (of fundamentally distinct “natures”). This is not accomplished through the removal of a preexisting degeneracy of the global (intersubjective) quantum vacuum. The dimension of time/temporality is always local too a particular vacuum state. This might mean that a degenerate vacuum state

possesses multidimensional temporality. Every collapse of a quantum mechanical wavefunction generates both entropy and information. The entropy is distributed throughout the entire newly engendered system. The information is exchanged (and transformed in the process/between the two system). The gradient of entropy between vacua can never be wiped out through mutual exchanges of energy. Instead of us all being members of the same universe, the real nature of reality is a manifestation within each and all. At some metalevel the degeneracy is still infinite and the symmetry unbroken. Pure timelike fluctuations as interactions with this symmetric, degenerate ground Emergence, if real, requires involvement of a creative intellect. Metagenetic processes mediate selection from virtually infinite numbers of possible base pair combinations. Let Psi (x, y, z, t) be symmetric under x  x, y  y , z z, and antisymmetric under t  t. The reprocessing of concept maps by which one has acquired one’s present concept map, is not going to turn out to be a process explicable in terms of one’s present concept map. To supposes the possibility of doing this is to invite the paradox of infinite regress. Because there is no basis for comparison of the brain states in terms of their consequences for consciousness) of distinct individuals, we must suppose that the consciousness of each individual is nonlocal time orthogonal to that of another. Continuity of a peculiar nature is required to support the extremely

high consciousness degeneracy possessed by brain states. Compare the concepts of levels of abstractness and degrees of symmetry. When what appear to be dynamical elements are pieced together by “natural selection” into a more or less coherent control system, the resulting structure must be understood to be a projection of the indeterminate unknown of an open system into an abstract space, i.e., a first order closed system. And that every interaction between discrete elements is within this system depends for its relevance and effectiveness upon what transpires within the indeterminate ground of the system to which the system remains connected. This connection is somewhat after the fashion of a that existing between a computer terminal and network (an important difference here is that both computer and network are closed systems of discretely interacting discrete elements – understood in the abstract, of course). The notion that memory is a representation is logically inconsistent and necessarily leads to an infinite regress of representations. When receiving a psychiatric admit a psychiatric nurse will typically ask their new patient, “ what brought you her for treatment today?” A schizophrenic will invariably answer along the lines of “ a white van” or “the ambulance,” etc. This is because schizophrenics cannot think in metaphorical terms. The schizophrenic’s personality disorder involves a dissociated state of consciousness. The question here arises as to whether there can be such a thing as a “totally dissociated state of consciousness” or whether consciousness is itself an emergent phenomenon, resulting from a requisite level of integration of the association of impressions, these impressions initially being un- or subconscious in infancy and early childhood. Memory possessing perfect fidelity to the past probably is not an optimal mnemonic capability, e.g., due to considerations of social

relevance of what each individual recollects and relates to the other members of the clan, tribe, etc. What are the real abstract objects of the quantum description of reality? When is the last degeneracy split? When all of the force fields have been applied to the system from outside. When all possible observables have been made manifest. As long as no one cries, “April Fool’s,” everything remains quite serious. We commonly say that “things could have been different.” Implicit here is the notion of substituion of one combination/permutational element with another within the system in question. Quantum mechanics indicates that the permutable possibilities do not mesh with our concept maps of ordinary, everyday reality, i.e., classical physical reality, i.e., the permutations of Dasein elements don’t line up with any abstract elements of the “objective continuum.” What kind of symmetry describes the realm of mathematical truth in which mathematical truth undergoes temporal evolution that is actually contained within itself as a mathematical description? No arrow of time could be associated with such infinite temporal degeneracy. Time has being eternally, only manifesting itself when the symmetry of Being is disrupted. and Recouping of the broken transcendent (nonlocal) symmetry of Being through local evolution of composites formed from precipitates of this broken symmetry. The first symmetry breaking occurred outside of the realm of

individuation, since it was the breaking of the symmetry of unified Being. This reminds us of the Lila (play) of Brahman. Real matter only perturbs the quantum statistics of the vacuum if configured in an energetically bound system. The mass of the Universe that is not attributable to a sum of local masses is caused by the net global spacetime curvature. The whole is greater than the sum of its context dependent components. @#

McTaggart’s famous unreality of time argument doesn’t so much succeed in disproving the existence of time as it succeeds in demonstrating the existence of multidimensional time. The most highly symmetric invariance possesses no underlying mechanism. Mechanism is the dynamics of some broken symmetry. @$ It is clear that there is no mechanism for individual consciousness in terms of local, causal interactions. A convenient example of how broken symmetry takes us from synchronized action of a unified entity to the staggered action of an entity with spatially distributed parameters, might be the sudden reorganization of any control system governed by a least action principle, which partially disrupts the higher symmetries of the system. Gravitation breaks the symmetry of spacetime through a summing together of the symmetry-disrupting contributions of nongravitational forces. The concept of other minds, like the concept of other universes, requires the existence of an all-embracing superspace of a superuniverse, and seems to require the reality of a super- or transcendental

mind. If quantum theory is to depend on the interaction of separate universes for the engendering of all distinctly quantum, as opposed to classical, phenomena, then no one of these “many worlds” is itself permitted to possess quantum mechanical nature. So then consciousness, if a distinctly quantum phenomenon, places the individual enjoying conscious states entirely outside any particular classical universe whatever this is supposed to mean. Moral degeneracy may be readily defined as the person possessing it, in no way implementing in his behavior a moral principle. This was what lies behind my remark that it was improper to label a Mafia boss as “morally degenerate.” However, we might easily suspect one of his associates as being morally degenerate, if this code of conduct was not implemented whenever it was inconvenient for him to do so, and even if this code of conduct deemed necessary the committing of a homicide, say, in the case where some other Mafioso had failed in observing “the code,” wherein a Mafioso purposely fails to commit the required homicide, resulting in the sparing of a human life on account of a relationship not recognized by that particular mafia family. All the “extras” in the background of old photographs have perhaps something in common with the friend sitting directly across one at the lunch table: the problem of correlating the more or less coherent cluster of sense data, representing a human person, with the conscious mind eternally hidden from one that must itself in an importantly relevant way be connected with the person’s physical presence, that this is the subject of one’s perception of said person. This restatement of the problem of other minds, I think, helps sharpen the skepticism underlying this seemingly insoluble philosophical riddle. The connection between behavior and psychological states must be bi-directional to warrant attribution of conscious states to others’ exhilarating intelligent behavior, which is based solely upon the (incomplete) analogy of how this connection works in reverse direction in one’s own case. @$And this is only rational/ workable if

there exists a valid theory of how consciousness emerges from the behavior of the material constituents of the body’s component subsystems, if not of the body as a whole. Other as ground vs. other as self of another ground. The notion of different temporalities inhering in different grounds has an analogous basis in quantum mechanics. Superfluity comes from genetics and gene expression not being “designed” for the “purpose” of evolution. This is because the notion of “evolution” is an abstraction and therefore admits of arbitrariness with respect to the total field of phenomena it attempts to describe. Dissociation and overturning the arbitrary conceptual map of society defined reality. Mainstream (mass) society-defined reality as rally point for heterogeneous alterities. What these alterities have in common is their estrangement from the mass culture, however, each is estranged from this culture in his own fashion. Examine the concept of grace as gift of effortlessness (say, in the sense in which a gifted athlete exercises his gifts) and how conscious intention intervenes to disrupt the conduit of grace, e.g., appearance of lucidity in dreams and the resultant disruption of the dreamscape or sequence. Adaptability to the unknown certainly human experience can be reprocessed on a broader and deeper level than the human level itself. Locality presupposes a dyadic relation as well as the logic that attends this fundamental relation. Triadic and higher order relation may be characteristic of nonlocality. Is logic the abstract nature of causality perhaps, but according to Searle, logic can’t capture all-important features of causality, which is comprised by media-specific relations. So the power and effectiveness of the causal relation presupposes the

plurality of causality’s substantive ground. Channeling. . . coherence of accents, tonal inflection with diction, phraseology, dynamics of psychological associations. Duplicity, social malleability, hypocrisy, compartmentalized memory/recall, suggestibility, mob/group think, 5% of primates with leadership qualities, effects of music, repetitive sound, poetic versification upon manner of processing language, being pleasers, killing people what they want to hear. Opposing forces of individuation/individualization, isolation, introspection, spirituality, self-centeredness projection, coincidence-perception. Notes written during the semester that I took Number Theory at LSU  Is the tunneling rater or tunneling velocity, related to the barrier height? Is the speed of light velocity limit related at all to the “height” of the hyperspherical potential barrier (represented by the false vacuum state)? How is the tunneling transmission coefficient affected by couplings of internal degrees of freedom of the tunneling “particles?” As William James observed in 1879, it is hard to accept an epiphenomenal status for consciousness on account of its obvious survival value as a general function of the organism. For how otherwise should it have grown in power and depth during the course of evolution? But then the alternative here is that consciousness, though not a mere epiphenomenon, must nonetheless be either an abstract feature of some function that orders our mental contents and processes or, it is so inextricably entangled in the web of other biochemical and physical processes of the organism as to possess no clear demarcation and hence, individuality as such. The notion of consciousness is just one among any number of other

such notions which can become mental contents within this consciousness whatever this might really be. The parallelism of discrete metaphorical elements between two rather distinct contexts does not always (though perhaps more often than is commonly supposed) imply a parallelism of the manner in which these elements are mutually related within their respective contexts. There is such a thing as a critical mass of experiences committed to memory of all of the essential aspects of the intensity of such experiences as if the success in having made all of the importantly relevant connections within the self which give to this self an impression of its mature completeness and ripeness of its identity, that is, of its sense of itself. Life is lived properly in the shadow of the unknown possessing importance greater than the most important consideration of the known. CAT scanner metaphor for reprocessing of life experience data by mature intelligence. Symmetry corresponds to nonlocality and broken symmetry to locality. Individual consciousness within a social organization – broken symmetry. Metaphysical presence – polite appearance of mutual respect, valuation, and regard. Qualification and conditions are hidden in the tapestry of polite society. It perhaps defies imagining what society would be like if exclusively composed of telepathic persons. The duality of the human character would be readily apparent. Perhaps a great deal of effort would be expended in socializing undesirable antisocial thought patterns. The notable lack of the integrity of the average human self would be readily perceptible.

Whether one regards the less than desirable facets of the self as belonging to a separate self housed within one’s body along with one, or regards these facets as indeed belonging to the self, but that one merely elects to repress and suppress them, makes for an important distinction in personality type. The mechanism of ECT’s effectiveness is not presently understood (similar statements apply to the effect of MRI magnetic fields upon the depressive states of elderly persons). A cancer radiotherapy analogy may provide the core of a workable theory of ECT’s effective action.

Some one who has grown up in a culture never having seen a chair, possesses no explicit concept of what we might call chairness. However, if this person’s experience is otherwise similar or equivalent to the reader’s, either this person shall soon enough hit upon the notion of a chair, inventing one for his own convenience, or shall almost immediately recognize the significance of one upon suddenly encountering it. How does this discussion metaphorically illuminate previous discussion about the question of whether intelligent, sentient individuals possess a concept of consciousness though only having knowledge of but a single instance of this concept, i.e., from the case of a person’s own peculiar state of consciousness. Observe the following relationship between the creation operator and discrete energy and momentum. . . a+ (n times)|k> - - -  nß÷ = E, nßk = p

While on earth everything reminds us of something else and metaphor is an exercise of never ending deferment of meaning. In heaven things are for their own selves and not merely as symbols of means for something beyond themselves – and example of what is termed unlimited semiosis. How can the radius of curvature of the Universe remain constant against cosmological expansion. Does R u remain constant through compensating changes in ? Matter rotates the spacetime through its effects upon vacuum’s statistics as described by the Pauli and Bose principles. And in this way, matter creates a local spacetime curvature with radius of curvature much smaller, of course, than Ru, the radius of so-called that spacetime possesses an infinite radius of curvature? The interplay of the subconscious wills of all sentient creatures defines the fluctuation in the fundamental physical constants in decimal places beyond the boundary defined by what we shall term eigen-uncertainty. The eigen-uncertainty should define the indeterminate zone or band separating the abstract ad concrete realms. It may be precisely within this zone that mind and matter have mutual contact and influence, as well as naturally where the mechanism of wavefunction collapse should be sought. It is interesting that virtual particles (and real fields) play an essential role within this interzone. Eigenuncertainty is related but not at all the same thing as what is called Heisenberg Uncertainty.

Eigenuncertainty is a kind of generalization of Heisenberg Uncertainty that is not observable or operator-bound. The spacetime metric represents the symmetry of the conserved stress-momentum-energy tensor. Just as we have , the expectation value of Tuv, there should be definable a Heisenberg uncertainty with respect to Tuv, i.e., /\Tuv that possesses an associated quantum fluctuation field, úTuv, which may be modeled as either the exchange of a spin-2 boson, two degenerate spin vector bosons, or four degenerate spin !½ virtual fermions, created and annihilated by the quantum vacuum in 10 distinct combinations, ++++ +++++ -+ - --

++++ - - ++ - - - + - - - -

+-++ ++-+

Symmetry considerations reduce the formally possible 16 combinations to 10 distinct combinations. This reminds us of how the symmetry of the metric tensor reduces the number of distinct field equations to 10 from 16. A generalized uncertainty principle incorporating composite spin-0, integral spin-1, composite spin-2 stress-momentum-energy quantum fluctuations is given by the following relation: /\Tuv x /\duv ˜ ß These (we believe to be) composite, spin-2 “tensor fluctuations” appearing as they do as a result of Lorenz spacetime symmetry being broken by gravitational fields, suggest that this spin-2 quantity is an emergent conserved quantity, incorporating the nonconserved spin-0 and spin-1 fluctuation energy and momentum components.

“Arafat’s strategy is to keep the violence going and get a neverending series of unilateral concessions without changing his own policy and goals,” c.f., Barry Rubin, Jerusalem Post (3/13/2002 issue). Coherence of a dynamic structure such as that of a Bose-Einstein condensate, always reflects a preexistent, underlying organizing/selforganizing principle and cannot have been merely tinkered together. The order substrate or, more properly, the information substrate of the evolutionary process involves not the negating of negations within vacuum represented by fundamental matter and fields, but a disabling of these negations by way of an asymmetrical pathway. Coherence is always a spontaneous and hence emergent phenomenon. The free space vacuum is supersymmetric, but this otherwise perfect supersymmetry is disrupted by the presence of non-supersymmetric matter. The Pauli Exclusion Principle applying as it does to both real and virtual fermions, implies a complementary relationship between the probability densities of real vs. virtual fermions. Investigate relationship of Pauli and Bose statistical principles and Heisenberg uncertainty principle. Probability conservation principle applies to photons (bosons, more generally) because the probability densities of real and virtual bosons are identical, equal, or proportional, though perhaps only indirectly. Uncertainty does not flow out of a closed system and so information cannot flow into such a system. Four momentum is not conserved in a gravitational field because two distinct reference frames cannot be mutually transformable via a

Lorenz trans-formation within such a gravitational field. Instead a 2 nd rank tensor becomes the conserved quantity the off diagonal terms in the tensor, Tik; j k, require the exchange within both bulk matter and quantum vacuum of a spin 2 tensor boson. Thus the spacetime metric must also take on non-diagonal components, äjk; j k. Investigate group theory of spin (n, n½) particles. No external field can change spin of particle (intrinsic angular momentum). There is an endless number of distinct versions of persons, places and things to select from which to improvise a synchronistically continuous world stage. Causal determination is a special case of synchronistic determination. Intersubjectivity in this picture of reality. Each person’s identity would be composed of a spectrum of contextualizing sub-identities. This model might be workable in a TIQM version of quantum mechanics. Superposition of distinct intentions for a single action. The mechanism of electro-convulsive therapy’s effectiveness is not presently understood. A cancer radiotherapy analogy may provide the core of a workable theory. The magnitude of the electron probability density function throughout local surrounding spacetime is determined through virtual photon exchanges with its local vacuum. There is a complementary relationship between the symmetric and antisymmetric parts of the local vacuum’s Psi function. The electron Pauli-blocks the creation/annihilation of the virtual electron positron cooper pairs, and does this in accordance with the conserved sum of Psi(matter) and Psi(vacuum).

Change of the wavefunction with constant energy degeneracy constitutes a kind of orthogonal time. ñmatter = ñ(m)sym + ñ(m)ant ñvacuum = ñ(v)sym + ñ(v)ant Correlational structure of Heisenberg energy uncertainty, keeping in mind the notions of energy degeneracy, symmetry, conservation laws, and David Bohm’s remarks about causal relationships being equivalent to fluctuation-correlations. We must relate the notion of eigen-uncertainty to the characteristic of Psi collapse (decoherence?) An arrogance of the nouveau sentient. Holography is convolution of signal with “empty” carrier wave. The functioning of conscious awareness and perception is more similar to the convolution of a random (as opposed to “empty”) signal with some other information signal. Spin-0 ~ no rotations possible Spin-1 ~ one rotation to shift the magnitudes of components of a vector, conserving the magnitude of Vu. Spin-2 ~ two rotations to shift magnitudes of components of 2 nd rank tensor, conserving the magnitude of Tuv. Metric tensor ~ relates components of a 2 nd rank tensor. Stressmomentum-energy tensor ~ causes changes to components of metric tensor. Buddhist Enlightenment as metaphor for successful psychotherapy. The objective would be one instantiated by each and every individual consciousness except, of course, my own, which is unique, i.e., not an

instance of the strictures of causality. Intersubjectivity that excludes my consciousness versus intersubjectivity necessarily including my consciousness. How does memory of the experience of evolving consciousness represented within consciousness? The forms of ground back-react by another ground reacting through them. We must realize that all forms are temporal and still more, ephemeral.

Emergence as a property of data, i.e., information versus consciousness as a property of matter. Consciousness we have shown is not an abstract property, quality or feature and so consciousness is neither a thing nor thing-like. So neither is consciousness caused by local, causal processes, though it might itself be quantum nonlocal in origin but simply modulated by local causal processes. Abstraction at its most general is a function of consciousness and so neither is the origin of consciousness to be sought in processes possessing reality merely as abstract processing of things and their relationships. But both thoughts and for example, subatomic particles are instances of consciousness’ abstracting functionality. Natural selection acts only upon genes while they are being expressed. Self-organization is then free to cross through would-be deleterious mutation to the gene regulatory network (GRN) in order to reach an improved cybernetic control system. This is what Kauffman refers to as transitions between local minima and the rugged fitness landscape of genome configurations. This is yet

another example of how nature has figured out how to decouple the evolution of gene expression from the strictures of chemistry so that evolution becomes less limited by the incidental connection of general organic chemical properties to the specific chemical mechanisms of genomic expression. The aperiodic lattice of the genome progressively extracts information from earlier, more degenerate (highly symmetrical) versions of itself. Easy to be legends in our own minds relative to our perceptions of the possible greatness of others. This is due to our only being able to take in but one or two of the most pronounced features of another person’s personality. “Not alone in being alone” – logic of metaphysical presence. The importance of linguistic meaning degeneracy to social construction of the self as individual with membership in a community. The principles by which each person’s consciousness operates must be completely alien and completely familiar relative (at the same time) relative to those by which others’ consciousness operates. Discursive symbols of product (essentially epiphenomenal?) of consciousness (i.e., not back reactions of consciousness’ abstractions upon itself?) The dissociated consciousness was moderated by stimulus-response interplay between animal hominids. Some how these external controls became internalized and an internal coherent self-concept began to develop and mediate raw consciousness from inside. Descartes’ clear and distinct ideas applied to the notion of the necessity of transcendence of the human context. In the transcendent realm, the modal and causal structure of being, i.e., existence within spatiotemporality, breaks down. Here we enter the “pre-mix” of the

mix-master universe. And there is no longer any meaningful distinction to be drawn between chance and necessity, between the real and the merely conceivable (possible). Concrete details connected with media specific limitations and conditions are removed in making the move to another media. Literal interpretation of Biblical Fundamentalism and the example of a football metaphor being invoked by a CEO in a sales/marketing company meeting. Truth lies with the abstract features not specific to the originating context, e.g., bronze age Middle East. There appears two distinct but related notions of abstract similarity, parallelism and dissemination. Psi collapse as parallel quantum reprocessing of fundamental data. Information as “end user” data – the reason for the nontransmissibility of information. It is consciousness and its necessary concomitant of free will that permits the conceiving of “clear and distinct” ideas possessing (or seeming to possess) a transcendental reference, e.g., the removal of limitations that permits the knowledge and information of each individual being combined with that of each and every other. The tendency of the human mind is to assume that boundary conditions are part of the natural dynamism. The tendency of science on the other hand has been to gradually reveal natural dynamism as boundary conditions upon some deeper dynamic. People who see nothing wrong in indulging the false premise for a relationship so long as this relationship benefits them in some way. Such persons term it naïve and fanciful to suppose that human

relationships might be founded upon some premise other than mutual benefit to the relationship’s participants. This view might be termed individualistic anarcho-syndicalism. “The authors in fact avoid this and related problems by arguing that it is only the perturbation of the zpf which produced gravity and curvature; and that the zpf itself does not gravitate or produce a Ì-type field.” “One can either argue that the zpf does not gravitate at all, or one can argue that it does gravitate but is cancelled by another field of negative energy density.” C.f., Zero Point Fields, Gravitation and New Physics (Paul S. Wesson) Rotation field as a spatially distributed velocity field. Although angular momentum may be described by a vector and a spin 1 particle, an angular momentum field, on the other hand, must be described by a 2nd rank tensor because the spatial gradient of a vector is a tensor. L and S components of ñ are not separable in special cases. Which? Might the degree of separability of the classical angular momentum and quantum mechanical spin components of ñ be a function of the degree of spacetime curvature? !hbar/2 is more properly understood as zero-point angular momentum rather than “spin.” The angular momentum of a particle may be changed through the application of external fields. This is however not the case for the quantum mechanical spin of a particle. This helps to justify the above interpretation of spin as zero-point angular momentum. Because anti-particles may be consistently interpreted as otherwise identical particles translating backwards in time, it seems probable

that spin may be interpreted as a kind of timelike momentum. Also, according to Feynman, relativity demands the existence of antiparticles as negative frequency components of the Fourier expansion of the wavefunction necessary to cancel out all positive frequency components of the wavefunction outside the Minkowski lightcone. If not, then faster-than-light particles are given a nonzero probability by the wavefunction. Investigate theories of particles and fields possessing complex quantum spin. A distinction between curvature and metric is pointed up by the Klein-Gordon equation.  [-1/c2ï2/ït2 + Å2 – a]ñ(t,x) = 0 where “a” has units of 1/R2. The momentum-energy fluctuation vector from which is derived the momentum-energy vector, represents the invariant mass acting as the gravitational source term of Einstein’s field equations. This vector may be alterhnately expressed in terms of fluctuation momentum and fluctuation energy functions of the creation and annihilation operators of symmetric and antisymmetric wavefunctions. That is, may be expressed in terms of the creation and annihilation operators of bosons and fermions.  fdp(a+,a) = dp(x,t);

fdE(a+,a) = dE(x,t)

Part of what determines whether it is “real” or “virtual” bosons and fermions that are being created and annihilated is the density of Heisenberg-uncertain momentum and energy of a particular volume of spacetime. The other component determining this distinction might be vacuum modes of resonant and coherent fluctuation.

 fp(a+,a) = p(x,t); fE(a+,a) = E(x,t) The Fermi-Dirac and Bose-Einstein quantum statistical laws do not distinguish real and virtual particles. Real versus virtual is determined by whether the mass of a particle is “on” or “off” its mass shell. Einstein’s momentum-energy relation defines the mass shell, E2 = m02c2 + p2c2 where m0 = E2/c2 – p2 So that when m ½ m0, we say then that the particle of mass, m, is “off mass shell.” If the mass shell equation applies to the expectation values of E and p, i.e., and , then an alteration in the relationship of the fluctuations in E and p to their respective Heisenberg uncertainties, /\E and /\p, must connect the distinction of real versus virtual to Heisenberg uncertainty. The question then becomes what is the precise nature of this Heisenberg uncertainty? If the H-uncertainty in and the fluctuation of say, the energy of a particle Lorenz transform identically, then how is it possible for to be Lorenz transformed, since Ö(2 - /\E) = m0 = E2/c2 – p2 = (2 - /\E)/c2 - (2 - /\p) E0 = (2 - /\E) - (2c2 - /\pc2) = ( + /\pc2) – (2 c2 + /\E) Reality of quantum vacuum energy and problems for theories not properly interpreting the physical role and significance of this vacuum energy. No evidence of Higgs boson, supersymmetric superpartners, observable general relativistic effects of an enormous quantum

vacuum energy density, gravitational waves, i.e., “gravitons”. Physics anomalies: Pioneer 10 & 11 acceleration anomaly, accelerated cosmological expansion, discrete or quantized cosmological redshift, galactic rotation curve problem, Davies-Unruh Effect, Casimir Effect, Lamb Shift, anomalous x-ray scattering, quantum mottle of high speed photographic emulsions, cosmological flatness problem, isotropy and homogeneity problem, stellar ageuniverse age inconsistency, time rate of decrease of the speed of light, etc. The quantum mechanical wavefunction seems to occupy a place midway between that of “purely abstract” mathematical entities (those entities possessing no reference to objects “found in nature”) and the very objects existing in nature. “If the numbers work, why go further?” “That way lies madness,” c.f., Science Channel, Cosmic Dimension. March 2004

Many worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics implies that each person occupies their own quantum universe by virtue of their own, unique Anthropic cosmological principle, e.g., JohnAnthropic cosmological principle, Mary-Anthropic cosmological principle, Susan-Anthropic cosmological principle, etc. If the fundamental physical constants are truly fundamental, then their fine tuning should affect the universe at all levels of its structure and function – the finer the adjustments made to the fundamental physical constants the subtler would we expect the resulting changes in the structure and function of the universe to become. Hypothesis: the very finest possible adjustments to the fundamental physical constants, i.e., adjustments to these constants at the very cusp of what is intersubjectively (objectively-physically) resolvable constitute an important and peculiar boundary, i.e., that by which the identities of separate individual consciousnesses are distinguished. All smaller changes/fluctuations in the values of the fundamental physical constants would be exclusively bound up with the operation of only a

single individual consciousness. Changes that skirt along this resolution boundary define distinct quantum observers. It is important to remember here that my acts of quantum observation may alter the eigenvalue of the system for me while merely altering the probabilities of the system eigenvalues for everyone else! In other words, for me it appears that only my consciousness collapses the wavefunction, while everyone else’s acts of quantum measurement only result in changes in the probabilities of a quantum system’s eigenvalues because I consider the other who is observing the system and the system he is observing to merely form a larger composite quantum system, one very likely to be in a statistically mixed state. Retarded and advanced Psi functions interfere between two successive points of observation. The influence of the future experiment/observation is hidden within the various quantal uncertainties of the system as it exists and evolves between the two successive points of observation. Back propagation of advanced Psi from a future experiment into the bubble of Heisenberg uncertainty existing in the present (that had propagated from a most recently past quantum experiment). This is the principle of the transactional interpretation of quantum mechanics, c.f., integration of virtual reality, Heisenberg uncertainty, and prn=MWI QM. The transcendental-literal is just as much a predicative oxymoron as is the designator, “round-square.” We might someday have confirmation of Platonism’s truth, for example, if space aliens from another star system visited this planet and they proved to be exactly humanoid in form. The existentialist, on the other hand, can never uncover proof of his philosophical prejudices, as there can be no empirical proof of something’s nonexistence or nonbeing, e.g., God. There is for the existentialist only critical analysis, which can sometimes serve him well,

seemingly, in unmasking incoherent or inconsistent notions, e.g., disproving the concept of free will. If the laws of logic turn out to be empirical . . . The manner of physical realization of date in the form of energy structures is relevant to the question of how much this data can be “reprocessed” to yield “new information.” The viral/mimetic properties of this data seems to have two seemingly very different informational properties informing structure B with the features of structure A and triggering/enabling the informing of structure B with newly accessible features of B’s dynamical ground. ñ represents the most that can be intersubjectively known about the state of an external state of affairs (system). But ñ can’t claim to say anything about subjective states. Consciousness may be defined as the substrate of metaphoricity (of experience, whose experience?) Primitive man interpreted the metaphorical reference he perceived in natural phenomena as a literal indication of a reality beyond his perceived environment, e.g., the downward slanting rays of the setting sun as “ropes of light” leading along and facilitating the path of the Egyptian god-king to his heavenly afterlife, etc. As noted earlier, the power of the humankind seems considerably greater than what is necessary for mere reproductive success. This is likely because consciousness rather than being the product of evolution has been adapted by evolution to its reproductive and survival oriented agenda. In other words, evolution has tapped into a preexistent dynamism that became available to it at some point (quantum brain interface question) so that the information processing capabilities of consciousness would not be expected to be fitted to the perhaps relatively humble aims of evolution.

Vagueness as paradigmatic interstitial. We believe consciousness to partake of quantum nonlocality because of the way the function of consciousness seems to transcend the mechanical that is, causal paradigm. The brain may resonate with specific carrier wave frequencies that either are or are not carrying modulations. The modulations are not themselves initially resonant, but become so with time. Are quantum uncertainties just expectation values of quantum uncertainty? “It’s not for nothing that. . .” Alterity’s plea for excuses UFO’s and nostalgia tours by future evolved humankind. Metaphysical presence vs. dissociative vs. hometown gemeutlichkeit. Part of coming to terms with oblivion, which is one’s fate, is coming to fuller realization that oblivion was one’s origin. The ground of being is recursion and infinite regress, if understood formally. Syntax and semantics place different kinds of limits upon the degeneration of recorded knowledge. Evolution is not just the development of functions enhancing reproductive success, but the enabling/triggering of functions with which the internal function of the organism interfaces. Inertial frame of reference is where there is a balance of internal binding forces of matter/inertial mass. An inertial frame would also be characterized by evenly spatially distributed uniform rates of time

dilation. But in curved spacetime, the probability density continuity equation, ïò/ït = Å ›J = 0 must be modified into a tensor density continuity equation. Lorenz invariance of quantum vacuum is connected with the fact of the vacuum’s not gravitating. Matter disrupts the Lorenz symmetry of the quantum vacuum, reflected in a shift in quantum vacuum statistics of virtual fermion and boson creation/annihilation events to a more excited, less spacetime symmetrical state, c.f., harmonic oscillator occupation number formalism quantum statistics of the oscillators levels of excitation. Density matrix as representing partial (or complete) decoherence of ñ through the appearance of fermion/boson probability density crossterms, disruption of information-bearing phase relations between ñbranches, appearance of entropy, thermal vacuum, Davies-Unruh, Hawking radiation, etc. The instinct for heroic self-significance is maintained against the enveloping, maddening crowd seems to require the presence of an audience attributing value to one’s actions. Can the Self fulfill this role when it is precisely this self which acts? Isn’t it a natural requirement that the audience be other than the Self? A metaphor, like Ayer’s sense datum, is self-validating as an assertion of relatedness. Much of the freedom of the human mind consists in the malleable nature of metaphors. The energy uncertainty of a system described by a density matrix rather than a wavefunction must be composed of at least two, if not three distinct components: quantum (Heisenberg) uncertainty, statistical (classical thermodynamic) uncertainty, and perhaps also the

Heisenberg but non-statistical observer/experimenter’s brain.

uncertainty

of

the

Through two quantum fluctuations may be random, they may nonetheless be correlated according to (representation) order parameters. This is not the case for statistical thermal (classical) fluctuations. The correlation of two distinctly separated quantum fluctuations via a nonlocal connection does not involve supraliminal “transmission” of information. What is termed “same” is an abstraction, an extrapolation of similarity to infinite degree. The essential characteristics of a stable, robust system cannot be importantly based upon such a minute degree of precision, though perhaps subtlety within precise bounds provides a better basis for seeming necessary infinitesimal precision. Fluctuations of vacuum energy do not back-react upon the ground state vacuum. Nor do zero-information configurations of such fluctuations. “Information” is not a conserved quantity seems to be a requirement of the 2nd law of thermodynamics and may be intimately connected with the nonlocal connectivity of nonconserved energy, i.e., Heisenberg energy uncertainty of quantum entangled energy fluctuations. Enumerate the nonclassical peculiarities of quantum mechanics as follows. Time is not a valid parameter in QM. Heisenberg uncertainty is ontological and not merely epistemological. Quantum states cannot be duplicated. If the temporal continuity of the Psi function is only by virtue of the rotation of Psi in phase space, then Psi is nonlocally connected along its worldline within Minkowski space.

Some initial conditions require the system to “bootstrap” itself. A bankrupt metaphysics it is which treats the very “to be” as transitive. IPL 289 Dodge Intrepid April 2003

ñ = ñs + iña

|ñ|2 = (ñ + iña)(ñs - iña) = |ñs|2 + |ña|2 = conserved probability density Bosons and fermions contribute positive and negative energy, respectively to the energy of the quantum vacuum. So probability density of bosons and fermions should be (+) and (-), respectively, to the energy of the QV. Let ñs = 1/Ö2(ñ + *ñ); ña = 1/Ö2(ñ - *ñ) and where by definition of an arbitrary complex function and its complex conjugate, ñ = æ + iê; *Ñ = æ - iê

so that,

ñs = 1/Ö2 x 2æ; ña = 1/Ö2iæ ñ = ñs + ña;

so that,

ñ x ñ = (ñs + ña)(*ñs + *ña) = ñs2 + ñañs + *ñañs + ña2 = = ñs2 + ña2 = ñ2

So we see that the square of the wavefunction is the sum of the squares of its symmetric and antisymmetric parts. Within the context of quantum mechanics then, the total probability density is equal to the sum of the probability densities of the symmetric and antisymmetric components of the total quantum field. And ñ s and ña behave like orthogonal complex functions, c.f., cit=Quantum Mechanics (au=Messiah), p. 584, Dover Books (1999).

From the continuity equation, we have ïò/ït + Å.J = 0 Å.J = Å.Js

and

ïò/ït = ïòa/ït;

so

ïòa/ït + Å.Js = 0; but we also know that, ïna/ït = [ïn(+a/-a)]/ït

In other words, the time rate of change in the number density of virtual fermions (in this case, neither a net increase nor decrease, but an oscillation) is equal to the time rate of change in the number density of composite spin 0 bosons, i.e., density of fermion/antifermion virtual pairs. This is only true if the composite spin 0 particle is treated as a single particle. So the above continuity equation must be reinterpreted in terms of number densities of composite spin 0 virtual “Cooper pairs” and number current densities of spin virtual bosons. The original context of the term, Cooper pairs, is that of superconductivity theory. In gravity field and/or expanding spacetime, cross terms develop, ï/ït [Å. òs] and ïòa/òt Is this why it is necessary for spacetime to be nonstatic in general relativity theory? The definitions, ñs = æ + iê and ña = æ - iê allowed us to deduce that ñs2 + ña2 = ñ2

But another definition could have been chosen, leading to the very same result, ñ = ñs + iña ñ2 = ñ*ñ = (ñs + iña)(ñs - iña) = ñs2 + iñañs - iñañs + ña2 ñs2 + ña2 = ñ2, with the real component of ñ being ñ s and the imaginary component of ñ being ña. So the probability densities of ñ, ñs and ña behave as though virtual bosons make a positive contribution to the vacuum energy density and virtual fermions a negative one. The general relativistic increase in the mass of the composite matter + vacuum spacetime energy density where a gravitational field is present is attributable to the induced imbalance in the formally symmetrical opposition of øs and øa brought about by matter via a perturbation of the free spacetime quantum statistics of this spacetime’s vacuum (ground state). April 2003 Relativistic mass increases with increasing gravitational potential in two distinct but precisely complementary ways (note the relevance here of the equivalence principle, i.e., the equivalence of inertial and gravitational mass): the negative contribution to the vacuum’s energy density becomes less negative while the positive contribution to this energy density becomes more positive. Vacuum interactions induce change in the phase relations of the ñ branch functions, eventually causing states decay/decoherence. Vacuum fluctuations cause entropy of otherwise closed quantum systems to increase. Yet another reason for asserting that the vacuum energy fluctuations mediate the temporal evolution of the physically meaningful parameters of the system. Now the phase of a ñ function are not thought to possess an absolute physical meaning – only the relative phase differences between deficient ñ.

ïòa/ït + Å›Js

doesn’t quite seem right for

and expanding universe, even a so-called “flat” spacetime. “Flatness” must possess some non-geometrical quality. Does this imply a violation of the Einstein Equivalence Principle? Supersymmetry necessarily involves both external (spacetime) and internal symmetries (e.g., intrinsic spin). Å›Js makes sense in a flat, expanding spacetime in terms of virtual Lorenz boosts within this spacetime (abstract, discontinuous accelerations). Relativistic angular momentum, juv, is a 2nd rank tensor, rather than a simple 4-vector. As the state of a harmonic oscillator is progressively excited to higher and higher states, the representation of the oscillator’s quantum state becomes progressively less symmetrical, c.f., Symmetry in Physics, p. 98 (Elliot and Dawber). For example, vacuum state becomes less antisymmetric and more symmetric, so to speak, even though spacetime Lorenz-covariant symmetry is actually decreasing. If a quantum mechanical system can exist in an energy eigenstate, i.e., a state of 0 energy uncertainty, i.e., /\E = 0, then the system may be considered to be an energetically closed, which is to say, as well, a thermodynamically closed, system. The possibility of such energy eigenstates seems itself inconsistent with the bar set by Quantum Theory on the copying of states nondestructively. For the 0 energy uncertainty of an energy eigenstate certainly means that the system exchanges no momentum or energy with an outside. (Investigate a possible momentum-energy theorem concerning Heisenberg uncertainty properties). Therefore, an outside for this system is sharply defined and an inside as well, to wit, the system meets the most rigorous definition possible of what is called a closed system. So in theory the system should be “copyable” and any limitations upon any attempts to duplicate the system must be considered merely practical in nature. This seeming

theoretical inconsistency may be resolved by a reexamination of the definition of Heisenberg uncertainty. Just looking over the equations in its derivation reveals what otherwise appears to be ordinary statistical symbols: mean, variance, standard deviation, etc. Apparently, there are degeneracy’s that cannot be removed by a mere judicious adjustment of wavefunction boundary conditions. To wit, fluctuations are occurring “in” the system with respect to degenerate observables of unknown nature and definition. If this observable can be identified as objective (external worldly), i.e., intersubjective, then the Psi function, Fourier analyzed in terms of the heretofore unknown observable may or may not be separable in terms of a product of component Psi functions with to include the Psi with respect to the mysterious observable. Web “link rot” analogy for brain’s and personal continuity. No closed system continuity, i.e., “substance-continuity” but continuity in the sense of maintained contact with an infinite ground. “Infinite precision” copying of a closed system = copying of an open system whose identity must be internal since the system can have no external boundaries. Anti-linkrot analogous continuity is contextual and so formalism transcending. The process of abstraction is object degenerate, e.g., this is why my childhood toys look the same to one though I am now an adult. Does a nucleic acid/nucleotide sequence genetically engineered contain more or less information of greater or lesser quality than an exactly similar sequence produced naturally during the course of organic evolution? The answer seems to be here that of the former necessarily possessing information in greater quantity and quality in the former instance than in the latter. The reason for this is that evolving structures such as organic molecules back-react and “informs” the ground that also informs the development of other similar organic molecules with which

hey will later interact. So engineered molecules that have not occurred naturally, say through mutual interactions of both molecules and molecular morphogenetic fields will not be properly quantum entangled with the dynamical quantum vacuum that mediates their and all molecular behavior. Engineering some new organic molecule, one that has never existed before, may not be able to fully profit from the preexistent repository of organic molecular nonlocal connectivity within the quantum vacuum, Sheldrake’s morphogenetic fields guiding the formative causation underlying the evolution of organic molecules. The new molecule must be allowed a sufficient train up period to feedback with the preexistent formative causal nonlocal quantum fields to virally disseminate its new fields to virally disseminate its new pattern. It does this through the mechanism of quantum entanglement of its wavefunction branches and their mutual phase relations with those of the preexistent fields. Nonlocal causal connections may supplement the initial and boundary conditions such as the particle masses and coupling strengths, the fine structure constant, Planck’s constant, etc. Quantum uncertainty and quantum information are intimately related possibly complementary or even largely or exactly similar, or perhaps just different manifestations of the same underlying, more fundamental quantity. Information and order are not the same quantity, as evinced by the example of a perfect crystal. prn=

Quantum phase is not physically meaningful per se, but all of the information content of a coherent quantum state is contained in the phase relationships. C.f., Statistics and prn=Quantum Group Symmetries. Information corresponds to fluctuations.

Order corresponds to

expectation values and boundary conditions. Order corresponds to syntax. The requirement of any document that it be both transcendental in its reference and literally true is a contradictory set of requirements.

Stated in words, the above says that the sum of the time rate of change Due to the vast advantage afforded by quantum computing over against classical digital, the fact of the impossibility of duplication of quantum states introduces an interesting dilemma: how then are informationefficient quantum mechanical processes supposed to support high fidelity copying and tran-scription of quantum information? Perhaps the quantum imposed limits on state copying is supplemented by the context for the states provided by quantum fields, specifically the quantum vacuum? The general connection between quantum statistics and quantum uncertainty, particular between the prn=Pauli and Bose principles and prn= Heisenberg uncertainty, may well provide the mechanism for explaining the another connection, that of quantum mechanics with general relativity. The positional uncertainty of fermions possesses a kind of metric elasticity, that is, fermions’ positional uncertainty tends to increase as the expectation value of their relative nearness to one another decreases. The opposite is, of course, true for bosons. Investigate the relationship of the commutator [A,B] and the Heisenberg uncertainties in A and B, /\A and /\B, where A and B are operators of a given wavefunction. The commutator determines the symmetry, antisymmetry, or mixed symmetry of the wavefunction upon which A and B operate. A Heisenberg uncertainty relation exists for A and B, i.e., /\A x /\B >= h if A and B do not commute, i.e., if [A,B] = i2ðh.

The commutator is 0 for bosons and i2ðh for fermions? No natural physical phenomenon obtains only as a transient. Resonance frequencies of the phenomenon always exist at which the transient response of the system approximates a steady state. So the time evolution of a quantum mechanical system is driven by a scalar field that is composed of virtual fermion-antifermion pairs of all species – a field much like that of the spin 0 pion. “In relativistic wave mechanics, a conserved probability density must be the time component of a divergence-free prn=4-vector probability current.” cit=Lagrangian Interaction - Doughty Does the conservation of relativistic four momentum imply that the prn= stress-momentum-energy tensor must be antisymmetric, i.e., Tuv = -Tvu? “prn=Covariantly expressed, the integrated relativistic source of gravity is the 4-momentum pu of the source system”, c.f., cit=Lagrangian Interaction (au=Doughty). The metaphorical unity of the manifestation of a thing tends to be interpreted by human beings as pointing up some deep underlying meaning connected with the object and which transcends the appearances. Although these distinct manifestations are perhaps disconnected abstract features of the object in differing contexts that are connected only through becoming so within the human observer’s consciousness by his will to create a meaningful connection. This is very much after the fashion of the connecting of dots into a trajectory. @$

An individual gifted with a sufficiently great power for metaphor could read passages from two texts treating entirely different subject matters and nonetheless see how both passages were actually speaking of the same deep, abstract reality. Hmmm.

The facility for metaphor is the essence of transformal, i.e., beyond-theliteral thinking, c.f., Heidegger’s prn=transcendental horizonal repositioning. This peerage of the jaded afterlife, replete with most witty electronic banter, cleverly distilled by esteemed associates from the metaphor of a once sweetly shared earthly existence, is to me an absolutely underwhelming experience. The universality of gravitational action wouldn’t seem to be adequately served by a theory of gravity in which gravitation is mediated by a specific exchange particle. This method of modeling the gravitational interaction, prompted by analogy with nongravitational forces that are specific in their action, will eventually be debunked as a kind of category mistake. Requiring a specific force mediating boson, e.g., a graviton to mediate gravitation may turn out to be an error similar to that committed in Bertrand Russell’s famous illustration of the child who, after watching the passing of a column of soldiers, asked his father when the regiment was to pass by. The universality of gravitational action is to be sought in the underlying unity of nongravitational forces. Gravitational mass is a manifestation of the nonuniformity of energy imposed by mass energy upon the vacuum energy. Mass energy in other words is a collection of boundary conditions upon the quantum vacuum. So it is not by virtue of the absolute energy content of particles or fields that a gravitational field is produced. It is the changes to the state of the quantum vacuum, in the form of nonuniformities created in it by mass that manifest in the form of gravitational fields. This is why the unconditioned quantum vacuum, though possessing an enormous and in fact, virtually infinite, absolute energy density, does not gravitate, does not engender the colossal gravitational field predicted by the theory of general relativity. Bosonic fluctuations are 3-momentum fluctuations and fermionic

fluctuations are energy that is to say purely timelike or imaginary 4momentum fluctuations. Because spin 0 and spin 1 quantities may be described as component scalar and vector quantities, respectively of a unitary 4-vector, and spacetime can be spanned by a 4-vector, this 4vector quantity, i.e., the fluctuation momentum-energy is a conserved quantity within 4-dimensional spacetime. Boson exchanges mediating all nongravitational binding forces are quantum 3-momentum fluctuations that underpin the binding energy of massive particles, and hence also underlie their mass. Creation and annihilation of virtual fermion-antifermion particle pairs underlie the Heisenberg energy uncertainty of all quantum thermodynamic systems and hence also the characteristic lifetimes of their constituent physical processes, i.e., temporal evolution. The ratio of the energy to the 3-momentum uncertainty determines within the free space vacuum the propagation 3velocity of electromagnetic radiation as well as that of other massless particles. A fluctuation momentum-energy density gradient should be associated with a spatial variation of the speed of light. A temporal variation in this ratio associated with cosmological expansion in which the time rates of change of the matter and vacuum energy densities are unequal would manifest as a temporal variation in the velocity of light. Another possibility, due to the differing quantum, and hence, thermodynamic statistics of virtual bosons and fermions, is that, if temperature is a meaningful concept in application to virtual particles, then the time variation in the density of virtual bosons and fermions must diverge during the course of cosmological expansion, leading to a cosmologically time-varying speed of light. But since he velocity of light is essentially the velocity of time, a time variation in “c” may also be thought of as a timelike variation in the rate of the passage of time. There appears to be three seemingly distinct within quantum mechanics, deterministic accordance with the time-dependent discontinuous quantum state reduction (Psi

types of time evolution temporal evolution in Schrodinger equation, function collapse), and

fluctuation of conserved physical quantities due to Heisenberg quantum uncertainty of these quantities. Both continuous and discontinuous modes of temporal evolution are mediated by the more fundamental temporal evolution constituted by quantum fluctuations comprising Heisenberg uncertainty. In the case of the continuous temporal evolution of the Schrodinger equation, information is conserved, implying concomitant conservation of Heisenberg uncertainty. In the case of the discontinuous temporal evolution represented by Psi function collapse, neither Heisenberg uncertainty nor information is conserved. This may be thought to be on account of the fact that wavefunction collapse, in the case where the collapse is “induced” by a quantum mechanical observer, necessarily involves the creation of information. The creation of information cannot be exactly offset by the destruction of other information of states no longer accessible to observation since, even though the fact of new information having been created in this way may not itself constitute some additional bit of information, certainly the fact of the loss of complementary state information does constitute a bit of information. The Pauli and Bose quantum statistics apply equally to both real and virtual fermions and bosons. Conservation laws are closely connected to symmetries. Do the fundamental fluctuations of quantum fields constitute small violations of the laws of conservation of the fluctuation physical quantities? When the exchange boson energies and scalar field frequencies are redshifted by a factor of [J’/\P(u)/J’/\P(I)]/[ J/\P(u)/J/\P(I)] with total fluctuation number current density conserved (manner of arising of gravitational binding energy?). This may contain a possible explanation of resolution of the paradox of reversible gravitational blue shift. (Apply theory of cosmological constant scaling behavior to the notion of gravitational binding energy fraction.) GM/Rc2 leads to both Ebinding /Emass and Emass/Eblackhole

Although the density of 3-momentum exchanges increase as the density of timelike 4-momentum fluctuations, i.e., energy fluctuations decreases, the bosons created/annihilated constitute exchange of 3-momentum at c’ < c and consequent dilating of time. Are inertial and gravitational mass related by a symmetry? there be two distinct mechanisms of time dilation?

Should

Viral dissemination nature of truth has been proposed in the postmodern age as the natural successor to naïve representational theory of truth. Whatever alternative theory of truth is chosen to replace the naïve representational truth theory, this theory must explain truth phenomena adequately, that it, at least as well as the representational theory. This alternative theory of truth must also conform to our metaphysical intuitions about truth’s scope and reach, e.g., we expect the “mechanism of truth” provided by a truth theory to “save the appearances” while always transcending them. Meditate on Pandora the viral nature of culture and the cohesiveness of the structures of consciousness. Aging brings with it not only frailty and infirmity, but also the prospect of greater peace and spirituality. This is simply because natural selection, the force and mechanism by which the individual’s consciousness is conditioned and shaped into a mind fitted to solving the problems and meeting the demands of survival within a threatening physical environment, gradually but surely loosens its grasp upon the creature it once fashioned for mere survival and reproductive fitness. Ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny in part because both share in the same dynamical, creative ground from which their structure was abstracted. A structure of condition upon a dynamical ground derived from this very ground naturally possesses the property of interface between this ground, and all further structures derived from the original structure, and the dynamic processes of the ground of the original structure.

The most profound truths are shared in spite of our ablest efforts at giving them articulation. The most inclusively shared intersubjective truths are still metaphorical in nature. “I have it on good authority that you are presently embarked upon an unwise course.” Creative intelligence cannot be instantiated by a closed system of any level of complexity, i.e., it must be nonlocal after the fashion, perhaps of a nonlocally connected quantum field though of much greater and likely infinite generality. In other words, locality is just a particular instance or example of determinacy, i.e., determinacy of spacetime dimensionality and scope. September 2000 cit=

ArXiv.gr-qc/0009036v1 Inertial mass and the quantum vacuum fields, au=Bernard Haisch, au=Alfonso Rueda, au=York Dobyns (A recent proposal by au=Vigier (7) that there is also a contribution to inertia from the Dirac vacuum goes along similar lines.), c.f., J. P. Vigier, cit= Foundations of Physics 25, 1461 (1995). “the rest mass of a particle is actually the field energy associated with point charge particle oscillations driven by the ZPF. If that is the case, there is no problematic conversion of mass into energy or enigmatic creation of mass from energy, but rather simply a concentration or liberation of ZPF-associated energy.” (Field energy relative to energy of another field interacting with this field energy. Mass is convertible to a relative difference in energy.) “But to achieve that requires a change in velocity, an it is precisely upon deceleration that the vacuum generates a reaction force that is called the inertial reaction force which Newton took to be an irreducible property of the so-called inertial mass, m.” (Interactions between particles and

fields necessarily involve accelerations.) “This uncertainty requires fluctuations in the field intensity, from one such small volume to another, and from one increment of time to the next: fluctuations which must entail fluctuations in the fields themselves. These fluctuations become more intense as the spatial and temporal resolution increases.” “In this view, h is not a unit of quantization nor quantum of action, but rather a scaling parameter for the energy density of the ZPF.” “Since electromagnetic fluctuations are assumed to generate uncertainty as embodied in the Heisenberg relation in the conventional quantum view.” (Keep prn=QED, just explain /\q in terms of prn=SED fluctuations in q – prn= Hybrid QED-SED Theory) Conservation of Heisenberg momentum uncertainty, for example, 3momentum uncertainty, presupposes that this uncertainty occupies a determinate spatial boundary within 3 dimensions. But determinate spatial boundaries imply infinite momentum uncertainty at these boundaries. One essential property of the individual consciousness is that a universe secretly revolves around it. What complicated dynamics results from the world revolving around each and every conscious entity? prn=

Quantum solipsistic anthropic cosmological principle with infinite world or universe degeneracy. April 2012 prn=

QSAP appears consistent with an inverse or “inside-out” hierarchical organization of the multiverse in which the number of universes vastly outstrips the number of galaxies in a universe, the number of multiverses vastly outstrips the number of universes within a given universe, and so on. Applying the Anthropic Cosmological Principle to such an open-ended hierarchical organization of physical reality appears to place at most one consciousness within a given

continuous and finite spacetime domain. The phenomenon of creativity seems all the more remarkable to one beholding this phenomenon in oneself because on is not aware of how much evidence the unconscious amasses in favor of a notion before the floodgates of inspiration are thrown open and a hunch or insight articulated by the conscious part of the self. Subjective truth is relative to one’s level of knowledge and understanding. The arbitrary may then become meaningful and then once again arbitrary, and so on. Different largely genetically determined personality types may function together in a kind of social cybernetic control system, each with its respective complement of talents and deficiencies that mutually complement each other: one personality type to conceive insights, another to knit these insights together, another to find the cracks in the edifice which results, another to repair it, another to destroy, another to adapt, mimic, distort, restore, reform, collect, admire, facilitate or inhibit the action of all of these, etc. A social collective composed of and functioning optimally with a highly varied collection of individuals whose activities must interlock in dynamic and complementary fashion in order best to facilitate the collective’s survival and prosperity will necessarily be composed of individuals removed from most of the constraints of natural selection. This permits existing individual types to evolve into more intensely specialized forms as well as for the evolution of altogether new types of individuals. Any change in the social conditions to which societies are subject that reduces rather than enhances the influence of natural selective pressures upon its member individuals grants greater scope for the forces of self-organization, whether these be chemical, biological, psychological, social, etc. A coherence (as opposed to a “resonance”) theory of truth implies that

truth is a multiplicity, that being is too complex to be unified within the realm of manifestation/individuation, this unity only being achievable through transcendence of spacetime, matter and form. A further implication here is that coherence theoretic truth is always metaphorical in nature. And truth by correspondence with the actual, with the “that which is,” of the greatest possible closeness and intimacy is the only such truth possible. In a closed system, the quantity of energy and hence information remains constant. Sometimes to observe the scenery too closely disrupts it – unless one becomes a part of the scenery itself. The structure of such intersubjectivity formed out of a solipsistic collective would transcend any conceivable mechanical, abstract or literal description. To say that a sacred text is literally true, or is only correctly interpreted in terms of how its human “authors intended it” is to severely limit the text’s reference, depriving the text of any growth and maturation of its context. For it is always possible that a text refers to an evolutionary or dialectical process and only appears to refer to determinate entities by virtue of the necessarily metaphorical language employed by the text’s authors. We must not take literal correspondence with fact to be the highest standard of truth. Correspondence truth pertains solely to the objective (read intersubjective) realm. Coherence truth may apply to either the subjective or intersubjective realms, each of which is degenerate but in fundamentally different ways, that is, formally and dynamically, respectively. But formal or theoretical explanations cannot account for the distinguishing of substances or their continuity. Perhaps it is proper in this connection to keep in mind the distinction of continuity of change with continuity through change, i.e., moving along “with the flow of events” versus remaining within some past moment. Somehow consciousness manages succeeding in doing both at once. The correspondence theory, or model, of truth does not apply to what

might be termed transcendental existence claims, e.g., God exists, Jesus Christ is the Son of God, etc. That is to say, the proper theory of truth, applicable to claims concerning the intersubjective realm, and its constructive entities is quite inapplicable to claims concerning the realm of subjectivity. The coherence theory of truth must be applied here since all subjective phenomena are grounded in coherent thought patterns of fluctuating consciousness. The consciousness that is the subject of fluctuation is not itself contained within experience. Because the abstract objects of experience never reveal themselves to us all at once, our reference to them, based upon our limited acquaintance with them, must be metaphorical and after the fashion of metonymy. The only means of referring to transcendental entities, i.e., subjective-alter, rather than subjective or intersubjective (read objective) is by virtue of the coherence of subjective notions within intuition. It might be worthwhile to investigate the logic of the physiological changes taking place when the body undergoes “the act of expiring,” i.e., death, or the physiological changes, which attend the bodies, futile attempts to survive mortal injury. For example, what possible evolutionary purpose or survival value is served by the “near death experiences” (NDE’s) experienced during the spontaneous decay or depolarization of the neuronal electrical potentials of a dying person, or the excruciating pain experienced by those with terminal illness or injury. These are examples of phenomena generated by biological systems subject to conditions under which they have not once been subject to the sculpting influence of natural selection. Such phenomena may be considered to be true examples of experiential epiphenomena. The phenomenon of coincidence, if meaningful, points to a structure of reality that is vast in its entangled and degenerate multiplicity. It might not be too difficult for a robot, well versed in the worked of Darwin, Freud, Marx, Sartre, Skinner, or more recently, those of

au=

Dennett, Dawkins, Minsky, et. A., to defend itself against the implied insult of “being less than human.” The works of Foucault and Derrida might also prove to be particularly helpful in this regard. au=Gödel, Bohm, Searle, Chalmers, Popper, Stapp, Dreyfus, Lockwood, etc. are among those who level this charge against the notion of intelligent machines, July 2011 c.f., Hubert Dreyfus’ What Computers Can’t Do, “What work has been done on learning by Piaget, for example, suggests that the same forms of “information processing" are required for learning which are required for mature intelligent behavior, and that intelligence develops by "conceptual revolutions." This should not surprise us. Computers can only deal with facts, but man the source of facts is not a fact or set of facts, but a being who creates himself and the world of facts in the process of living in the world. This human world with its recognizable objects is organized by human beings using their embodied capacities to satisfy their embodied needs. There is no reason to suppose that a world organized in terms of these fundamental human capacities should be accessible by any other means.” How would we as humans respond to the charge that our transcendental concepts are collectively bankrupt, i.e., devoid of “cash value?” The secret of transcendence, upon which humankind pins it most fervent hope, rest upon the validity of metaphor as a vehicle by which human concepts may be extended beyond the “bounds of sense,” c.f., Austen’s title by the same name. A good start might be to observe that experience is necessarily based in a medium that cannot in its operation be an object of this experience that it makes possible. What hope would man have for transcendence if someday science proves man’s instincts more sophisticated than his precious intellect. The fact that man’s intelligence was an adaptation fashioned by natural selection has in the minds of some thinkers cheapened it rendered his intellect a kind of survival gimmick.

Original and yet fulfilling the “requirements of the situation.” Occam’s Razor – not the simplest, but the most general, i.e., subtlest and most pervasive in its application. Is information just what happens at the mind side of the interface with reality? There should be a physical, intuitively-based and mechanical explanation for the seemingly abstract, mathematical truth that a spatial energy gradient is equivalent to the presence of a universally acting force field, i.e., ïE/ïxj is proportional to the magnitude of a force acting in the direction of the gradient and is not a mere abstract equivalency. But such an explanation must involve us in the workings of a concrete mechanism possessing features important to the realization of this connection between gradient and force, but which do not figure in the formal description of this connection. For this reason, the mathematical description cannot really constitute a causal “explanation” for the production of a force field from an energy density gradient. In free space, this gradient is nonzero along the time dimension even though, due to the mutual cancellation of bosonic and fermionic vacuum fluctuations, the absolute value of the vacuum energy is identically zero. So in free space, a gravitational force acts along the time dimension and tending to accelerate the rate of cosmological expansion. The motion of matter along the time dimension would have to be via quantum tunneling in order to explain the observed quantized cosmological redshifts. But the nature of the force acting within the region occupied by the gradient determines the mode of action of a specific force (force field). The global or cosmological curvature is necessarily connected with how, collectively, mass affects the time-rate-of-change of the cosmological constant (vacuum energy density). The time axes of galaxies become

progressively more spacelike at progressively greater cosmological distances. This is on account of an interaction between the global curvature and the hypersurface volume integral and the hypersurface volume integral of all the local time-rates-or-change of the vacuum energy density. This shows a kind of equivalence between the timerate-of-change of the cosmological constant and the cosmos’ global spacetime curvature. The question of the vacuum’s gravitational mass, if any, may only be resolved by accurate measurement of the vacuum’s absolute energy density. This is only possible, if every variety of particle and force contributing to the vacuum’s absolute energy can be measured. A quantity of energy only makes a difference to an energy system by virtue of a causal mechanism that takes the relative energy differences within the system as input and operates upon it. A particular application of this principle is the following. A body of given inertial mass energy, m inert, manifests a gravitational mass, mgrav, by virtue of the interaction of the information quantity rather than information content (reason for the equivalence of inertial and gravitational mass, the cash value of which is the exactly similar nature of response of both types of mass to acceleration (whether by thrust or acceleration field, e.g., gravitational field) ) with the quantities of information interacting with it, as well as with the overall quantity of information of the system as a whole. August 2013

“But why complexity is a necessary condition of a higher form of consciousness? I suggest a plausible answer: because the sensitivity to any stimulus may be increased through the interconnectedness of the constituents of the organism. The increased degree of sensitivity in groups is available through the interactive creation of collective states having energetic states with smaller net energy differences between each other than within the constituents themselves”, c.f., cit=The Physics of Collective Consciousness (au=Grandpierre, 1996).

Information content cannot be transmitted through spacetime, tagged to conserved physical quantities governed by a continuity equation. Curvature of spacetime vs. spatiotemporal variations in spacetime momentum-energy density. Time-energy uncertainty and lifetime of decay processes mediating time dilation, c.f., Fermi’s Rule of the Golden Mean governing relationship between probability transition rate and magnitude of system energy uncertainty. Heisenberg time uncertainty governs the characteristic lifetimes of all fundamental physical processes. This time uncertainty applies equally to the location within a given physical-process-characteristic time interval of any given instant of time within this interval. A Fourier frequency spectrum analysis of a given physical process of Heisenberg time uncertainty, /\t, cannot demonstrate the unity of fluctuation structures component to the system over frequencies beyond the frequency spectrum boundaries defined by the quantity, 1//\t. Displacement-momentum uncertainty mediating relativistic mass. Bandwidth model of applied to cellular representation of quantum mechanical system. How to explain the relative masslessness of the quantum vacuum. Balance of energy contributions from bosonic and fermionic fluctuations of vacuum. Inability to measure motion relative to vacuum fluctuations explains vacuum’s Lorenz-invariance. Lorenz transformation applies to time, energy, position, and momentum Heisenberg uncertainties.

All matter is either fermions or bosons. Fermionic and bosonic vacuum fluctuations underpin spacetime symmetry. Shift in vacuum statistics of these fluctuations of the quantum vacuum explains breaking of spacetime symmetry represented by gravitation. No possibility of distinguishing contributions to /\q from observed system from system represented by observer? Energy density if scalar and 3-momentum density is vector. The two components combine into a conserved 4-vector. The gradient of a 4vector is a 2nd rank tensor. The only real basis for continuity in quantum mechanics is the observer/potential observer (via the wavefunction). Curved time is only a meaningful concept within curved spacetime. Universality of quantum spin as a common denominator of particles and force fields. Energy transition degeneracy of 3-momentum exchanges leads to the notion of vacuum energy fluctuation degeneracy of vacuum 3momentum fluctuations. A simultaneous suppression of energy fluctuations “compensated for” by enhancement of 3-momentum fluctuations constitutes rotation of the 4momentum fluctuations density vector within spacetime. Vacuum occupied by a mass-energy distribution may be modeled as a spacetime rotation of the quantum vacuum’s fluctuation momentum-energy. But this is a spacetime rotation, i.e., not a spacetime rotation within spacetime, but a rotation of spacetime. A spacetime rotation is equivalent to time and space dimensions becoming coincident, e.g., black hole. Another way of saying this is that 3-momentum and energy vectors become coincident (this, of course, is also true for the fluctuations in these quantities). We may say here that fluctuations in a physical quantity provide the ground for this quantity (“ground of

being,” c.f., Heraclitus). Relativistic length contraction in x-direction necessarily connected with an increase in the mass’ x-directed fluctuation 3-momentum density. Is locality due to collective interaction of myriad consciousnesses with some nonlocally connected field? Or is locality due to the mutual interaction of myriad nonlocal fields? The more strongly fermions in a gas or plasma interact (through mutual exchange of bosons, e.g., of the electromagnetic field) the further exists the system from its quantum mechanical ground state, i.e., vacuum state. We suppose here that the closer a quantum thermodynamic system approaches its quantum mechanical ground state, the greater the density of energy exchange between the system and the global vacuum state (quantum vacuum). Imagine pulling apart the interacting constituent fermions of a quantum system, decreasing the density of 3-momentum fluctuations within the volume occupied by the combined system + local vacuum in the form of mutual boson exchanges. It is clear that in this situation, the density of bosonic exchanges, i.e., 3-momentum fluctuations within the expanded system volume must decrease as the density of vacuum energy fluctuation increases. This increase in the density of vacuum energy fluctuation is easily explicable in terms of a decreased density of fermi blocking of virtual by real fermions. Recall that Fermi blocking and Bose enhancement are reciprocal or complementary effects of real upon virtual matter. It is only the variation in the vacuum energy induced by energy in some other form that can be the cause of inertial/gravitational mass. Local vs. nonlocal interactions may be simply and elegantly distinguished as one place in space, everywhere in time vs. one place in time, everywhere in space. Another way of characterizing this distinction might be that of continuous in time, discrete in space vs. discrete in time, continuous in space.

The four dimensionality of spacetime is easier to grasp in a concrete way if one reflects upon the fact that myriad distinct reference frames are effectively in constant interaction to sustain any given physical system appearing within the observer’s own frame of reference. The magnitude of vacuum energy fluctuations is measured relative to the expectation value of the vacuum’s energy. As discussed elsewhere, observable expectation values may always be alternately described in terms of some sustained interaction between the observable’s Heisenberg uncertainty and the magnitude of its fluctuation. The above definitions of local vs. nonlocal interactions suggests that both types of interactions must be interlocked in some kind of structured way for a particle to trace out a trajectory in spacetime. It is more true to say that all words become metaphors rather than that all words are metaphors. What accounts for the distinction of real vs. virtual in the sense of dynamism vs. boundary condition? The more accurately the experimenter wishes to pin down the behavior of the entity or system under study, the more he endangers the parallelism between phenomena and description presupposed by a correspondence paradigm of scientific truth. Truth expands in scope to becoming equivalent to logical selfconsistency (i.e., validity) or logic, at some level of detailed structure of the real, becomes no different from what exists, i.e., the rational is the real, c.f., Hegel’s Phenomenology of Mind. The temporal evolution of a system’s logic must be noncomputable (by that system).

Does ñ temporally evolve independently of the quantum energy uncertainty (fluctuations) of the corresponding system’s vacuum? This question is related to the notion of eigenfunctions’ being an abstract idealization of the quantum theoretic formalism. The mind is not quantum mechanical. Information is only conserved within an informationally closed system. Mind breaks the symmetry upon which information conservation depends. Because vacuum fluctuations render the laws of thermodynamics only approximately true, their spectrum must not conservation of fluctuations would imply that the vacuum fluctuation spectrum is indeed thermal. Any being less complex/sophisticated than reality itself could not possess this reality as a proper object of its knowledge. This is another way of saying that Man is forever barred from possessing as an object of his knowledge an object more subtle and complex than himself. The anomalous component of sunward acceleration experienced by the Pioneer 10 space probe may be accounted for by a mock gravitational field associated with the interaction of gravitational time dilation with a time-varying, locally nonzero cosmological constant. If the energy density of the cosmological constant is proportional to the time rate of change in this energy density, then given the value of the anomalous acceleration, the spherically symmetric, spatial energy density gradient centered about the sun may then be determined, if this gradient can be wholly attributed to spatially varying magnitude of the gravitational time dilation. Natural selection does not account for the design basis, if any, for consciousness itself, only for its manner of structuring, i.e., into that of a higher primate. In conjunction with the artifacts of culture, natural selection may largely account for the structuring of this consciousness as human consciousness. Then again, consciousness may not participate in

a structure of human consciousness per se unless it becomes affected in some way. Separation from God involves withdrawal of all of grace and providence from the being and environment of the person. All of the undesirable qualities of this existence are on account of a choice by the individual and involve no active participation of God Himself. Waking existence is uncertainty under the control of “the object,” that is, the sum of determinate conditions to which this uncertainty is subject. The internality of mind implies that what distinguishes one consciousness from another cannot be attributed to imposed external conditions. This means that the distinction of persons is absolute. Pauli exclusion between hyper-rotated Bose condensates (a 45 degree spacetime rotation out of the spacetime hyperplane, in the direction of a 2nd subjective time dimension, virtually orthogonal to the intersubjective time dimensions. Providence is the embodiment of grace, which gives credence to the verisimilitude of man’s handiwork. The parts without knowledge of each other from a perfect wholecoincidence. Consciousness if it exists, only does so through its projected, transcendental being of which natural man should have no interaction. The functioning of mind presupposes chance and necessity’s mutual recognition. Camouflage of optic blind spot with internally self-consistent patch implies the retinal image is holographic.

No concept of consciousness because it is a pure particular concrete individual and therefore possesses no abstract features apart from transcendental ones. March 2014 We can have no concept of consciousness because concepts are formed through the abstraction of some essential quality or property from multiple instances. Yet one only ever has one's own example as an instance from which to draw upon. Moreover, consciousness itself is logically elusive because it is "purely concrete" as everything we experience is made from it. The *purely* concrete is *wholly abstract* (a self-contradictory concept, therefore). Intuitively, there *must be* a concept of consciousness, however. So the concept of consciousness can only be arrived at via intuition (insight). "Consciousness" needs be a transcendental concept, then and individual consciousnesses, respective instantiations of some universal mind. . . Yes, Sam, I do. :p Lime Cat The contradiction is resolved by noting that, secretly, there must be more than one level of description/discourse at work in understanding consciousness as firstly, "transcendentally abstract" and secondly, "wholly concrete". The two levels of description are the immanent and transcendent. Again, atheism (in the sense of a mere philosophical disbelief in universal mind) is just half-baked solipsism. Let me get at the notion of God by discussion consciousness, which I believe importantly relates to the notion of "the image of God."

We can have no concept of consciousness because concepts are formed through the abstraction of some essential quality or property from multiple instances, which possess the property in common. Yet one has only ever possessed one's own peculiar example as a solitary instance of consciousness from which to draw upon in any doomed and misguided attempt to formulate such as concept. (Do not confuse here the notion of "states of consciousness" with the much more general notion of consciousness as such.) Moreover, consciousness itself is logically elusive because it is "purely concrete" as everything we experience is

made from it. The *purely* concrete is *wholly abstract* (a selfcontradictory concept, therefore). Still more, by definition, the "subjective" (*infra*-subjective, more properly literally speaking) can possess no *inter*-subjective description. Intuitively, we all probably acknowledge that there *must be* a concept of consciousness, however. . . which is to say, consciousness is not an incoherent notion. So the concept of consciousness can only be arrived at via intuition (insight), one might say even, "by revelation". "Consciousness" needs be a transcendental concept, therefore, and individual consciousnesses, respective instantiations of some universal mind and/or transcendental category, which can only be entertained by such a universal mind. This universal mind I am identifying with the mind of God. We can perhaps see from what has been suggested, that by its very nature, such a mind must be utterly free of limitation, though it may manifest itself in limited form as human, demigod, wrathful Old Testament God or loving, forgiving Incarnation. This is my version of Unorthodoxy.

November 2011

It is more correct to say that consciousness has an experience of us than that we have an experience of consciousness. Decemnber 2011 Like the concept of being, there can be no literal concept contrasting to a would-be or metaphorical notion (concept) of consciousness. We can only contrast with consciousness in its various modes or applications, which are instantiations of this concept, e.g., subconscious or unconscious versus conscious, protoconsciousness, hyperconsciousness, etc. May 2013 kwo=“Haecceity may be defined in some dictionaries as simply the "essence" of a thing, or as a simple synonym for quiddity or hypokeimenon. However, such a definition deprives the term of its subtle distinctiveness and utility. Whereas haecceity refers to aspects of a thing which make it a particular thing, quiddity refers to the universal qualities of a thing, its "whatness", or the aspects of a thing

which it may share with other things and by which it may form part of a genus of things. Duns Scotus makes the following distinction’, c.f., web= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haecceity

In a dialectical process of change no steps may be skipped, no short cuts and no short circuits available along the course, n’est pas? It is conditions that are subject to mathematical or causal, that is, to say, articulate or discursive description. The succession of cultural forms in an open, technologically advance society may illustrate the nature of dialectical change. By being open and technologically advanced, members of the culture are less driven to manifest predictable types of response/behavior. Basic preconditions for virtuality are the following: Infrastructure Large database of cultural memes Breakdown of naïve realism Critical level of valuation of information as a commodity High multimedia integration Identity dissociation Information genres as defining geographical relations Critical level of development in technology of simulation Rise of intelligent artificial agents Definitions of real vs. artificial erodes Triumph of deconstruction/post modern thought Integrated though dissociated is along a single continuous axis, consciousness as such. Objectivity as going beyond its experiential “cash value” of intersubjectivity. Metaphor points to higher dimensionality of experience beyond that of the moments in afterlife. Constraints of

intersubjectivity left behind, as the entering this life is necessarily a personal journey. October 2013 fcbk= So if I follow you, Sam, the self is a kind of recursive, ongoing sociolinguistic construct and so-called phenomenal consciousness is but an illusion, a metaphysical projection of selfconsciousness that we have wrong-headedly all along supposed was some kind of peculiar structuring of some basic or general psychic substance. Pure, phenomenal consciousness, then does not really exist because it's a substance-reification of mental relationships produced by underlying brain processes, say. Some have said that the quantum behavior manifest in the subatomic world suggests that no omniscient God exists, for otherwise, all wavefunctions would collapse and Heisenberg uncertainties would contact to zero, either because of His Consciousness of due to the determined influence of His Will. Nonlocal connections and interactions must mediate the subjective, while local interactions mediate the intersubjective. Within nonlocality, everywhere is here and every time is now. Integrally whole (holographic) nature of quantum uncertainty. Overdetermined effects define a cluster of possible antecedent causes. What is the nature of the integration of the causes, any one of which, or superposed admixtures of which, could have caused the event in question? Since the composition of the overdetermined effect causal set is dynamic phenomenal underdetermination is the result. The Fourier-like expansion of each real (existent) person’s consciousness is the collection of the consciousness of all other really existent persons? The observer always commutes with himself (through his own

consciousness), but with not one else does he commute. Consciousness may be related to the brain’s quantum self-interference. Mattergy Corporation Multiple modes of coherence interconnected forms a more stable dynamical system, than when the system possesses only a single mode. Can two sets of random quantum fluctuations be nonlocally connected to produce order? Because of consciousness’ nondeterministic temporal evolution, no Psi can be assigned to it so when consciousness interacts with a system it always “surprises” that system, i.e., consciousness can never temporally evolve parallel to the system it has observed even though it, consciousness remains identically itself throughout its temporal evolution, this may help explain the phenomenon of decoherence. Consequently, there can be no stable correlation between evolving consciousness and the external quantum world. What type of causality may be derived from the pattern of correlation of fluctuations of a human consciousness and a quantum system with which they are interacting? The outcome of a measurement being performed upon a prepared quantum state is not the actualization of one of the eigenfunctions of Psi as an eigenfunction with a probability relative to the probabilities of the other eigenfunctions within the spectrum of Psi, but the selection of one of these eigenfunctions as the representation of the actual state of the system upon which a measurement is being performed, c.f., Ulrich Mohrhoff’s articles at http://xxx.lanl.gov If one thinks of the electromagnetic wave of a photon as being the photon’s wave function, then the square of this EM wave is the

probability wave of the photon’s position along its axis of propagation. We might try to be consistent with the Many Worlds Interpretation of QM and postulate that 1 – P(x,y,z,t) represents the probability for the photon being somewhere else. The moving within “amplitude space”? Always faster than c with c being the lower limit case where the photon has infinite wavelength. A maximal speed of c in vacuo may be due to limitations on velocity/momentum in amplitude space. Velocities greater than c for EM propagation may be possible through stretching of the photon’s EM wave during its propagation, c.f., recent v>c experiments. There is not back-reaction of a quantum mechanical system upon a given vacuum without a crucial degree of complexity having been reached at which the intersubjective vacuum state can no longer “keep up with” the temporal evolution of the system at which precise point, the system begins to react upon a vacuum not already within the spectrum of mutually interfering vacua that constitute intersubjectivity. However, when a conscious observer, through a freely willed action, performs an observation upon even a simple (subcritical) quantum system, the system back-reacts upon the quantum vacuum – or rather, the observer back-reacts upon this vacuum through mediation of the system being observed. A seed is not thought to contain all of the information required to “code for” the mature organism, that is, to grow and develop from it. Each vacuum extends throughout the entire breadth, metaphorically speaking, perhaps, and interferes with every other. This is the quantum basis of intersubjectivity. Wavefunction collapse may be on account of a sudden need for the intersubjectively determined quantum system to accommodate a new quantum vacuum within the preexistent vacuum spectrum constituting the “object.” The question, “Why am I me, rather than someone else?” is a

transcendental question. The reason for this is that each individual may ask himself this same question. The reason why I am me, myself cannot be the same as the reason why you are you unless the basis for distinguishing persons should turn out to be illusory. Or perhaps the individual’s consciousness is not the most general property of all his consciously aware experiences. If the consciousness of each person constitutes an example of consciousness as such, then one’s own consciousness does not itself constitute the most general quality or property of one’s conscious experience. In such a case, consciousness must be seen as a transcendental quality of experience. The transcendental nature of consciousness as such may be closely related to the phenomenon of mind termed intentionality. Or perhaps the real basis for distinguishing persons is not some subtlest quality of the experience of the individual, but merely the absolute distinction of wills. Consciousness is the basis of abstract thought, that is, the construction of abstract categories. And so we should not expect that consciousness would itself possess the same ontological status as an object among its other objects. This is because the objects of consciousness are its projections while consciousness possesses objective being and is more than a mere projection of itself. Evil may be founded in “daemonic acts of creation” in which creativity acts outside the will of God and which is forced therefore to avail itself of inferior methods and materials, e.g., imperfectly self-consistent and not perfectly stable and mutually harmonious. For every truth that seems right there is another also appealing to the intuition that is its imposter. If a human being is connect in an assertion of fact, then either (1) he does not know how right he is or, (2) he does not really understand how he manages to be right, or (3) or both of these are true. Mind movers itself (acts) in the physical world by a marshalling of

quantum fluctuations that are in both local and global interaction with the brain to reset the quantum mechanical boundary conditions on the deterministically evolving quantum brain fields. This peculiar action on the part of the self is perhaps intimately bound up with consciousness’ action of collapsing the wavefunction of quantum systems it observers. A some point in the causal chain of light striking the lens of the eye, for example, and stimulating retinal activity that is transmitted to and along the optic nerve, etc., there comes into play a dynamic remodulation of the further progression of the perceptual causal chain that necessarily invokes the action of quantum nonlocal interactions. If truth is transcendental, then the ultimate nature of truth is neither by correspondence or reference, but is based on an open-ended though coherent metaphysical structure. The open-ended self-consistency of the coherent metaphoricity of the real implies that the world is an ongoing, intelligently designed project. Does the absence and/or mathematical consistency of spherical waves in 3 dimensions have anything to tell us about the nature and possibility of gravitational waves? In classical physics, the probability description of (thermal) fluctuations is based on the mutual independence and dominance of non-neighboring fluctuations and so is purely statistical in nature. However, where the case of quantum mechanical fluctuations is concerned, there is no presumption of mutual independence of fluctuations. Though we certainly expect local causality to obtain between QM expectation values. The “devil is in the details” and nonlocality is owing to the nature of quantum fluctuation phenomena that is not shared with that of classical physical thermal fluctuations. If uniquely quantum phenomena lie behind the mysterious properties of the mind and consciousness, then causal-physical models of

consciousness are necessarily doomed to failure. The coherence principle (which may well be related to the notion of grace) implies that not all possibilities are to be treated as equally possible or as of equal (or null) value. The fact that some structures are stable, some metastable, while others only capable of existing as virtual states, perhaps, only in theory, implies that relative value exists, which is the surest indication that somewhere there is absolute value. The fact of relative differences in coherence (stability, biological, social, cultural, political, or religious system, points up the reality of distinctions of value. And the basis of value here appears to be made of however, beauty, meaning and truth, and not just of our empty and isolated logical self-consistence (which has no reference beyond itself, that is, transcendence). Certainly one has to possess a certain requisite degree of attractiveness in youth for the preservation of one’s appearance to become a priority in middle age. The creative, dynamical ground of being does not evolve all of its notions entirely from out of its own inner nature, but takes it lead from evolving structures that have become from it independent while maintaining with this ground some contact. This is the true essence of creativity – the developing of novelty of the self, but from the other rather than just from the influence of the other as transmuted, i.e., “transubstantiated” via the self’s essence or essential nature. Quantum mechanical wavefunction collapse may be a reaction of intersubjective ground becoming suddenly brought into interplay with a dynamical ground heretofore foreign to and hence incommensurable with it. It is logically inconsistent to explain the emergence of subjective ground from intersubjective ground. This would constitute a clear case of metaphysically “putting the cart before the horse.”

Although there may indeed not be an existent entity to correspond with each conception of such an entity, there might indeed be an answer or collection of answers for each question that the mind can conceive. It seems as though the method of verification of the probability density function is highly problematic, if one imagines limiting oneself to empirical investigation. The quantum mechanical wavefunctions, however, may be calculated precisely from theory. However, the exact structure of the quantum wavefunction is sensitive in some cases to the precise structure of the boundary conditions to which the wavefunction is subject. The reality of the active principle of Sin, when glimpsed in its utter selfpreserving and evolving pervasiveness may easily convict one of the desperate needs for a universal savior for mankind. The truth has roots in all worlds. The truth maintains itself through expansion of its domain of reference. This means that truth is transcendent but only experienced by humans as metaphorical truth. The truth is unpredictable in its tenacious resilience. Internality derives from ground, externality from its precipitates. The uncertainty principle is telling us that, in addition to the contribution of interactions to the dynamics of a given system, there is also another important one of given system, there is also another important one of the process of the continual crystallization of relations and elements into the system not from “outside” itself but from within it sown sustaining ground. Analogous to this is the distinction of the processing of data vs. processing of information. An attempt to rationally explain consciousness, that is, in terms of some rational system of structurings of such consciousness, if successful, would lead to the paradoxical-seeming situation in which each of his own particular consciousness alone. Clearly any rational explication of consciousness must include the distinction of personal, or individual,

consciousness from consciousness as such while at the same time allowing the demonstration of one’s own consciousness as a particular variety of consciousness as such. Information can be defined as a reduction in uncertainty. Therefore, quantum and classical physics afford us two importantly different concepts of information and perhaps also entropy, c.f., Planck on thermodynamics. State space description cannot accommodate decoherence phenomena. Psi is a code containing its own interpretation. Reduction of classical physical (statistical) uncertainty represents data. A reduction of quantum mechanical (Heisemberg) uncertainty represents information. Unlimited number of theories explain the data. The potter doesn’t create his clay and the nature of this clay is not to be explained in terms of what forms may be fashioned from it. However, we expect the explanation of consciousness to be unique (subjectivity of conscious states assures this), and so we don’t expect a theoretical explanation to be able to capture what is unique about consciousness qua consciousness. No finite collection of facts/data interpreted theoretically will account for the “phenomena” of consciousness. The phenomenal continuum is not itself a phenomenon. Clay qua “clay” is not among the infinite number of forms fashioned from it. One manner of characterizing the subconscious value judgment in considering one human face and form beautiful compared to another,

viewed as “homely” might be to describe the first as divine, angelic, inspiring, gifted, heavenly, etc., the other, as discernibly a product of biological evolution. IN the case of the latter visage or countenance, one becomes detached from the feeling of “naturalness” of the human form and physiognomy, one’s aesthetic perception is placed in a kind of “dissociative state.” What is distinctive about a given individual’s face is the manner in which it deviates from some standard face even though no face we could be presented with would be utterly absent of “deviations”. When physical interactions become so complex, relative to the underlying quantum vacuum substrate, these processes can no longer proceed in an automatic fashion. Suddenly the Universe has to pay attention (from the inside) to how the system is going to proceed further. Scratch the surface of an altruist and you’ll find a politician. On childhood: where is it written that ascent to the next level of development and maturation means one has mastered and plumbed the wondrous depths of all the previous had to offer? The fusing together of cobbled together pieces represented by biological evolution suggests a possible parallel process having occurred throughout the evolution of theistic religion, specifically, Christianity. As Moyers says in his interviews with Joseph Campbell, virgin births, God sacrifices, resurrections, second comings, judgment days, and so on are basic elements of the mythology and religion of all cultures and times. In analogy with biological evolution in which mankind shares more then 50 percent of his genetic material with most of the organisms of this planet, but in which we think the human genome represents the greatest and most harmonious combining together of the genes we share with the rest of creation, so to does Christianity represent the most ideal blend of the stock elements of the mythological and religious collective unconsciousness.

The last step in constructing the magical technological implement is nature correctly or more than appropriately, as is usually the case, figures out what our trial and error fumbling has been aiming at and at once, genie-like, provides for their realization. One must not ignore the essential role of Providence, as opposed to God in effecting the ultimate seamless fusion and coherent resonance of scientific/technological endeavor with its ground. Just logic by itself can tell us nothing whatever about what exists, though perhaps what can exist. Science cannot expose the magic, which lurks within fundamental fluctuation phenomena if the ground of fluctuations is sensitive to the experimenter’s probings and proddings. The experimenter’s implements are determined by classical variables (quantum expectation values) neatly and cleanly separable from the classical features of the system he is probing. However, once it is decided that quantum scale phenomena shall come under the scope of his experimental probings, entanglement of fluctuations within the system, the apparatus, and the experiment’s brain are inevitable. (This reminds us of the recursive double-bind when the experimenter probes to deeply and finely the structure and dynamics of his own gray matter). The stability of fundamental physical constants, for example, may be more due to a conditioned resonance (harmony) of multiple dynamic fluctuation fields (i.e., grounds, such a that represented by physical, individual, society, etc., in fact, any system with “emergent properties” shall possess some of its own ground partially independent of any supposed overarching ground (internality here). Mercurial nature of fluctuation phenomena and the children’s talking toys paradigm. Quantum behavior may be summed up as anything goes within the

bounds. But what if nature is not symmetrical in the sense of normalization and uncertainty degeneracy, freedom of causality to be convergent and/or divergent with respect to the behavior of the fluctuation sets comprised by a quantum uncertainty, one in which the relative portions of each tape of quantum entropy vs. synchronicity on a number of levels, in which this interaction is by definition not ascertainable within QM. This relative proportion of divergent vs. convergent fluctuation is determined by how the relative proportions of the experimenter’s brain and the quantum system he is observing shift in relative magnitude, as well as how these two sets of quantum fluctuations change in the mutual resonance. The demagogue brings to the inarticulate masses definition and expression of their greatest fears and prejudices, and so inspires a slavish devotion from these masses. The masses secretly know that what they swear alleagiance to is but an outward projection of their would-be crystallized selves. It is in reality the demagogue who serves and is the slave of the masses. Knowing the future consists in knowledge of the self-consistent possibilities. In this way, physical reality, i.e., quantum mechanics, is structured similarly to the mind. “Before you were in the womb, I knew you.” Apply the logic of the solution to the paradox of free will and Divine foreknowledge to the proper interpretation of the relevance of this scripture to the morality of abortion. In the “The Next Generation” Star Trek episode, entitled Parallels, Commander Data proposes the theory that each person possesses their own, unique “quantum signature.” Worf, displaced from his own quantum universe when his returning shuttlecraft struck a quantum

spacetime “rift”, can only be returned to his home universe, according to Data’s theory, by locating the quantum universe possessing an identical quantum signature to Worf’s and somehow arranging to transport him there. Data’s theory suggests a strange, solipsistic, quantum mechanical version of the multiverse suggested by certain treatments of the Anthropic Cosmological Principle wherein each person possesses his or her own quantum parallel universe while all other persons appearing within this particular parallel universe along with him or her are either mere projections resulting from the interference of other persons’ quantum signatures with one’s own January 2012 or perhaps are as physically real (in a classical physical sense) as oneself, but under a full-blooded quantum mechanical description (a complete theory of which must ultimately include such mysterious subjective entities as consciousness and “quale”) are just phylogenetic (as opposed to “ontogenetic”) “also rans”, i.e., “philosophical zombies”. Note: could there be a “litmus test”, e.g., quantum mechanical-based for the genuine presence of consciousness on the one hand and the detection of zombies, on the other? Perhaps a derivative test, one which verifies behaviors or behavioral tendencies that are essentially characteristic for consciousness such as whether the test subject possesses the capacity for dissociative states in which he or she can momentarily step outside of the thrall of their biological instincts as well as his social and cultural conditioning? It has been alleged that such a quantum litmus test for consciousness may be definable. October 2013 fcbk=Philosophers of mind, who have unfortunately acquainted themselves with the implications of the Anthropic Cosmological Principle, must now come to grips with the likelihood that, if not Boltzmann brains or Ancestor simulations, then indeed some other cosmos simulacrum likely far outstrips in probability and number the appearance of a bona fide and physically real cosmos, which both respects the tenets of society-defined naive realism *and* the recently confirmed cosmological evidence of the universe having originated in a state of extraordinarily low entropy. February 2012 Nature is structured in such a manner that no given person, A can prove that the wavefunction did not collapse for a person, B, provided that certain minimal conditions obtain. I am conceiving of this somewhat along the

lines of Hawking’s chronology protection mechanism. Nature is structured to 1) protect chronology and 2) prevent any observation or experiment that would reveal the truth of metaphysical solipsism. But turnabout is fair play and one’s own phenomenal projection into other persons’ universes is enabled by this same pattern of mutual quantum mechanical interference. So we arrive at the notion of objective reality being grounded in a quantum interference pattern between myriad individual quantum signatures while subjective reality is grounded in the dynamics of the evolution of a single quantum signature. This is similar to the notion of each person’s brain being tuned to interact with a quantum vacuum unique to itself while the objective physical world is grounded in the collective state formed from the mutual interference of each person’s (as well as each potential person’s, for that matter) quantum vacuum. The quantum mechanical brain, in functioning, resonates with its unique, characteristic quantum vacuum, interferes with the fluctuations of all other quantum vacua, those characteristic and unique to other persons. It is commonly remarked that “words are meaningless “devoid” as it were of context.” This is true in two distinct though perhaps related ways. The sense in which the above is commonly intended is the situation or setting in which an utterance is made ( as perceived in the mind of the speaker (writer)). The second sense of context that is probably less common is the mind in which word meanings become manifest. Meaning may only subsist within a medium that is at once open-ended and unified. Such a medium could not be unified once for all, e.g., like a crystalline structure, but itself capable of being unified and unifying itself along an unlimited number of distinct axes. Time-varying , homogeneous partial differential equations are equivalent to a homogeneous PDE with a source term, i.e., forcing function.

If it is true that we humans are, as the name “human” suggests, we are of this earth (bottom-up causal organization), then there seems no good reason for humankinds’ preoccupation with nonempirical are and science, e.g., philosophy. On the other hand if we humans are in truth “sky people” /human mind organized in accordance with top-down causality), then we may explain intense and pervasive philospohical activity as the natural manifestation of member of a race with dim, fragmented memories of a higher, more ethereal existence so that philosophy is pulled forward toward forgotten understanding. Ordinary human existence as epiphenomenon in relation to its function as explorers and co-creators, i.e, metaphysical labor. The ultimate truth that is conceivable is essentially metaphorical. Metaphor subverts its referent while at the same time (perhaps, in order to) “correspond” with its reference. That type of thinking process which necessarily involves the stretching or shrinking of the denotative sense (discursive field), along with the metaphorical scope of a substantive term, cannot be given a logically self-consistent formal description. So in a very real sense, each can say that “the world” is his oyster. Philosophers of mind’s assertion of or implicit assumption of a “concept of consciousness” reminds us of the children’s tale of the emperor’s new clothes. Topology of consciousness: properties of mind can be explored through a comparison of Mind’s topology with the topology of the process or property we would attribute to it. Stockholm syndrome can be applied more generally to include the case of one’s being a “prisoner” or “hostage of love.” How evolved or unified can the self really be if the self is open to much higher levels of integration, say through the reprocessing of its data in

memory? The self, such as it is, is also open to further reprocessing and higher integration with similarly reprocessed other selves. Consciousness is a default and unconsciousness is derived from it as a special case of self-consciousness, i.e., consciousness of “no self.” “Liberal” versus “conservative” positions are characterized as those with respect to a given issue where self-sacrifice is either withheld or potentially offered as backing for the position, respectively. The machine state space like description of each quantum reality implied by the many world’s interpretation of quantum theory seems to leave no room for the internal coherence (and cohesiveness) of systems with a quantum state description. This because such internal coherence upon which system cohesiveness depends necessarily involves resonant coupling together of multiple and perhaps myriad distinct but mutually exclusive quantum states of the system. An exhaustive state space description of the system, in the sense of a self-spanning set of basis states, is impossible due to unavoidable degeneracy of quantum states. Quantum teleported particles carry no information, including about their own quantum state. Pioneer 10 sunward acceleration anomaly may be explained as a small “mock gravitational” effect caused by the effects of time gravitational time dilation upon the local rate of change in the local quantum vacuum energy density, i.e., local rate of cosmological expansion. The relativistic effects upon momentum and energy, time and space are grounded in exactly similar relativistic effects upon the Heisenberg uncertainties in p, E, t, x. This may be deduced from the relativistically slowed decay of muons bombarding the earth’s upper atmosphere once special relativity is applied to a quantum tunneling model of the muon’s spontaneous decay process. Truth is neither absolute nor relative but is found in the dialectic of their

mutual struggle. A classical physical trajectory is just a special case (an overwhelmingly most probable one at the macroscopic scale) where /\x, /\p, /\t, and /\E, c.f., Hamilton’s energy formalism, are restricted in their limits of variation to within the finest resolution of the observer measuring instruments. The phenomenon of metaphor demonstrates that language does not wholly determine the structure of thought, which therefore retains its (ontological) independence. @$

Even avowed atheists are saddled with a number of important theistic metaphysical assumptions. These metaphysical assumptions presupposing Deity are shared by every normally adjusted person within Western society and its various longstanding traditions. For example, the death of thousands in a cataclysm is regarded as a greater tragedy than would be warranted by mere socioeconomic and political considerations. The hidden theistic metaphysical assumption at work in this case is the notion of a collective consciousness, transcending that of each individual taken individually as a victim in this cataclysm, a consciousness experiencing the tragedy in its collective magnitude. (Which is perhaps the only intelligible metaphysical sense in which the tragedy actually possesses the magnitude it instinctively seems to possess.) Like two disparate operating systems sharing an important collection of common files, many of the tenets of secular morality, i.e., humanistic ethics, presume or presuppose theistic metaphysical assumptions. @$ In fact, metaphysics and morality are only superficially distinct branches of philosophic enquiry/endeavor, c.f., cit=The Metaphysics of Morals (au=Kant). June 2011 The reason being: ethical notions are grounded in a morality informed by subconscious and pervasive theistic metaphysical underpinnings. “Historical origin of the 5th Amendment to the US Constitution.” It is

commonly thought nowadays that the social and political ideals that seem inevitable and obvious to us, from the perspective of this age and culture, were nonetheless daring innovations in the era of their invention. And this may well be true despite the commonly heard general pragmatic arguments against, for example, the apparently naïve, well-intentioned (though in reality cynical and disingenuous) attempts to export Western style democracy to cultures which are utterly lacking in a heritage or history of democratic processes and institutions. So a concept can be conceived in a form that is rather immature and inchoate (relative to its later innovated more mature forms). The Sedgwick quote included in this collection of notes is relevant here. At logocentrism’s core is the gloss of an integrated, unified, selfconcealing and underlying, de facto loose confederation of proto selves. This “trick” is imitated again and again at myriad different levels as the human mind reifies all around itself. One important example of this logocentric kwd=reification is @$the instinctive (as well as subconscious in the sense of “consciousness-grounding”) regarding of verbal communication as being essentially on a par with “telepathy accompanied by articulate sounds”. This fundamental difference between subjective and objective, or clock, time is that the one is integrated and processed, whereas the other is raw, or wholly unprocessed. In this way we see that our condemnation of the schizophrenic seems to involve more than a hint of “euphrenic” hypocrisy. We are all more or less schizophrenics either unwittingly or wittingly though in denial. Ground of Karma is the high frequency component of collective consciousness dynamics. The problem with placing the dynamics of a foundationally creative ground in the high frequency band, e.g., of quantum vacuum, etc., is that we know that at higher levels of approximation the lower frequency end

components are needed (because progressively more important), c.f, time scale reductionism. Parallels of structure between artifacts of diverse media are intriguing because they suggest an interpretation of an underlying order akin to an intentionally designed tapestry, e.g., The Next Generation, “Sub Rosa” and The Fixx, “Phantom Living.” Human existence as a “meaning engine of the Gods.” This is quite the contrary view from that of human existence as a soul foundry. Spacetime has only one manifest dimension because this is also the nature of the (human) mind. There is an obvious influence of Kant here, of course. One must move to the equivalent frequency domain in order to escape the naïve realistic assumption of the unidimensionality of time. That time scale reductionism is invalid is consistent with multidimensional time as seen from the mutual orthoginality of multifarious frequency domains. December 2011 Since each alternate universe must possess coherence and cohesiveness, the progression of time scales cannot be compact. This obscure sentence points to a kernel insight concerning the inadequacy of any discrete, combinationalpermutational model of the dynamics of temporally evolving systems, but also points to the superabundance of temporally evolving systems as forever transcending any integral, self-consistent description. This is consistent with the concept from the quantum theory of energy uncertainty being essential to the possibility of physically meaningful change. November 2011

Analogous to the hidden (because compactified) spatial dimensions of superstring theory, the mind likely possesses hidden compactified temporal dimensions, which are responsible for the robust temporal integralness of consciously experienced time. The innumerably great number of possible distinct conscious experiences open to a normally functioning human brain far outstrips the relatively paltry number of possible distinct psychological states available to the

human brain in response to any conceivable pattern of simultaneous or near simultaneous neural data inputs, i.e., inputs “copresent” in the sense of being within a span of time less than or equal to the temporal width of the specious present. June 2012 The brain does not merely respond to some novel collection of internal and/or sensory data inputs, but the brain must be prepared by the inputs and respond. There are in other words, no instantaneous neural correlates of consciousness - or even such a set comprising a narrow temporal window of mere milliseconds c.f., Benjamin Libet, and time scale reductionism (low frequency processes always must be composed of high frequency processes - in short, onedimensional temporality) is an invalid hypothesis of neurological temporal evolution. This may be taken as one (of several) grounds for the implausibility of the Boltzmann brain hypothesis, whether there are indeed any really existing physical brains or no. November 2012

The success of interspecies horizontal gene transfer and the effective underlying rationality of the combining together of heretofore never before combined genetic mutations . We need some interaction of the DNA with an open-ended ground to provide context and transcend syntax by breaking determinism. A given string of DNA does not constitute any particular message, fixed once and for all by the laws of biochemistry and physics. June 2012 The seeming fixed syntax of the DNA language does not necessarily lead to a given base pair sequence possing a fixed operational meaning as revealed by the currently new science of November 2012 epigenetics. Although meaning transcends intention, the human intellect is in the habit of naively solely interpreting meaning in terms of intentionality, i.e., aboutness with respect to a determinate object of reference. Consciousnes as such is the potential for reference without an intentional object. Prophecy and revelation are transcendental ideas (if it is maintained that these are distinct notions, c.f., Plato’s Universal Forms as transcendent). The self-centered person feels that others owe it to him to penetrate the mystery of the rationale behind his narcissistic fantasies.

The delusional person of philosophical bent who is coming near to convincing himself of the truth of solipsism, i.e., that he alone exists, might well ask himself two fundamental, but probably unanswerable questions. Why do I exist and why do other people exist (or appear to exist)? The first thing he should realize is that these two questions are essentially one. This is on account of the necessity of the self being a social construct. And this social construct is mediated at its most basic level through physical, that is tactile interactions with other entities who are later modeled as other persons akin to the self which is itself modeled as being merely one self among numerous others. The development of the conception of the self goes hand in hand, and necessarily so, with the development of the conception of the existence and reality of other selves. The more advanced becomes the individual’s conception of his self, so should his conception of the reality of other persons evolve in sophistication. In fact, the two conceptions of self must track together if the individual is to become psychologically well adjusted. A sophisticated model of the self and other persons is necessarily mediated linguistically. An important realization here is that language does not actually involve the transmission of anything to the developing socially constructed self. Linguistic communication however fosters the overwhelming illusion that ideas and experiences are indeed transmitted between persons engaged in communication. The illusory nature of transmission in this sense is what underlies the ineffectual quality of metaphysical speculation. This is because language does not actually permit the individual to glimpse anything outside of his own unique state of being. One must either not exist as a self aware being or one must exist as a self aware being in the presence of and with the memory of having been in the presence of other persons analogous to one’s own self. Selfconsciousness presupposes extensive memories of previous meaningful interactions and communications with other persons similar to the self. An introduction of mathematically structured empirical data seems to consist of three distinct parts: incidence, coincidence, and order. Next,

there is the Waking life is the dream under the control of the object, according to Santayana. What Santayana perhaps means by this remark is that the conscious mind is structured associatively just like the unconscious and subconscious minds, only that the object, i.e., the external world modifies, modulates and moderates this structure of consciousness that is essentially associative, or as Jung may well have said, synchronistic. The back-reaction of syntax upon semantics is implicit in a certain model of induction and is a supplement to bottom-up, abstract thought. Consciousness indexing of sense data is similar to Gödel-numbering or to Gödelization. Cell phone gravity knife, Begnaud’s Tours, self-gauging valve stems, automobile blind spot tracking software for use by law enforcement agencies, pop-up digital imaging for auto windshield (will help to greatly reduce billboard clutter), (pay advertiser’s small fee to remove their billboards from your pop-up viewer). The integrity of consciousness as the medium of experience requires a self-monitoring psycho-associative network that has an underlying structure that is maximally recursive to permit (the potential for) the greatest freedom of associative metaphorical ideation. The arbitrariness of Christian doctrine should not trouble our faith in them, considering the profound arbitrariness of human existence. The world is broad and deep enough to be able to be unified along any axis of order, provided that the pattern of unity is self-consistent and logically coherent. One sociological or psycholinguistic view is that all meanings are dependent on a social context and hence are socially constructed. Another view is that only the interpretation of meaning is socially constructed. It may be unclear what distinction is being implied here.

People do not commonly recognize their authority to create meaning but imagine that meaning and significance must issue from the other. Slavishness of the human soul (to its own narcissistic projections). Changes in the brain as a whole might be defined in terms of those changes in the brain’s state that are not indexed by changes in consciousness. Is it coherent to speak of imperceptible changes in consciousness? Perhaps the integration of a long series of imperceptible changes to one’s consciousness (rather than merely in one’s state of consciousness) would produce two states of consciousness, say, separated by a couple of decades or more of life experience, if placed side by side, as it were, would constitute an easily perceptible difference in consciousness to the person concerned. But this is really not a coherent way to think about consciousness because there presumably is no super or meta consciousness within which such a comparison could be supposed meaningful. The genes selected for always possess, in addition to a desired expression, many others, some latent, some neutral or irrelevant at any evolutionary juncture. It is among these “neutral genes”/”gene sequences” that self-organization may operate with the least hindrance from spatiotemporal constraints. Self-organization also operates powerfully amongst neutral genetic mutations, junk DNA, etc., i.e., within the dynamics of genetic drift to bring neutral point mutations into a favorable gene regulatory network as well as to the attention of natural selection-driven evolutionary forces. Does the coherence specific to a peculiar culture always resonate with the mental processes of those members of the culture who have established a similar resonance within their thoughts? Dissonance as the negative feedback signal for adjusting dynamic network towards greater resonance. The explanation of these great mysteries will be akin to finally

discerning aright the misheard lyrics of all one’s favorite old songs. Each superposition state is a set of eigen-basis functions that is unique to a particular observer. In a similar fashion, we might theorize the existence of a kind of set of synchronistic basis functions with each eigenfunction of each particular basis corresponding to a particular simple thematic element or relation. There is a natural recursiveness built into the relatedness of the eigenfunctions of different bases. The only requirement for such a quantum mechanical basis function is that it be a wavefunction with respect to a quantum observable. An analogous statement may be made with respect to the synchronistic basis functions that are substantively related to the notion of intersubjectivity. A given collection of observables as well as their dynamics may possess an unlimited number of alternative expressions in terms of distinct basis functions, all of which are equally valid expressions. In this way we may suppose that consciousness is formally reality-degenerate, since each consciousness may be structured equally well and complexly as any other consciousness. Consequently, the differences between consciousness cannot be attributed to formally describable elements and relationships. Quantum state reduction introduces novelty into the causal chain only because causality possesses an intrinsic indefiniteness that admits coupling to a fundamentally indeterministic process. Data must be continually updated just as does any material structure that is a more or less stable coherent pattern of quantum vacuum fluctuation energy. The processing of this data necessarily entails a backtracking of the evolution of the context in which these data found themselves in an attempt to uncover the data’s original context. The original context should provide interpreter’s of the data with valuable information for the proper divining of the intent behind the data concerning its message content. Another part of processing the data might be the application of appropriate error correction and data decompression subroutines.

Image enhancement and pattern recognition software might also have to be applied to the task of extracting the data’s informational content. What unifies all these various means of processing that data is a modeling of . . . 1) the data as a string of code and 2) the instantaneous context of the data as an endpoint in its evolution. Language and meaning are mutually degenerate and so there can be no formal or causal relationship between instantiations of each. The phenomena of linguistic expression and interpretation are thus properly understood as transcendental functions of mind. There are two distinct kinds of uncertainty, one classical and the other, quantum mechanical. There must then be two distinct kinds of information since information is formally defined as a reduction in uncertainty. In the case of classical physics, information represents a reduction in one’s uncertainty about what exists but which possesses a determinate state though one which is presently unknown. In the case of quantum physics, information constitutes a reduction in uncertainty in a mind-independent sense. The paradigm shift in physics going from classical to quantum mechanical involves a peculiar switching of roles of observables and uncertainties. In classical physics, uncertainties in observables are attributable to observer ignorance and so possess no ontological status while observables are considered to be observer-independent. In quantum mechanics, the reverse of this is true. Quantum uncertainties in physical observables are real, while the values of quantum physical observables are ideal, or mind-dependent. This reminds me of the switch of denotative and connotative roles in dreams. Quantum uncertainties are defined in terms of the probabilities deduced from quantum amplitudes. The Bell inequality says that the quantum and classical probabilities of the spins of two decay products of a single particle are 1/3, 1/3, 1/3, and ¼, ½, ¼, respectively. Proof of the inequivalence of the quantum and classical uncertainties is given by experimental confirmation of the Bell inequality of the above quantum

and classical probabilities of two particle composite spins. Consciousness is a phenomenon of the fullest integration of the individual’s experience as well as his identity as such, and so itself cannot itself be contained within his experience. This integration encompasses the synthesis of all dual opposite categories and this process of integration transcends, therefore, all formal categories of description by which the process might otherwise have been formally understood and explained. Consciousness therefore seems to occupy a strategic position at the interface within duality. This seems particularly true in the case of the theorized-to-exist interface between classical and quantum worlds. The fact of the multiplicity of consciousness along with the unlimited evolvability of consciousness’ articulation implies the fundamental multiplicity of the unity of the real. Causality is infrastructure at its most general. The infrastructure facilitating causality is indifferent to that which utilizes it. The tool is passive to the hands of the tool user. The causal infrastructure cannot be turned to for answers concerning the origins of what propagates through it. The interpenetration of meanings stems from their intrinsic uncertainty and lies behind the evolution of meanings. Everything develops out of its penumbra of uncertainty. Freely willed actions can in a sense alter the past though without generating a “time paradox” via selective Psi function collapse. Technology is the constructing of an interface with a preexistent infrastructure interface for facilitating the effectiveness of Man’s will. Must we assume that the past is a closed system? God knows which choices we will not think of that otherwise would lead to creation of a time paradox.

Reprocessing Hebrew passages through re-parsing them iteratively theoretically could yield an infinite number of distinct meaningful messages, as well as an infinite number of ways of expressing a finite (or infinite?) number of messages. Miracles don’t have to involve a suspension of physical law, as each miracle can be easily accommodated through judicious preparation of initial and boundary conditions, e.g., Joshua’s “long day” and EarthMars orbital resonance. What reason does physics provide us for assuming that the past is a closed system? Communication produces random products within a determined set of possible meanings. Representations guide the communicants’ participation in the dialectic of the communication, though nothing is literally transmitted between them. Although data may be transmitted at the speed of light because they possess no inertia, information, being data placed within a context with which it is in continual interaction in order that it keep updated as current information, is dependent for its movement through the information network infrastructure. This data is updated by the network, all the while it is responding to inputs it receives elsewhere – some of these inputs undoubtedly being important to the network’s decision concerning the “proper” interpretation of the data. So transmission of information through the network is an effect mediated via the dynamics of the networks interpretation of its data. In this way a packet of data must traverse continuously transforming contexts during the course of their respective information being “transmitted,” and so must possess mass due to the finite response time of the network’s processing of data. So it appears at this stage that time is more fundamental than inertia as a

dynamical parameter. This can only be the case if time or temporality is mediated via nonlocal processes. Otherwise, changes in the network are dependent upon the speed of propagation of influences through the network in which the influences are themselves independent of the data of the network. What is nothing more than the territory that must be crossed in returning to one’s home is itself a home for others. History exhibits the synchronistic consistency of a dream. Atrophy of morphological and physiological structures under the relent of specific selective pressures is the mechanism by which these structures become more easily retrofitted into other structures currently being selected for. Occasionally, natural selection fails to improvise a new use for an atrophied structure as in the case of the human appendix. There must be some means for the environment to suggest to the genome certain lines of experimentation that take into account higher orders of environmental change, analogous to the relationship of nth order derivatives (rates of change). This might be easier to understand in terms of the gene frequencies of population genetics. The higher the gene frequency, the greater the number of instances of that particular gene that are exposed to environmental factors contributing to mutation frequency. But higher gene frequency is also an index of fitness, which worked in the direction of preserving and increasing the frequency of the particular gene. A metaphor or metaphorical description of a thing points of some abstract features of a thing in terms of these same features that are possessed by some other thing that the audience is already quite familiar with. From the vantage point of consciousness, the world is a novelty conserving system. Novelty is not conserved in a system of

representation of any complexity hat cannot adapt to the evolution of that which it represents. You don’t need to understand quantum theory to grasp the idea of parallel universes – any poor schmuck who chose the woman he loved over the woman who loved him understands the necessity of there being alternate universes. Mutual interference of the frequency spectra of multiple time uncertainties give us discrete events in time similar to wave packets. Data has no mass but information does have mass. Time advances in two fundamentally distinct but intimately related ways. One after the normal fashion, in terms of the advancing of functions of a ticking clock, the other through a kind of crystallization process in which the time and energy uncertainties shift in such a way that past events become ever more determinate. The process of human recollecting of such past events of which we were once a part accelerates this quantum crystallization of Heisenberg uncertainty of past events. This is the Heisenberg uncertainty analogue to the collapse of the wavefunction triggered by the consciousness of human observers, which engenders a determinate eigenstate with respect to some quantum mechanical observer. Might physical time be integrally structured such that the temporal integration exhibited by subjectively experienced time is not entirely emergent, but partly derivative of the underlying physical temporal structure? @$Might the integral nature of subjective time be a property of transcendental consciousness rather than merely of the play of forms within the individual’s conscious states? Might there be an infrastructure of fundamental process (of transcendental consciousness) that is shared between eternally preexistent and separate individual consciousnesses?

The genetic “toolkit” concept is part and parcel with the vanishing likelihood of there emerging any new phyla over the course of future evolution on Earth. The evolution of latent genetic information embodied in heretofore-untried gene sequences is conducted on a competitive field within which gene expression remains unknown. The level at which natural selection operates within this competitive field is that on which chemical stability and compatibility is optimized. Gradually, mechanisms of gene expression evolved which resulted in amplification of the differences in complex macromolecules by amplifying interactivity of these molecules with their chemical environment. Species’ adaptation to their changing environment is analogous to the evolution of an organism’s immune system in that structures that evolve under heavy selective pressures persist as integral features of the organism though at a decreasing frequency within the population. Moreover, as many generations pass without recurrence of the original selective pressures that shaped the evolution of these structures, the expression of these structures gradually becomes less marked, i.e., atrophy. This response of the species to the disappearance of some threat to its survival would make perfect sense if it were generally true that as more and more time passes without the species calling upon some genetic endowment, the less likely that a later challenge to these organisms shall be similar to the original one. Is there any relationship between the rate of environmental change to the rates of evolution and devolution, i.e., atrophy of heretofore selected for features of the organism? An example of “design” that perhaps bears special attention here is that pointed up in the following examples. Suppose that the human ribosome underwent an arbitrary mutation that caused it to interpret genetic base pair sequences differently than heretofore? Would this difference in how the ribosome interprets genetic code have to be a systematic one, so long as the ?contd=

Consciousness gives us a better capability for gathering intelligence on a potentially threatening physical environment than would have been afforded by an integrated set of instincts, regardless of the complexity of their integration. This suggests that consciousness is not merely a function of logical complexity, storage capacity and processing speed, all of which perhaps being necessary for its minimal functioning, but consciousness is also a function of its capacity for meaningfully connecting to alterity beyond that posed by a purely physical environment. In fact, the essence of consciousness might be the capacity it affords the organism of connecting the part of itself that is not yet present (within the physical environment) with other elements not present or yet present in its physical environment. Though we might well wonder what possible material benefit there is to the organism in its being able to do this, unless natural selection and “the struggle for existence” between organisms indeed takes place within a larger arena than that defined by classical biology and physics. There seems no reason not to suppose that at least some of the conditions shaping organismic evolution must be grounded within uniquely quantum mechanical processes. So-called free will might have been a “stealth” or evasive strategy developed by some organisms to frustrate attempts by other organisms to anticipate their actions and responses. And consciousness might well have evolved out of the organism’s having hit upon a method of hard quantum encrypting its subroutines for perceiving, responding, and planning actions within, the physical environment where it competed with other organisms for resources, mates, social dominance, etc. The coherent quantum states containing the organisms’ encrypted strategies, ideally, should itself have been endowed with an environmental sensitivity. However, such quantum superposition states would be able to detect any interaction with it by another such state attempting to access its cache of coded information. Neither could any such quantum encrypted information be copied (@$more on the distinction between copying a quantum state and “cutting”, i.e., “teleporting” such a quantum state) without provoking detection. So the only organism

having access to its own quantum encrypted information would be the organism itself, clearly a case of what has been called by idealist and phenomenalist philosophers, privileged access. Such information is known “by acquaintance” by the organism that originally created the encrypted quantum state. This is perhaps just the subjective state of awareness of the organism, namely, its privileged access to its global quantum hard-encrypted state. Knowledge by description might be analogously understood as knowledge of the boundary conditions alone of the wave function, rather than knowledge of the actual or observerindependent state of the system. The organism’s awareness of its subjective state may be a naturally occurring example of what is termed non-demolition measurement of the quantum observables of the organism’s quantum state. Were the actions of a conscious individual in observing a quantum mechanical system physically caused, the observer and the observed would constitute quantum mechanical subsystems of a larger such system comprising both systems, undergoing a temporal evolution consistent with the temporal evolution of the larger system. A further implication of observer and observed being components of a single quantum mechanical system would be a failure of the observer’s act of observation upon the system to provoke collapse of the external system’s wavefunction. It is precisely because the observer’s act of observation cannot be anticipated by the vacuum fluctuation spectrum sustaining the quantum system under observation, because this observational act breaches the system by introducing possibilities of quantum states not rationally consistent with those comprising the observed system’s probability density function, that the system undergoes “collapse.” This reminds us of one recent theory of consciousness’ evolutionary advantageousness. In the theory it was proposed that consciousness conferred an advantage upon social organisms in two important ways, one competitive, the other, cooperative. This advantage afforded by an organism’s consciousness was primarily through the distinct capacity it gave the organism of simulating how the physical environment and

psychological state of other organisms appeared to that organism, from its distinct viewpoint. Self-consciousness might have arisen through a 2nd iteration of what might be termed perspectival projection. For example, rudimentary self-consciousness might develop from applying a dim recollection of a simulation during the moment when the organism finds itself in a situation similar to that of that other organism for which it had evolved this simulation. Presumably, still higher states of awareness might be open to us if this projection of perspective or simulation of the other’s state is carried to 3rd or higher iterations. One might wonder how higher states of awareness not of the state of another human being, but of the surrounding environment might be reached in analogous manner. Resonance is a dynamical feedback that is set up between two heretofore distinct coherent systems in which information is exchanged, though perhaps only in terms of integrated sets of intentionality, i.e., no actual “transmission” of any “thing” between the two systems, just mutual influence of each upon the other’s means of processing internal and external inputs. Self-organizing properties of biological molecules meant genes confronting the demands of the environment at ascending levels of complexity through adaptation of genetic ideas to new contexts rather than invention of altogether new genes. It might be presumed that if mutation were not random, but coupled somehow to the matrix of environmental conditions, e.g., cybernetically, through feedback loops, that this would necessarily facilitate the evolution of biological complexity. Certainly too much such direct feedback between the process of mutation and the environment might produce either an unstable cybernetic control or short circuit the necessity of genes and gene sequences being “expressed.” This is similar to the fact that an infinite vocabulary is not needed in order to communicate amongst us within a potentially infinite number of

“x-ological” contexts. Information is a structuring of the boundaries between domains of uncertainty. Quantum probability amplitudes are always defined in terms of classically describable boundary conditions of spatiotemporal coordinates and/or momentum-energy that are assumed to be known to arbitrary precision. In other words, the quantities, and that go into the definition of /\Q carry the unquestioned assumption of determinate eigenstates of the system in question, which in turn rests upon classically determinate boundary conditions upon Psi. It appears from this that not even the Heisenberg uncertainties in Q can be then deduced with (classically physical) certainty. The Heisenberg uncertainties in the system’s observables may presumably be statistically determined through a series of measurements, however, measurements in which the state of the system is inevitably altered. The many worlds interpretation of QM suggests that, since the collapse of Psi for person A shall not necessarily, in fact, only rarely, collapse in the same manner as it shall for person B, A and B must occupy separate “parallel universes.” The quantum uncertainties in the classical boundary conditions of the wavefunction, from which the Heisenberg uncertainties in the quantum observables of this wavefunction are determined, lead to a fractal geometric structuring of these uncertainties. Perhaps knowledge only really need be unified provided that the knower, as well as, knowers as such, are themselves integrally whole. Here the disunity of the world consists solely in the fact of the plurality of subjective beings, or, still more, the underlying dynamics of the basis of this plurality of subjectivity, i.e., knowers, that is, definers and

possessors of knowledge (about the world). If mind and brain do interact, as they must, then human consciousness and brain processes, or perhaps just the physical processes upon which brain processes depend, would have to possess the same underlying ground for their respective dynamics. At some stage, the analogous similarity of one consciousness to another must give way to their non-formalizable differences. If one consciousness as such differs from another in only a non-formalizable manner, then each consciousness is formally identical to any other. This is only to be expected since what is called suchness is also formlessness. It is only through the use of metaphor that the denotative may be properly grasped. The “reduction” of the subjective is always from smaller to larger, from lower to higher, that is, reduction is effected always in terms of consideration of ever larger or deeper contexts. The human form as superattractor of myriad selected for strange attractors, i.e., nth iterative attractors (attractors of attractors of attractors, etc.) Coherence is mediated by bosonic (exchange) particles that are manifestations of 3-momentum vacuum fluctuations, i.e., /\p j. So the greater the coherence of a structure, the greater is /\P j, the smaller is /\E and, hence, the larger will be /\t, the characteristic lifetime of the structure. Coherence is a manifestation of self-organization, resonance, on the other hand, is a manifestation of the happenstance of propinquity. The Anthropic cosmological principle implies that it takes forever for a hypercomplex structure to come into being and even when it does come into being, by chance, cannot maintain itself in existence for any appreciable length of time. Without the operation of at least some randomness within a system, no more than one individual (or individual state) is open to the system.

Chance becomes regulated in a system in which novelty is no longer possible. Indeterminacy in the system means that the system still possesses choice of local symmetry. The quantized redshifts, i.e., expansion velocities of distant galaxies may be explained in terms of harmonic quantum tunneling of matter particles through a hyperspherical potential barrier. Abstraction as a mental activity has two distinct varieties, depending upon the causal structure of the field subject to its operation. In a bottom-up organized causal structure, mind is external to its field subject to its abstract thought. In a top-down causal structure, mind is internal to its field of abstract thinking. IN the former, out of an external field of relationships, internal structures are produced, in the latter, the converse of this is true. In the first case, external order is transduced into internal, in the later, the converse is the case. The phenomena within an individual observables and so are not located nonlocal. Similarly, the processes individual consciousness are not consciousness.

conscious mind cannot be public within spacetime, i.e., they are essential to the integrity of the themselves manifest to this

We said that no determinable substance or quantity is transmitted in a verbal communication. One develops language through reflecting to a reactive environment of mysteriousness others (or, perhaps, others that are wholly taken for granted at this early stage that of pre-individuation in which recognition of both self and other remains still inchoate) what are yet relatively meaningless vocalized forms. There may be a fundamental distinction between the topology of this prelinguistic

interaction conceived as between self and closed system vs. self and open system. In the closed system case, the self will encompass its own sociolinguistic environment within its own ground. In the open system case the self-other distinction is nondegenerate. The commensurate nature of the common language may only be maintained within a collection of speakers through a dialectical process of continual reconciliation between and among themselves of would-be conventionally agreed upon meanings. Perception is then linguistically structured though the environment thus perceived is itself not linguistically structured. So corrections and adjustments must continually be made in linguistic structure of cognition resulting in the development of internally inconsistent linguistic structures that can only be rectified in combination with those of other similar perceivers/language speakers. In this way, the subjectivity of the “experimenter effect” is overcome and objective knowledge more fully approached. The “preliminary materialism” of which Eccles is so understandably critical make no more sense than the claim that the phenomenon of the quantum mechanical wavefunction will finally be adequately explained once physicists discover the correct set of basis (eigen) functions in terms of which it might be properly expressed. Only by being witness to the event of one’s consciousness forming itself from more fundamental processes, only by being in possession of this aesome personal experience could one ever be said to also possess an explanation of one’s own consciousness. Of course, such an experience is intrinsically impossible should the phenomenon of one’s personal consciousness be organized “from the bottom-up.” In other words, one’s consciousness must really be just one among many possible states of some consciousness transcending entity which in reality must be the self, that is, one’s true self. It is commonly said by practitioners of transcendental meditation that the particular contents of consciousness can serve only to distract the self from the authentic experience of its

consciousness in its pure state. But can one really experience a state of consciousness without an object, that is, pure consciousness? TM practitioners insist not only that this is possible, but that this is the very object of the practice of transcendental meditation.

The coherent state aggrandizes itself through its ability to manufacture degeneracy. The sum of theoretically possible states will naturally coalesced into a much-reduced set of overdetermined states. This means continuous transformations of these substantive forms are no longer possible. This may be due to the underlying quantum/digital nature of these states as individual but subject to processes with partial quanta as inputs. To have been a mystery is to remain so. Consciousness cannot be an appearance and so is not a spacetime phenomenon. Microtubule action of computation is one with their conformational transformations. Here the running and implementation of the microtubules’ quantum computational program is identical. It seems necessary for self-organization capacity to be a conserved quantity within a closed system. Emergence within closed systems may be accounted for by material, energy and information entering the system through its boundaries (it is not necessary that the boundaries which define a closed system here to be understood in terms of a spatial metaphor). Emergence of order within so-called radically open systems cannot, of course, be understood so simply in this way. There lies within the bony carapace of any institutionalized faith an inner, living substance the essence of which is a variant of transcendental metaphysics. What is the relationship of disobedience to

rebellion to evil? One sure way to escape causal determinism is if no unique state (of the underlying embedding substrate) can be engendered/determined through a cobbling together of already defined elements. The coming into being of a unique system requires that altogether new possibilities of abstraction into elements also come into being. Some resonant states cannot be engendered without the fact of certain other resonances having already occurred within the system. This points up the truth that the actual is never simply the transporting of structure across a perfectly transparent interface. A question here is whether this interface is importantly similar to that which lies between the conscious and unconscious mind. But resonance and coherence require some parallel though inequivalent underlying functioning of ground/context to effect/sustain these. Collapse of Psi and vacuum’s inability to anticipate (vacuum compensation for free will acts must be outside causal continuum, i.e., spacetime) alteration in Psi’s boundary conditions intimately related to the automaticity vs. consciousness distinction. Only the formless can appreciate form, as does mankind. Some dismiss the question, “why does the Universe exist?” by supposing that no explanation is needed because the Universe has always existed. This type of answer is as good as any other where conserved quantities are concerned, but is no good for dismissing the question of the origin of unconserved quantities. Quite simply, unconserved physical quantities necessarily involve a temporal uncertainty and so demand an origin in time and hence some process responsible for this origin. Its funny how this inversion of the literal and the metaphorical that

typically occurs at the interface of consciousness ad the unconscious can itself become inverted once more rather than simply reversed or undone, resulting in the expanded potential for metaphoricity of the literal as a result of a more thorough minded extension of the literal to the realm of what for lack of a better term we should call the meaning dimension of the hyperliteral. We find that what we thought were rather disparate processes were really only modularly separate within some more unified process at a deeper level (along some axis or dimension or other.) This seeming innate recursiveness of consciousness may be due to 1) conscious attention’s attempt to flatten the hierarchy of the levels of abstraction and 2) . . . The contrast between the literal and the metaphorical is a false one. All description is metaphorical. The definition of metaphoricity is not merely relative to the alleged absolute nature of the literal. Both the metaphorical and the literal are realized as coequal and relative, neither having precedence over the other. Can only states be copied or teleported or can the same be possible as well, for the systems possessing these states? Is every system just a state of some deeper, more unified system, in other words? The King of France is a tyrant. The above is a proposition concerning a nonexistent entity. It is neither true nor false. There are no matters of fact where nonexistent entities are concerned. But then can facts be viewed as limitations upon some subject (the nonentity)? Meditation on Job: Job’s property was restored to him twice over, his children, only once. There is something of significance for developmental psycholinguistics to be drawn from the Biblical storm of the Tower of Babel. This story is just the story of the Fall retold in another context.

The marked innate tendency for infants and toddlers to spontaneously develop among themselves a mutually intelligible set of languages and then the sudden loss of this ability upon exposure to the language of their parents perhaps points up such a parallel. Jesus as fruit of tree (cross) of eternal life. “You must become as little children.” A perfect example of the arbitrariness of concept maps is pointed up by the evolution of human relationships toward the continued fulfillment of timeless psychological drives and emotional needs despite the continually evolving social and cultural backdrop against which the these needs are to be fulfilled by members of succeeding generations. The breaking of the spacetime symmetry of the quantum vacuum by mass is not the fundamental or absolute symmetry breaking that requires the engendering of a gauge boson. This situation is quite unlike that where a broken global symmetry causes the creation of a gauge boson, which, by being exchanged between splintered symmetry domains, results in the restoring locally of the symmetry that was broken globally, e.g., the creation of the Higgs boson in the theory of electroweak symmetry breaking. Another reason that the breaking of the vacuum spacetime symmetry by mass is not fundamental is that mass is not an irreducible, conserved physical quantity, but is a phenomenon produced by the peculiar manner in which the components of the total (massenergy + vacuum-energy) fluctuation stress-momentum-energy tensors mutually interact. Prior to the breaking of the spacetime symmetry of the vacuum by mass, the spectrum of momentum fluctuations within the vacuum is just that defined in terms of the spectrum of virtual transitions allowed between the discrete energy levels of this global vacuum state. This is exactly the situation we should expect if the quantum vacuum can correctly be modeled as a four dimension array of coupled harmonic oscillators, i.e., as a four dimensional crystalline latticework. The additional 3momentum fluctuations, over and above those permitted in the symmetric state of this vacuum, correspond to those transition energies

of the modified vacuum lattice which are now forbidden by the state of broken symmetry. After this symmetry is broken, the spectrum of vacuum 3-momentum fluctuations becomes denser while that of the vacuum’s energy fluctuations, i.e., fluctuations in the imaginary component of the vacuum’s 4-momentum, becomes attenuated. Were this vacuum two dimensional, this change in symmetry could have been effected by a simple “rotation” of the fluctuation momentum-energy vector, i.e., a 2nd rank tensor would have been required to describe the rotation, but not the end state, which could be adequately described in terms of a 2vector. And the dynamics of this rotation of momentum-energy within this 2d spacetime can be modeled in terms of the exchange of spin-1 gauge bosons. However, in four-dimensional spacetime, a 2nd rank tensor is required to describe the vacuum’s end state - that post symmetry-breaking. Moreover, a 4th rank tensor is necessary to describe this transformation of the vacuum caused by the breaking of its symmetry, as mentioned earlier. Consequently, a transformation of the fluctuation stress-momentum-energy tensor can be described in terms of time-varying probability current densities of both spin-1 vector gauge bosons and spin-2 gauge bosons. The question arises that if the fluctuations in the momentum and energy in the particles of which the mass is composed are independent of these fluctuations of the local vacuum state, then interpreting either set of fluctuations as the Heisenberg uncertainties in momentum and energy and the remaining set of fluctuations as the fluctuation terms of these two quantities, then given that these two sets of fluctuations, matter and vacuum, are appropriately correlated, nonzero expectation values result for the momentum and energy for this matter. More specifically, negatively correlated sets of fluctuations will produce nonzero expectation values of the momentum or energy and positively correlated sets of fluctuations will produce zero expectation values of the momentum or energy. An important question here is: how are vacuum

momentum fluctuations related to vacuum energy fluctuations (within the same spacetime “neighborhood”)?

No tree grows to heaven – Confucius. “Any process projected to infinity will create some catastrophic scenario” – Terence McKenna (Palenque) This is not a proof that infinity is a mere abstraction, rather it is a proof that abstractions cannot capture the infinite within their scope. If after the fashion of a kind of quantum entanglement process, we suppose information to possess memory, then information becomes an unconserved quantity. The world isn’t really made of information, but of pre- or proto-information, in other words, the world isn’t mind, but needs mind in order to be manifest. Coherence requires overdetermination, that is, degeneracy of the psifunctions energy as well as the converse of this, the Heisenberg uncertainty of Psi’s (that is, the system’s) energy. So the flexibility of mind required for the facile forming of hypothesis seems to require a certain highly structured selective ignorance of potentially disconfirming indicators (evidence contrary to the burgeoning hypothesis). Basic vocabulary of primitive man may well have been of a more pristine, phenomenological nature, c.f., “evening” as an evening out of discernible features (due to decreased availability of light). Clearly the peculiar phenomenology of subjective time, e.g., in dreams delirium, etc., points to subjective component of temporality orthogonal to the direction of intersubjective time. Matrix of spins in 4-dimensions where any imbalance in the 4-

dimensional spin of any phenomenal bodies composed of these spins. Elements that are fashioned by history without any knowledge of how these elements might be transformed and combined, and yet, all along there was something latent in all of these that would admit such transformation and combination, call this Providence. Because the ultimate reality is beneath the resolution of the Planck time and distance, it follows that spacetime is a kind of digital simulation. The material embodiment of grace is Providence. A reactive matrix in which there is no definable “grain” and in which any arbitrary line through this matrix chosen as an axis of reprocessing reveals emergent meaning. Transactional model of communication: plant the suggestion of a question in answering the respondent’s question. Easier to recreate a pattern already manifest than to create from “no template.” This is why the notion of bodily resurrection is not so far fetched as it only constitutes a reconstituting of an interface of a collection of pointers to an utterly unique, dynamical process of fundamental nature. On this view, what makes the individual’s consciousness unique is itself a characteristic feature of reality, i.e., von der Wirklichkeit. The frequency of synchronistic events observed provides some indications of the relative size of the conscious and subconscious minds? Any set of fluctuations that is not exactly thermal in nature is expected to produce some orderly structures at higher levels of scale due to imperfect averaging. The notion of pure representation is but an abstraction, possessing no

correspondence in the realm of being that is, reality, except to itself. Pure representation is then purely recursive. Representations, if they are supposed to have a real reference, must have some effect upon the transformation of its referent whenever its form, whether graphic, glyphic, etc, undergoes transformation. Otherwise, language would possess no efficacy in the processing or reprocessing of information, that is, language could not possess its dual aspect as means in both the conception and transmission of ideas. The medium reached at which the data can no longer be compressed without loss of information constitutes the medium that thinks the information or the medium in which the information possesses its content. (in correlations of quantum fluctuations comprising Heisenberg uncertainty) The path of maturation takes us from a state of the other as self to that of the self as other. “The greatest barrier to truth is the presumption that we already possess it” – Chuck Missler Below 10-33 cm position loses its individuality while events taking place over time intervals smaller than 10-43 seconds do not figure anywhere within the domain of physical or historical time. Either the personal has stemmed from the impersonal or the impersonal has it origin in the personal. We must make a threefold distinction between chance, order (what is bound to happen), and that by which order is brought into being that itself possesses no order. This last is itself commonly thought to be chance or its operation. But if chance can be defined and hen analyzed and shown to possess order itself, then the order of both chance and ordered (bound) structures are what are in need of explanation. Again, the source of this explanation of order, in its greatest generality, as well

as the source of this order, i.e., no complete description. would best be alluded to as the absolute unlimited.

This source

McKenna’s notion of “novelty conserving engines” driving an accelerating evolutionary process of complexification, in which recontextualization at higher levels, extracts information which emerges as having been latent in fluctuation phenomena (noise or uncertainty) associated with earlier evolving processes occupying lower levels. On this approach evolution is better understood as a transactional process of the frequency domain in which higher frequency phenomena of an evolving system are exploited for their latent (or potential) order progressively with respect to the dynamics of the system over ever larger time scales. In many cases, the differences in the initial or boundary conditions of the system are smaller than the quantum uncertainties in the system variables subject to these conditions so that the character of the widely divergent possible later states of the system that result must be largely attributed to the structure of the quantum uncertainty itself. Psi collapse occurs also in the instance where superposition can no longer be supported because a difference in the quality of the system is bumped up against, as it were, by the superposition state, i.e., a change of basis + excitation of selected eigenstates of the new basis is incommensurable with the previous state of the system described in terms of the earlier basis. Here we see that description and quantum reality are not fully mutually independent. Locality is an abstraction from nonlocality. The dual distinction of local vs. nonlocal seems more or less parallel to that of physical vs. mental. The Planck scale of spacetime represents the event horizon dividing the local and nonlocal realms. It might be worth supposing that the event horizon of a classical black hole represents a similar division between the local and nonlocal. In the former case, gravitational or general relativistic effects become important at the quantum scale whereas in the

later quantum effects become so at the scale of classically describable objects. Evil may be understood as failure to submit to the bonds of Karma along with refusal to work off this Karma. But this is an example of merely relative evil. This notion of metaphysical presence can be grasped through an appreciation of how subjectively enculturated intuitions are adapted to the intersubjective world of discourse within a transactional rather than transmissional model of communication, one that relies heavily upon the faculty of human suggestibility. The idea that information, like energy, classically understood, might be a conserved quantity, could prove to be an incoherent notion, much like other concepts associated with that of information, e.g., its transmission, its being processed or reprocessed, its being spatiotemporally coordinated, etc. Then the idea of information’s nonconservation, rather than its being absorbed or emitted by a hidden reservoir, makes imagination the context of the real. An example of a deficit of metaphysical presence for instance may be when a friend repeats a long-winded story without realizing tha they had already related the week or month before. Information processing in the absence of total information. Topology seems to underlie the fundamental nature of the distinction of time and space. Copying certain systems in space is therefore fundamentally different from copying them in time. Different time slices of the same system reveal the same system in different states. Even another system created at another position in simultaneity, one that more closely approximates the form and function of the system of the first time slice, is nevertheless a less good “copy” of this system than the very much more “transformed” original system of the second time slice. This shows what we already knew – that there can be no abstract feature or basis for continuity. (See the relations of consciousness to the principle of indistinguishability of identical quantum particles)

Because the endeavor of love is so commonly successful, it must turn out that to love is to project one’s desires onto the other who accommodates these projections by legitimizing them, usually through or as a byproduct of the other’s attempts to have their own projections validated. Is the identity of a system only realized through this system’s state? Free will must involve the capacity for going, in Alan Watts’ words, “against the grain of the Universe.” For this to be possible, the ground of the individuals being must be both independent of and capable of subduing the ground of being of the Universe. We all, with what I like to call instinctive intuition, distinguish the state of death from that of never having been born (existed). Now clearly both of these are a case of nonexistence – of not existing at all. But, you see, we just feel somehow that not existing any more is to in some sense qualify an otherwise absolute nonexistence. Having lived a human life, even one that once ended, passes out of existence forever, makes a difference to the sum totality of the real. The question here, of course, is why we all seem to share this almost purest of illogical intuitions. So we more or less all of us believe in essence that the act of our existence is irreversible and somehow leaves an irrevocable trace upon all that shall come after us, or at least this trace shall (that of our having once existed) always persist despite the effect of all of the novelty accumulating throughout the rest of time. Can we rally expect this trace or imprint of our having lived a human life to succeed in so tenaciously preserving itself in the way we’ve described without its possessing a knack for survival for watching out for itself, as it were, developed to far greater perfection than we ourselves possessed while yet alive? It now appears our secretly held intuition that our individual existence fractures

absolute nonbeing through and through (this image of a fracturing is much more appropriate when considering th eeffect upon nonbeing of human existence, collectively), is equivalent to a tacit belief, not in continued survival of a mere ego, but in transcendence, through the death of the limited self, of the nonexistence we had prior to our first act of existing (conception, etc.), which is to say, strictly logically speaking, of course, that by the death of our human selves we transcend nonexistence. The phenomenon of consciousness is just the very “registering” of changes within itself that are heretofore irreducible to elements already ready to hand and therefore must be present to hand. This points up a commonly overlooked basis to Heidegger’s dual distinction between gear and representational phenomena. Distinctly quantum phenomena are characterized by the appearance and orchestration of physically measurable effects for which, in a classical physical sense, no cause may be ascribed. The underlying unity of quantum phenomena seems to be causality without causation. This reminds us of the unmoved mover or primum mobile, i.e., God. The intricacy of the relationships between structures discovered through experimental probing is in large part a function of the manner in which we have laid down our system of abstract descriptive categories. Here’s the strange thing, feedback is necessary to consciousness’ manifestation of its structures. Will is necessary for the structures to develop which are able to manifest structured consciousness. Paradoxically, all of the structurings of consciousness are also manifestations of its intrinsic structure. There is infinite reality within consciousness. Consciousness is behind the projection of forms into the Platonic realm rather than this implication being in the other direction. Causal overdetermination, i.e., quantum mechanics degeneracy is naturally occurring error correction codes. What is the difference

between synchronic and diachronic redundancy? How are they related? Given the information density of the human body/brain why is then the inertial mass of my brain only 1.6 kg? The speed of propagation of the vacuum information field must be effectively infinite/ instantaneous so that an “information dense” system does not have to “drag” an information-laden vacuum field behind it upon its being accelerated. @$ Of course, if the propagation speed of the vacuum information field is finite though much larger then “c” it should be experimentally possible to measure a small departure from the relativistic mass-velocity relationship for the system under large accelerations. The computing capacity of conventional and quantum computers possessing as Turing machines N distinct circuit elements and hence 2 N distinct accessible states and identical central processor unit speeds differ in computing power by a ratio of N:2 N. The equivalence principle would seem to dictate that the reconfiguration of vacuum field stressmomentum-energy be mediated in two distinct modes, one local, the other, nonlocal. The relative activity of each distinct mode of vacuum reconfiguration is matched to the mode of change in state, e.g., of real particles and fields such as in the case of arbitrary accelerations of masses, to which this vacuum must adjust. Impossibility of movement relative to the vacuum momentum-energy fluctuation field is always orthogonal to the 3-momentum of an inertial frame, i.e., to the 3-momentum of any uniformly moving body.

Of course, if gravitation is not a manifestation of absolute quantities of stress-momentum-energy, but of some spatiotemporal variation thereof. Spacetime and stress-momentum-energy varies in accordance with the Heisenberg uncertainties in these quantities. Displaced indigenous individual is a much more general concept than is

usually recognized. Umbringen literally translated means “to bring around, i.e., to awaken someone whose been asleep in the German however, is, interestingly, to take the life of or execute. The more intuition and insight that a text requires in order to understand it, the less stringent need be the requirement of precise transmission of the literal body of the text in order that the original intent of the text be understood. This brings up the notion of the distinction, letter of the law vs. spirit of the law in a more philosophical view. If one thinks about this, this, it only appears reasonable that the greater the metaphorical content of a text/oral tradition, then the less bound is transmission of the text to its particular manner or form by which it is expressed, and the more dependent does “transmission” depend on a shared, that is, generally commensurate context between speaker and listener/writer and reader. The degree of contextual degeneracy gets the limit on the ratio of literal to metaphorical transmission error sensitivity. We may think of the metaphorical as the Fourier transform of the literal. Mutually incompatible observables in quantum mechanics are related to each other as Fourier/Inverse Fourier transforms are related. The precision of the metaphor is manifest in the uncertainty with which it can be expressed. Reconstruction of Bible from early Church Fathers’ quotations from it is provable without consideration of order of reconnecting the quotes. It seems necessary for two causal chains, intersecting by chance, to be contained within a common space for merely a single dimension of time to suffice in parametrizing the evolving state of the composite system. What sort of temporality do we have in which a nonconserved fluctuation field merely mediates, but does not interfere with, the propagation of some causal influence? And what kind of temporality do

we then have should the fluctuation field actually participate in the causal propagation these otherwise merely support? Since the event of the beginning of time cannot be included within the timeline it begins, must we then interpret the beginning of time as an event within meta-, that is, a two- or multidimensional time? There must be some faculty of consciousness that has been somehow suppressed, the one that should otherwise permit the human person to know himself and the significance of human existence. Philosophy and mysticism are examples of the sublimation of this hidden faculty that is prevented from more direct operation. But evidently there have been individuals few in number to be sure that have been speckled throughout the ages who have caught onto life as a kind of cosmic confidence trick. When a quantum observation is made a new connection is being made between observer and system even though the two were already prior to this dynamically coupled (through the so-called nonlocally connected quantum correlation field). It seems that if we attempt to probe the properties deeply enough we end up inadvertently more and more tinkering with the very same “mechanism” by which the mind constitutes itself, if one was tinkering at the constitutive level of one’s own individual consciousness. Secretly, in the mind’s eye we picture the randomness of the so-called “quantum jumps” against the backdrop of our own imagination and so cannot escape an implicit understanding of the random of uncaused nature of these “jumps” as being merely epistemological in nature. Nonlocality is to consciousness as quantum transitions are to freely willed actions. Quantum fluctuations are akin to the chatter and noise of the unquiet mind. Quantum tunneling seems very akin to the operation of intuitive insight (the ability to draw conclusions in the absence of all of the facts required by a merely rational intellect to reach a conclusion – similar to causal determination in the absence of a “sufficient reason,” i.e., without all necessary causes operating or being present.

“. . . in the human brain, the amplification of quantum freedom happens via means that preserve the appearance, at our day to day scale, that we, and our universe, are completely mechanical, c.f., The Quantum Brain, Satinover, Wiley & Sons, Inc. This is just the type of arrangement by which we might expect the embodiment of conscious beings to be effected within coherent systems of matter and energy. At some stage in the progression from the subatomic to the cellular scale (or, perhaps, a little beyond this) a shift occurs from quantum computerlike operations classical digital computer-like operations (though these may be thought to be simulated on the brain’s neural network). This change in spatial scale temporal, also, when characteristic lifetimes and frequencies of the different scales are compared, amounts to our having an important redefinition of entropy forced upon us. These two, distinct definitions of entropy, the one, quantum, on the other, classical, must be (able to be demonstrated to be) exactly equivalent to one another. For otherwise we are faced with a stark paradox, i.e., what happens to the truly colossal quantity of quantum computational information that must be encoded in the myriad superposed quantum states within the brain at its atomic and molecular level of description? Perhaps another way to have asked this question is, where does the quantum computational information content go when the brain’s quantum coherent states decohere? Human suggestibility and the tendency of human imagination to be captured by novel and contrived symbols/icons. Prior to a certain watershed point in history, God did not deal with humankind on an individual basis unless one was a prophet, that is, an instrument through which God was to speak to His People. Individuality was an adaptation that acted as a break against lemming-like behavior of the clan/tribe as a whole that was potentially catastrophic, and the suggestibility of social groups is the evolutionary compliment to this important adaptation.

Receptor theory of drug action suggests that the peculiar psychoactive properties of drugs is only triggered or enabled by the drug’s completing of a circuit in the brain that was already in place, with the only missing link to complete the circuit being supplied by a certain facet of a stereospecific macromolecule. Chance may account for the fortuitous emergence of a favorable gene sequence but not the process by which such sequences are sustained, if indeed, they are intrinsically stable. The theory of punctuated equilibrium requires that a preexistent mode structure be in place so that transformative changes in the genome that take the macromolecule from one stable, coherent structure to another are properly enabled. This preexistent mode structure, though susceptible to adaptive evolutionary process Fate is rather like causal determinism that doesn’t care about how it gets from point A to point B. In other words, fate is determinism of ends, classical, causal determinism is a determinism of means. This suggests the distinction of determinism by the past vs. determinism by some set of conditions in the future. Underdetermination, causal determination, and overdetermination are characterized as chance, necessity and fate. Whenever the brain’s state gets close enough to that required to realize a desirable thought, it quantum tunnels to this state. Perhaps synchronicity in the course of human events can be explained through an appeal to a quantum through an appeal to a quantum tunneling – like mechanism. A deterministic process that produces random behavior must be intelligently directed. The metaphorical import of historical events seems to imply that history was composed by someone.

Curled up time dimension is the time during the toggling of a given “pixel,” i.e., spacetime quantum. Death would be a disruption of some underlying fabric of reality, creating a discontinuity – it is the encroachment of otherness that is the unseen part of the self and which underlies the familiarity that is the socially constructed self. Instead of information (data) being distributed spatially within the brain, it might be Fourier transformed into a momentum spectrum. Might the same be true of some information being Fourier transformed into an energy spectrum. The Fourier transformation of information may account for the holographic nature of the brain’s memory as well as, perhaps, the nonlocal nature of this information, c.f., audio lecture, Our Nonlinear World, in which Chuck Missler elaborates upon a quotation. You can’t allude to a cultural element that hasn’t yet been imagined and the context for which, still more, remains far into the future. This is the nonlinearity and interiority of culture. Cultural elements are the products of a reprocessing of new material cultural elements that is superimposed upon the backdrop of the permutational combination, montage, pastiche, parody, etc. of these elements for the reprocessing of these cultural elements. Non Sequitur is to semantics what contradiction is to syntax. Evolution is a creative response to the imposed boundary conditions. Forms manifesting from out of formlessness reminds us of quantum expectation values being constructed from Heisenberg uncertainties, causality from correlation of fluctuations. Boundary conditions and their particular configuration as historical artifact requires explanation, the chaotic dynamism upon which these boundary conditions are imposed require none. Does personal

consciousness represent a restriction or qualification of consciousness as such? Since physical laws only describe the relationships between classes of physical entities, it would appear, initially, that the so-called singularities represented by black holes by virtue of comprising a class of entities, should be subject to physical law description of their states and the dynamics of these states. But the region delimited by a black hole’s event horizon cannot be experimentally probed. This is because, of course, mass and energy can enter the hole, but nothing leaves from the interior of the hole, except that which is generated at it surface via the Hawking radiative process. The controlled and staged unfolding of epiphenomena doesn’t constitute real evolution. Evolution must be a dialectical and therefore a historical process in which novelty is incorporated into nature. Time varying probabilities versus time varying expectation values. An unlimited number of key codes applied to the Hebrew Torah to produce an unlimited number of messages that may be thought of as residing in the text itself only if the sequence of letters selected is determined by a function? The magnitude of relativistic time dilation at the light horizon of the Universe (relative to the surface of the Earth) is determined by the redshift of this horizon. What appears anticipatory and prophetic may in reality only be adaptive evolution. Inertia of objects tied to an outside continuum underlies the irreversibility of the sequence states of the object. Changes of the medium – time. Changes through the medium – space.

All internal motion in the icon is converted to external motion. No contradiction in superposition because it can’t be sustained under direct observation. Quantum dynamical systems do not scale upwards indefinitely. should not expect them to scale temporally either.

We

Physical continuity is at a deeper level than discrete matter. Entropy may be alternatively understood in terms of resolution instead of density of states. These two interpretations seem to be quite at odds with one another. The relationship of geometry ( as the structure of space) and the vacuum or space density approach to gravitation comes from the fact that the spectrum of available quantum states in a vacuum of spatiotemporally varying density of these states itself determines the spatiotemporal variation of momentum-energy for real particles and fields occupying this vacuum. We speak of spacetime being dynamic, varying or deformable. However, this raises the question in terms of what background continuum or context may we consistently speak of such variation/variability of spacetime? The probability of a particular state or configuration of a given system is usually expressed in terms of the probability of this state coming into being by chance in the course of random changes in the system’s state. Analyze this notion in light of the following: closed system, open system, coherence, causality, periodicity, etc. Temporality and consciousness are incompatible with the notion of design. The points to the essential nature of consciousness as uncreated, c.f., Searle, Chalmers, etc.

What unites the disjoint incommensurable is irrational.

is

transcendent,

what

unites

he

Data are stored in something, information has to be stored on something. If the language that a program is written in is powerful enough, then the program can be run on any machine. But this would imply that the software language’s most basic operations were taking place at a level beneath that of the most basic hardware design elements. Then the code can no longer be thought of as being completely structured in its implementation/execution by the conditions imposed by the hardware running the software. Since quantum correlations can be nonlocally connected, these correlations that become locally connected do so by some mechanism other than that of cause and effect. In short, quantum correlations by not being bound to spacetime may be found to underpin spacetime. This is why it makes sense to look for the mechanism of unified inertia and gravitation through an examination of the dynamics of quantum fluctuations and their correlations. Belief systems possess a principle of coherence upon which their evolvability relies that is independent of the arbitrary nature of the metaphysical elements formal within these systems of belief. A singularity is more generally speaking, a situation of the most extreme boundary condition having been placed upon the dynamical substrate subject to it the most restrictive boundary condition that can be placed upon this substrate that can be sustained by its very own activity. Information destruction paradox of black hole thermodynamics is such a crisis in some quarters of the physics community. Has anyone ever heard anyone concerned about loss, i.e., nonconservation, of information in the case of brain death of persons who have passed away.

The unique individuality of the personal consciousness is itself rather singularity like. Information cannot be transmitted at greater than the speed of light (in the local vacuum, that is). But is this also true for data? Actually, no is the answer. The explanation of this manner in which data and information differ is no doubt importantly related to Penrose’s graviton limit for Psi collapse, Wigner’s sense of the importance of consciousness in the Psi collapse mechanism, code versus its interpretation, etc. Does the death of the individual constitute a genuine, objective singularity? We expect the laws of nature to break down at the boundary of such an objective (or physical) singularity. But this can only be true if the underlying dynamic substrate bound by singularity is the same as this substrate conditioned or, more aptly, informed, by various particle field, i.e., massive (information-bearing) structures. “Psyche, goddess of purity.” Jung’s notion of complementary personality types and their mutual attraction. A complementarity of left and right hemispheres. Wisdom of the mother confident in her knowledge of the relevance of earth things and irrelevance of sky things. There is a possible breakthrough here in relating gravity, consciousness, quantum vacuum, open systems vs. closed systems in the context of thermodynamic theory, social construction of reality (reality as fundamentally intersubjective). . . That which is medium dependent is supposed to be encoded into or represented by that which is medium independent, i.e., the coherent represented by the discrete. Denotation is the fusing together of metaphors, as in inductively inferring the meaning of a word through hearing it used in myriad different contexts.

A floppy disk with data loaded onto it weighs the same as one without data. No data is just one among 2n different configurations, any one of which could have been designated as “no data.” Such a disk loaded with information, however, is expected to weigh more (possess greater inertia) than such as disk containing no information. Energy uncertainty contains information, but of a nonlocal and, hence, gravitationally/inertially ineffectual kind.

Now when you tell someone that death should be just like one had never existed, this doesn’t really console him or her, even if they can embrace the idea. That’s because somehow the person believes that they’re having existed makes a difference to the Universe even after they are dead. Just as the propagation of sound does not involved the actual transmission of matter, i.e., material particles, the transmission of information does not require the translocation of any substance. Because of the recursive nature of the transmission medium just the replication of information in place requires the processing of information. How information moves through space is dependent upon the mechanism by which information is sustained through time. Physics and chemistry serve as implementation, and transmission.

the

medium

of

execution,

Search engine metaphor for evolutionary process. No two systems can be considered to be properly connected, e.g., causally in the complete absence of back-reaction of one on the other. The direction of time merely implies that the forward reaction is the dominant one. This reminds us of the tiny leakage current in an

electronic amplifier circuit. Reprocessing of information is always easier than this processing ab initio. Events that transgress classically physically defined boundaries possess greater probability then would such, e.g., transitions in the absence of a given particular set of classical physical boundary conditions. This is how the power of quantum computing becomes accessible and how randomness and specificity may be effectively combined. Multiple levels of coherence that could interact with one another might be what is necessary to filter quantum fluctuations so as to extract information from them. But how can we extract information from a bed of fluctuations when no single fluctuation may be thought to possess any information? Two correlated fluctuations, each of which are random may be or become correlated. This would be a perfect example of how quantum mechanics permits and facilitates the integration of chance and necessity. Theory of inertia and gravitation based on the principle of the conservation of bandwidth. Spacetime curvature is degenerate with respect to 3-momentum and fluctuations in 3-momentum. To distinguish a curved spacetime from the mere appearance of spacetime curvature, say, due to spatiotemporal variations in the density of vacuum energy, there must be some other means of reckoning the values of space, time, momentum and energy intervals/ quantities. Nonlocal connectivity of fluctuations subsumes a causal description because, according to Bohm, causal relationships can always be constituted in terms of fluctuations and their correlations. Time reversal is only limited by a phenomenon called quantum decoherence.

The structure of energy fluctuation field (in four dimensions) is required to differentiate between distinct 3-dimensional spacetime manifolds. Consciousness is depth – Ken Wilber. Insights born of a facilitating notation, e.g., using Dirac’s “bra” – “ket” notation for describing compound quantum computational search/sort algorithmic action. Notations, e.g., tensor, Einstein summation convention, etc., can suggest generalizations otherwise missed. Everything reminding one of the object of one’s infatuation. A mate target acquisition and tracking algorithm that was chosen, by natural selection. But doesn’t the fact that this particular song, poem, picture, etc., reminds one of the love object signify anything other than the instantiation of a genetic program? Is the dual lived significance of the psychological association merely a manifestation of the modulation of the action of a genetic algorithm by environmental conditions/ cues? Instantiation of a concept as the modulation of a deterministic function by chance or unpredictable inputs. When is multiplexing of inputs a case of providence versus failure of the system to make needed discriminations? Can we equate good with transcendence and evil with immanence? What is it about texts or people’s way of relating to them that caused the emergence of texts soon after the invention of writing which came to be revered by entire societies, even fetishized and worshipped. From a certain point of view, the emergence of writing seems to have occurred at least several thousand years in advance of when it might otherwise should that point of view is that of semi-primitive peoples isolating themselves from the ordinary goings-on of life to pour over myriad dried

clay tablets on which are scratched clusters of vertical and horizontal grooves. By this means such an ancient scholar could share in the thoughts of those he never met or who might have been long dead by the time of his study of the texts. Neils Bohr said that anyone who has not been shocked by quantum theory has not understood it. Feynman said something similarly appreciative concerning this theory when he remarked that, “no one understands quantum mechanics.” If you take both of these statements by these two great physicists as being equally valid, then the conclusion follows that no one is properly shocked, amazed, or appreciated the implications and significance of the quantum theory. This brings to the fore the notion of a person, society, or humanity itself as a whole failing to properly appreciate the significance of something. Photons acquire mass in a gravitational field due to increased density of momentum fluctuations supported by a decreased density of energy fluctuations. This is (another way) how a decreased value of “c” in a gravitational field can be understood. Two physical objects that are embedded in the same vacuum that interact do so in a fundamentally different way than they do when each is embedded in its own, unique vacuum. In quantum physics, one “thing” does not cause another so much as do the underlying nonlocal fields constituting these “things”, e.g., particles interact. The disconnect of the base pair sequences from direct influence of the laws of chemistry in analogy with the disconnect of quantum phenomena from the classical world of substance/thinghood through quantization/digitization of mass, length, time, etc. Representation is a function of participation  generalization of Psi collapse principle. The uncertainties in quantum observables are not a

function of the interaction with an observer, but the certainties are (eigenstates). There is temporal nonlocality as well as spatial nonlocality. = ò; ò = The observer disturbs the system by his act of measurement through nonlocal connection being established (or altered discontinuously) between the system’s embedding vacuum and the vacuum embedding the observer’s brain. This means of disturbance may be similar to the disruption of the dreamscape which results when the dreamer begins to enter a lucid dreaming mode. Time has an ontogenetic dimension (this is time as usually understood), but also a phylogenetic dimension. The first kind of time is to be understood as an unfolding implemented by deterministic causality. The second is to be more properly understood as concrescence or coalescence, that is convergence. Convergent evolution implies the operation of a preexistent infrastructure, which enables it. Some people would prefer to remain a nonentity outside of history than an insignificant figure within it. I picture the development in the near future of a senior citizen niche market in the production of “new old movies,” black and white films starring all of the old great screen stars of the 1930’s, 40’s and 50’s resurrected in the form of 100% computer generated thespians. March 2012

In a matter of decades from this writing (2012), the distinction between real and virtual media, i.e., media representing the real vs. media representing the “virtual as real” shall have broken down. Creative writing narratives will become indistinguishable from journalistic reporting of factual events. The economic value/utility of real and virtual artifacts, products and services shall also have merged.

Subjective and even intersubjective/collective memories of events shall not only merge with memories of individual and collective events within so-called cyberspace, but there shall also be a blurring of distinctions between events grounded in proximate (inputted) versus those grounded in those more remote (natural sensory stimuli). Part of what shall aggravate this collapse of distinctions is the gaining currency of such notions as the Matrix, anthropic principle, ancestor simulation, virtual reality hypothesis, subanthropic principle, multiverse, Boltzmann brains, Philkdickeanism, etc. In discussions of Moore’s Law it is frequently said that the processing speed of the human brain is not much greater than 1017 operations per second and that therefore it will be only a matter of several decades before the computing power of the brain is overtaken by a new generation of computers, say, sometime around the year 2030. But there is an underlying assumption here that the brain is a closed computing system just as shall be the computers of the future that forecasters suppose must inevitably overtake the human brain in raw computing power. But what if the brain is not a closed computing system and what if the vast array of complex switching and memory circuitry of the brain leverages, if you will, a much more powerful system of information processing capacity, one inherently residing in the quantum vacuum or the gravitodynamics of fluctuating spacetime? Here the underlying dynamic information processing substrate embedding the brain’s neural network would inform, synchronize, and provide meaning-giving context for classical neural processes. It would accomplish this through the domain of spatiotemporal scale in which the crossover occurs between the classical and quantum realms. This intermediary domain is where such phenomena as decoherence and wavefunction collapse take place. It appears natural enough to associate quantum fluctuations with physical phenomena that are characteristically quantum mechanical in nature and to associate the expectation values of quantum observables with characteristically classical physical phenomena. In such a situation, the human brain, as an open computing system, and a digital computer, as an example of a

closed computing system, would have to be considered incommensurate with regard to comparison of their computing power. The digital computer does not leverage, control, modulate or interface with, etc. some larger, embedding information-processing network. It was designed to work in a “stand alone” configuration” or perhaps as part of a larger network that is itself a stand-alone, i.e., closed, computing system. The human brain was designed to work as a leveraging interface because it was an outgrowth of this same substrate that had guided its embryonic development. This reminds us of what is forcefully demonstrated by Prigogine’s work on far from equilibrium dynamical systems, namely, that the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics, which applies only the closed systems, does not apply to them. The deep connection that exists between energy and information suggests that this inapplicability of the 2nd law to open systems implies another important failure of information theory to apply to open computing systems such as pre-eminently represented by the human brain. For some strange reason, artificial intelligence thinkers and philosophers of mind and AI are in he habit of assuming that the quantum mechanical dynamics of, e.g., synapses, neural phospholipid membranes, microtubules, etc. are irrelevant to the peculiarly powerful parallel processing capabilities of the human brain. However, it appears, quite to the contrary, that quantum connectivity within the brain and especially between the brain and some dynamical, embedding quantum substrate, i.e., quantum vacuum, are of vital importance to the brain’s colossal parallel computational capacity. The intuition of time’s passage, i.e., human consciousness, implies a fundamental time asymmetry in the brain’s characteristic functioning which virtually assures that computer scientists and engineers shall never succeed in adequately simulating brain function on a digital computer, c.f., my 1996-97 writings on artificial intelligence. For closed computing systems a clear distinction may be drawn between hardware and software. This is however not so when it comes to the operation of what we might conveniently term “open computing systems.” But neither are these two types of “ware” identical. There

should be some rules of operation and information processing taking place through the brain’s functioning that are not merely reducible to the underlying laws of chemistry and physics of the brain’s material components. To the extent that the socially defined identity roles are arbitrary constructs, to just this extent is my future to conform to these nothing I should be troubled about. If you’re going to be recombining the results of filtering chance arising all over these different, and so we assume, unrelated regions of evolutionary development, then if we’re not planning on relying on happy coincidence, then there has to be an underlying rational basis for all of this. In other words, we need not just a code, one that applies to the processing of signals, but we need a language, that is to say, a system of arbitrary symbols (c.f., Monod) that allows us to plug in and out as it were into an unlimited variety of different contexts, so here we have the interesting notion of combining arbitrariness and context sensitivity. But then this is an effective strategy only because there’s already an underlying ground, lock and key fashion, true enough, and this seems to pose a limit on the degree of arbitrariness that is permitted our symbols by this meaning structure we’re supposed to access with them. On his deathbed he informed us that it wasn’t so bad that he didn’t have long to live since, as he noted, “I was looking at having to have a lot of expensive dental work.” Decay is a phenomenological process. A relatively small collection of rules permit one to enhance photographs so as to repair image decay. These rules apparently can be applied an unlimited number of times. The possibility of making unlimited numbers of copies of, for example, programs, tells us something interesting and important about the nature May 2012 of information and its dissemination. Information is selftranscending because it is never what it is at a given moment, but both possesses an underlying continuity similar to metaphysical substance

and is not limited in terms of the number of distinctly structured contexts which it can potentially transform. In this sense information may be thought to possess an “active principle” and does not merely disseminate, but inseminates, if you will. Parallel to the principle that there is no meaning without context, one might say that there is not creativity without information. Information in some sense is the “context of context”, but then again, so is consciousness the context of context. We are pointing up here the intimate connection between consciousness and information. If left to itself, the context of ground reaches equilibrium with itself or simply is at equilibrium with itself so that nothing new ever happens. A perturbation from outside succeeds in nothing more than bring the system to a new state of equilibrium much as before. This why the identification of information with mere energy is inadequate. “Nothing-butters” ~ naïve/inexperienced

experienced

versus

“All-butters”

~

Processed ~ automaticity; Processing ~ conscious intentionality So in this dream, I’m making up the sequence in which events take place. And so, unlike classically understood independent and objective reality, what happens next isn’t determined in advance although there are only so many distinct possibilities under a given set of boundary conditions. That which produces and sustains the oscillation, e.g., quantum observables can itself be neither captured by what is contained by the positive part of the cycle, nor by that contained in the negative part of the cycle. Although expressions of temporality may be spatialized, that which originates time and temporality cannot possibly be spatialized, that is, diagrammed, blueprinted or adequately described in formal or abstract terms which I to say, cannot be figured out.

Focus, blurred or sharp, is a manner of control feedback between observer and observed, not a degree of representational, revealed objective structure. There is memory and then there is the signature or residue of the forgotten. The signature of the forgotten is not forgotten. Incarnation for the first (and only) time is more mysterious than reincarnation. An unrepeatable experiment does not submit to scientific analysis. Consciousness is multiple, but not repeatable. In the case of linear input into the system, the sender and the receiver are distinct systems. Not so for the case of input/output of the nonlinear variety. Although correlated phenomena need not be causally connected within the plane of their manifesting, what controls the expression of each within a correlation might be expected to be connected as components of a cybernetic control system. The contradiction of playing god within the play you’ve contrived in which you’re merely human. To figure out, to express in the form of a blueprint or diagram. But systems that cannot have their temporal axes spatialized cannot be in this way diagrammed, that is, cannot possibly be figured out. I have a dream of approaching a door with a key in my hand. The implication is that he door is either locked and I’m going to unlock it, or the door is unlocked and I’m going to lock it. Now if I don’t have a clue why I’ve got the key in my hand or why I’m approaching this door for that matter, the when I stick the key in the lock and turn it, one of

two things typically are expected to happen: either it’s the wrong key and it doesn’t turn, or it’s the right key and it turns, either with resistance, if the door had been locked, or without resistance, if the door had been unlocked. There are all these opportunities for quantum superposition, e.g., going to lock/going to unlock a door, correct key/incorrect key, door having been locked/door having been unlocked, etc. Normally we would expect that an single process would be characterized by determinism and a collection of similar processes, by statistical relationships. The local is a manifestation of the mutual interference of nonlocal systems, e.g., the observer’s brain and the physical system under observation. Of course, the Other of all others would not be a person in the usual sense. If my thoughts are determined, then they cannot possibly refer to that which is merely hypothetical and not literally present anywhere in reality’s continuum. To wit, my thought cannot in this case be about anything. Deterministic thoughts cannot be supported by an openended context. March 2011 Another way to look at the question is the following. If all of the causal conditions for what is taking place within a closed, stand-alone computing system (brain) are proximate causes, i.e., taking place “within” the closed system, then events in the system only have reference to what is inside the system and can make no reference to anything “outside” the system. Information degeneracy is what permits the Gödelization procedure to carry through successfully upon which rests the validity of the Gödel’s Incompleteness Theorem. Numberline continuum possesses natural elements that are members of

the Real (numbers). Although information quantum is degenerate, what about information quality? Is information quality a general case of information about information, i.e., meta-information? All the good versions constructively interfere, bad ones destructively. Part of the Universe’s design is humankind, Jesus Christ, as well as God’s Holy Scriptures. The metaphysics of irony and laughter needs to be further investigated. Morality and ethics of intellectual property before and after Napster and the music distribution paradigm shift. Smoking pot, you notice when an oscillation is at each extreme of its periodic excursion, when reversing itself, but the smooth part of the oscillations’ excursion between either turn-around point, remains below the threshold of one’s altered consciousness. What permitted these intelligent primates to develop its technology is simply, consciousness. Consciousness permits a filtering and abstraction from the dynamic field in a way that causes an increase in order and complexity. If we understood the way time seems to slip away from us more and more as we move toward our mature years in terms of an anemia/hemorrhage metaphor, we might be more motivated to takes steps to manage time as a valuable, non-sustainable resource. Why do we think that the simultaneous death of thousands of people at a single location is more tragic than the death of an equal number of people unrelated by a single incident? That the loved ones left behind are likely to be acquainted with other victims in addition their loved

ones, is quite beside the point I’m trying to make here. Transcendental moral continuum seems to be implied by our intuition or instinct about death of the collective being a greater evil than the death of the individual or self. The new age crowd wants the warm and fuzzy feeling that comes from having the all powerful universal parental figure always in the background, but they don’t like the idea of owing any account to this parental figure and imagine that us kids can just make up the ethics governing our behavior. Consciousness and will are complementary even in a deity. Voltaire was famous for saying that if God did not exist, Man would have found it necessary to invent him. One of the for us profounder aspects of God’s being is that Man has indeed called God into existence. In fact He is called into existence every time an individual human being accepts and receives the promptings of His Holy Spirit. Fluctuation as a function of our manner of approximation/abstraction. The steady state cosmology theory will make a comeback every 50 years or so, and so this theory is a kind of touchstone of cosmology. All systems of cosmology must always justify themselves in part as valid departures from this touchstone theory (steady-state theory). Thoughts are representations of a direct contact. The purpose of words is to make one’s direct intuitions available to another. When “thinking” privately, without any notion of passing what arises during thought to some other person, one may altogether dispense with the necessity of words. Words are only valuable if they direct the listener/reader to the intuition corresponding to one’s own intuition one has sought to convey. Now an explanation or description of consciousness as a representation of consciousness is only valuable if it brings the other to a direct intuition of consciousness. Well, the individual already has direct intuition of his own peculiar state of consciousness. While the best method of bringing another to an intuition of consciousness as such, in contradistinction to his mere individual consciousness, is simply that of properly instructed in the techniques of transcendental meditation. The

individual’s success or failure in his attempt at transcendental meditation is ultimately dependent upon his own inner resources. Providing him with a kind of abstract description of consciousness instead reveals the committing of a fundamental category mistake. There is nothing, which can be abstracted from each and every individual consciousness since pure consciousness possesses not possible features which one might selectively attend to or suppress in order to abstract from them. The measuring instrument plus quantum system being measured can be consistently considered to be a single isolated quantum system. So by induction, the acausal nature of quantum measurement is properly attributable to that which breaks the composite closed system from outside, as it were. The consciously willed act of implementing the measurement by the observer fulfills this system disruptive role. Psi and by implication, causality, can only be defined within a closed system. Also, conserved quantities are only definable within a closed system. As a matter of fact, all three fundamental laws of thermodynamics are invalid when applied to open systems. Everything I’m doing and thinking is riding atop everything everyone else is doing and thinking. This is the idea of there being no fundamental distinction between a wave as a carrier versus wave as signal. Every wave is a potential carrier wave since every wave can be modulated. The projector cannot be found anywhere within the space it projects, of course. Because consciousness is integrally whole, its contents are distributed. A collective consciousness that is unified in much the same manner as is the individual’s consciousness. How the Universe breaks apart into components is as much due to us as to it.

Holographically stored information degrades gradually, but is capable of upgrading in a punctuated manner. The growth of a seed versus that growth which occurs from this seed. What is the reason for choosing one confluence over another within the system to label and track? , c.f., Alan Watts. The interface is itself supported by the very system with which its system connects and interacts. The appearance of synchronicity is supported by the convergence of divergent causal lives. The brain does not merely combine preexisting elements into new continuations, it introduces new elements into play, as well as changes the ground rules of this play. Socrates’ slave boy already knows the postulates and rules of inference embodied in Euclid’s Elements, so the questioning of the boy by Socrates his simply to trigger the accessing of the proper bits of knowledge. But these bits of knowledge were not simply waiting in a kind of innate (and local) memory storage against the moment of their needing to be accessed. The order of the growth of the central nervous system as well as the order of its functioning are manifested and sustained by the same ground. How could this be true for the peculiar kind of CNS functioning associated with perception? This is in principle easily done if a modulating resonance theory of perception is adopted. Watts discusses how we can’t bite our own teeth. In another lecture, he points out how the biting of the “infinite wiggliness” into discrete bits.

Then “biting” one’s own teeth would amount to biting the infinite wiggliness of the process of biting the infinite wiggliness of the process of . . . , and so one, ad infinitum. So it appears Watt’s statement about one not being able to bite one’s own teeth amounts to a poetic paraphrasing of Gödel’s Incompleteness Theorem. Equivocation of sense through equivocation of or indeterminacy of literal with metaphysical acceptation as aiding the creative application of logic. Manifestation of infinite regress, break down of validity of a mathematical expression as resulting from attempting to describe processes possessing temporal depth in terms of functions possessing only single dimension of temporal extension. You can scan data, but not information, whole or integrated. The manner in which the parts are found to interact is as much a function of how they were separated from the whole (or ground or embedding context) as it is a function of how these parts originally separated from one another. (time depth versus time extent again). To say that something is possible is to claim that there exists a facility for this thing’s production. The possibility of objective, as opposed to merely intersubjective, truth, itself depends upon another possibility – that of the “higher processing” of human experience, synchronically (in contradistinction to diachronically). Narcissistic communication style or, why my brilliant posts to science newsgroups are almost universally ignored. The lack of success here is also based, in part, in a failure to grasp the real nature of how knowledge (as an intersubjective artifact) is constructed, e.g., lone genius versus University research faculty. Infrastructure versus ground, as implementation/execution versus

creation/strategizing (tactics vs. strategy). Boundary between planning and execution, thought and expression and so on, is fractal. There are a number of deep, metaphysical questions that we believe must possess answers, but answers beyond the scope of human reason and imagination. Either this implies the transcendental mind or it does not. Temperament seems the only factor in deciding between these alternatives. Synchronicity is, in addition to an acausal connecting principle, is also a principle of multiplicity of meaningful connection. Part of the acausal nature stems from the relatedness of these connecting strands within the complex of self-significant connectivity. If the death of the other is tragic, then it is only grace (and luck) which sustains us. Because the perfect expression of insight cannot be found, hence all this energy spent in experiencing with forms and formulations. Within consciousness’ flawed formulations, i.e., metaphor, somehow suceed in referring to that for which we are powerless to derive the exact formulation. The open-endedness of data require that these data possess viral mnemonic characteristics. Viral memes may occupy a niche between energy and information. There are those who feel that a spiritual experience can only be authentic when taking place within an organized social religious context. For others a spiritual experience can only be meaningful if it is intimate and personal. Here spiritual encounters must partake in personal discovery and transformation.

Word as recursive as being an example of itself general and particular at once. Christ took upon Himself the likeness of Man. Adam was made in the Image of God. So image and likeness or physical form are distinct concepts within the Bible. Ephesians 1:4. The possibility of metaphoricity opens the way to unlimited possibilities of distinct orderings of reality. General considerations prior to development of unified theory. The relationships of the various branches of physics, etc. The Jew requires a sign. “They have Moses and the Prophets.” Faith cannot be sparked by or rely upon “signs” since without sufficient faith such signs as are provided go unrecognized, c.f., hardened hearts, blinded minds, etc. Two kinds of miracles – scientific and moral. This reminds us of Kant’s remark that there were two things which inspired awe in him: the starry heavens above and the moral law within. The sense of wonder is to science what the conscience is to morality. “Lord of Hosts” What are hosts? bodies embedding eternal souls?

Stars in the heavens?

Human

Perturbation theory and Ptolemaic epicycles. Many worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics is an example of perturbation theory. The distinction between real and virtual is a macroscopic one, and is a function of boundary conditions. Synchronicity, rather than evidence of the Universe attempting to communicate with the Self, is evidence of the self’s peculiar pattern of

projecting itself. The descent of the transcendental self, is evidence of the self’s peculiar pattern of projecting itself. The descent of the transcendental self into spacetime is not a special, one-time act, but is continual, occurring on as many occasions as there are moments composing an individual existence of dwelling within limitation (spacetime). The sensation of the subjective “flow” of experience is an artifact of a single moment. When a coincidence occurs involving multiple parties, one could say that only one person in the group (owns) the coincidence, i.e., that person to whom the coincidence is by far the most meaningful. Composite particle structures possess angular momentum and spin while fundamental particles possess their action entirely through their spin. A spin gradient (possessing units of linear momentum) would have to be derived from a definition of spin density and the gradient of spin density. Angular momentum of composite particles are bound structures of fundamental particle spins. An energy density gradient is associated with a force, that is, time rate of change in particle momentum directed toward spacetime with lesser energy density and greater 3-momentum density. /\p/\x >= hbar /\p/\x = hbar

for composite systems (real particles and fields) for simple systems (virtual particles and fields)

The uncertainty of the vacuum’s momentum and energy are equal to the instantaneous magnitude of the quantum vacuum’s momentum and energy. The time rate of change in momentum is equal and opposite to the space rate of change (gradient) in the system Hamiltonian.

Assuring someone that one is sincere is at a strictly literal level, paradoxical. Out of respect for the sane person we hope still dwells inside the mentally ill person, we resist the impulse to humor this person. Wisdom that is to be deployed by and within consciousness could not possibly have been built-in to the soul, for this would be mere talent and intellect/intelligence. Wisdom built-into a being would manifest itself to this being as a past history from within which this wisdom was distilled through its unique career of mindfulness. There must be an infrastructure for the implementation of the higher processing of human experience that is theoretically possible. And such an infrastructure necessarily transcends the cognition and perception of any individual human. This infrastructure is the divine logos. This infrastructure is better known as Providence. Psychic energy conservation theory of depression/ lucid dreaming, c.f., au= Alan Watts in cit=Not What Should Be But What Is, terming psychoanalysis “psychohydraulics.” What sort of boundary conditions must be placed upon consciousness as such to produce a given individual consciousness? Each individual cannot be thought to possess his own unique dynamism, if his consciousness simply results from certain particular boundary conditions having been placed upon the Universal Cosmic Consciousness (consciousness at large or as such). “The trees cannot grow to the heavens,” says Confucius. There is not reason to believe that human evolution cannot advance any further than the stage it presently occupies. There presently exists a facility for Man’s further evolution.

Could a computer design a more complex computer than itself? Not unless it was programmed for this – in a word, no – only the mere appearance of the computer designing a more complex computer than itself is feasible. But then the more complex computer is contained implicitly but contained nonetheless with the computer programmed to produce it. This is very much in contradistinction to a seed or acorn in which, the implicit develop mental program is more like an integrated collection of web links for the proper interfacing with a network (Internet) in this case. There is no reason to believe that the DNA contains all the information necessary to induce one’s ontogenetic development. In fact, the amount of information necessary to code for the structure of neural neocortical interconnections for outstrips the information carrying capacity of the DNA molecule. Possessing presence versus “possessing a future,” c.f., Alan Watts, Not What Should Be But What Is. The controlling of one’s mind spontaneously happens and so, in a real sense, there is not control at all.

Personal responsibility and the ethics of the mutual respect of persons are weakened within an ontology in which the distinction between persons is regarded as being ultimately illusory. The unitary dimensionality of time projecting backward into the past of each person's biography is a rationalizing projection which glosses over both the momental and arboreal structure of experience as actually lived. An actual one-dimensional time would leave no room for the operation of will and consciousness.

Mesons are massive bosons because they are actually composite particles possessed of binding energy mediated by the strong nuclear force. All simple bosons, i.e., bosons that are not composite, possessing internal binding energies, should be massless particles, unless able to manifest their momentum as energy through back and forth exchange between fermions.

Fermions are massive when they back react upon the fermi-dirac statistics of the quantum vacuum. In the same way, bosons should be massive when they in turn back react upon the bose-einstein statistics of the quantum vacuum. Any particle that directly back reacts upon the fermi-dirac vacuum statistics will also back react indirectly upon the bose-einstein statistics of this vacuum. This occurs through the coupling of fermi-dirac and bose-einstein statistics of the free space quantum vacuum. But this coupling is only in practice realized when the symmetry of quantum vacuum statistics is first perturbed on one side or the other of the vacuum's spacetime symmetry plane. It is easy to realize that deviation from flat spacetime symmetry induces a coupling between 3-momentum and energy fluctuations in the vacuum. The converse of this is also true: perturbing of the momentum-energy symmetry of flat spacetime induces a curvature of this spacetime that in turn induces further distortion in momentum-energy symmetry away from flat or diagonalized vacuum fluctuation momentum-energy. This feedback between interacting shifts in spacetime and momentum-energy symmetry is critically damped when r approaches Rshcwarzchild. A mass collapsing under its own weight ceases its this collapse towards its center once the the mass becomes disconnected from spacetime through having become disconnected from the time of its original spacetime. This occurs at the precise point that all of the mass' fluctuation energy has converted to bosonic, i.e., the point at which the mass begins to sustain itself entirely out of the internal vector boson exchanges mediating its own binding forces, which is to say, at just that

point at which the mass is converted completely into the energy of its internal binding forces. Any increase in the density of the mass' internal binding forces would have to be supplied from "outside" from the very spacetime from which it has just become "disconnected." Any increase in the mass' binding energy beyond this natural dividing line would necessitate a decrease in the density of fermionic fluctuation energy within the mass that cannot be communicated to the region of spacetime outside the mass' newly formed event horizon. Such a situation would result in a violation of conservation of energy by the black hole. Spacetime is characterized by the collective wavenumbers, k, and frequencies, f, of virtual bosons and fermions, respectively composing the momentum and energy fluctuations of the quantum mechanical vacuum state. Does the energy uncertainty of a quantum mechanical system encode its complete structure of temporal potentialities? If this is so, then the only properties possessed by a black hole, which is disconnected from the energy uncertainty of the quantum vacuum, would be those that are truly conserved quantities. Are expectation values derivable from stable intereference between the energy uncertainty of the quantum system and the energy uncertainty of the quantum brain of the person observing it? The sum of the respective probability densities of fermions of identical quantum state integrated over a finite 3-hypersurface of spacetime equals unity. A warping of this hypersurface increases its hypersurface area, resulting in a correspondingly reduced density of virtual fermions (vacuum energy fluctuations) within a hypersurface area equal to the projection of this hypersurface onto its tangent reference hypersurface, i.e., the flat hypersuface containing the matrix of virtual fermions prior to its taking on a curvature (degenerate with respect to (+) or (-) curvature). In other words, the warping of the starting flat hypersurface results in a corresponding decreased 3-hypersurface density of virtual

fermions (quantum vacuum energy fluctuations). The increasing elastic strain within the warped hypersurface corresponds to an increased density of 3-momentum fluctuations locally tangent to any given infinitestimally flat patch of the warped hypersurface. 3-momentum and energy fluctuations within the warped hypersurface become coupled. This coupling is described by a 2nd rank elasticity tensor. Each point along the warped hypersurface is characterized by its own spacetime rotation of fluctuation energy 3-momentum-ward. Since an arbitrary warping of the 3-hypersurface must be desribed by distinct spacetime rotations of fluctuation energy 3-momentum-ward, the fluctuation momentum-energy structure of an arbitrary 3-hypersurface must be generally described by a 2nd rank tensors describing torque and elastic strain at each spacetime coordinate within the hypersurface. The torque tensor describes the continual refreshing of a flat spacetime matrix of quantum spin density into a warped spacetime matrix of spin density against the restorative forces of spacetime's elastic strain. The decision to investigate background relationships underlying the appearance of unassuming ordinariness and the sustained willed intention toward implementing this decision induces a reconfiguration (transition to a new configuration) within the networked database of *adically similar universes, as well as a transition to a new similarity database of parallel universes. The important question here is that concerning the nature of the rule of similarity and similarity dynamics governing the induction of these transitions/ March 2012

Distinct patterns of “tweaking” of the fundamental physical constants constitutes distinct parallel universes, though perhaps only “parallel” in a metaphorical sense because there may indeed be a common ground for all of the distinct tweakings in terms of some underlying mechanism, which relates (causes intersection) of each with the other. The seemingly hyper-precise tweaking of fundamental physical constants required by a solipsistic cosmological principle (as a subset of a more general “anthropic cosmological principle – I’m either “called forth from the void by the sum total of necessary conditions form

my being, or I’m not!) suggests that the underlying mechanism of sustainment of the individual’s consciousness must involve a feedback system connecting and conditioning ever-present tiny fluctuations in the moment-by-moment values of these constants, which, if supposed to track the continuity of consciousness, must fail to do so for anyone else except me. Does the vacuum have to be described by a density matrix instead of a wavefunction. The vacuum’s energy is not conserved and so the vacuum does not commute with its Hamiltonian. There is not qualitative distinction between real and virtual particles of the same type. The only distinction between “real” and “virtual” exists in terms of measurability. Since the wavefunction is prior to the act of measurement, we can draw no theoretical distinction between a wavefunction that describes a virtual particle from one describing a socalled real particle. This is because what distinguishes real and virtual Dissociation, schizophrenia, dissent, social constructs, power politics, cynicism, metaphysics of presence, narrative structure, Parallel universes of Many Worlds Interpretation of quantum mechanics are each classical universe. Consciousness does not “fit” within a classical spacetime. Although perhaps certain key components of consciousness may be distributed across many distinct parallel universes. A heightened integration of consciousness may reveal the relative lack of integration of this consciousness’ representations carried over from an earlier time of less developed integration of cognitive structures. The transcendental self may have a virtually unlimited number of embodiment projections into a similar number of parallel quantum universes. Polyemanationist MWI quantum solipsistic cosmological principle.

An accident is a manifestation of underlying systematicity and something extraneous. Chicken is an egg’s way of makin ganother egg. What philosophical implication for an evolutionary interpretation of this adage. As evinced by the peculiar counter or nontintuitive logic of thougth typical during dreaming consciousness is projected through waking memory into the physical memory traces laid down during dreaming. Communications are easily understood despite free float permitted to negation indicators. There is an important sense in which explanation takes us stil further from a grasp and knowledge of the truth, or at least it does this before bringing us closer to its comprehension. Rather than change being an illusion and time being unreal it is permanence and continuity (within a continuum, e.g., spacetime) that is the illusion. “All is flux” does not allow coherence. “All is cyclical” does not permit any novelty, which requires aperiodicity. As in a crystalline structure, underlying coherence explains the spectrum of oscillations and their correlations (which contain information about how the crystal will respond to perturbations). If being and existence are synonymous, then there is no distinction between not existing and never having existed. If there is future evolution, genuine possibilities for novel higher syntheses in future times, then the experience. . .

The spin statistics theorem is a consequence of special relativity theory. We should expect spin statistics to remain valid within GR theory though with appropriately shifted occupation number densities for spin 1 boson and spin 0 fermion-antifermion pair exchanges – creationannihilations. The unity of Being requires its unification with nonbeing. Transcendental Being can only unify itself by plumbing the depths of nonbeing (evil?) The fact of oneself not being God, not even secretly, or even potentially, is intimately related to the fact of the existence of unspeakable evil. The person themselves becomes merely the nucleus of a system of projections. Truth cannot be embodied in propositions or assertions. All propositional assertions are based in interpretations and abstraction – something is always left out, suppressed in the background of the assertion. Decentralized network of groups with overlapping but basically distinct charters for each’s own tribal way of life. Each clan’s charter would be available to every other clan, as well as to displaced individuals seeking membership in a new clan. Funds would be available for the assistance of displaced or dissatisfied individuals, e.g., in finding or dissatisfied individuals, e.g., in finding them a new home/collective, transportation, orientation, job training, etc. A means of psychological testing would be developed and applied to recruiting ethical individuals to maintain the over-arching network infrastructure. (Must solve the dilemma of what guards shall watch the guards.) Only if ethics could be reduced to a computer program – fairness and universality of applicability of ethical standards could help to make more acceptable any unpopular aspects of this program. There would need arise a new class of brokers who could orchestrate the

complex arrangements required to exchange the dwellings (workplaces of displaced individuals so as to return them to more natural/hospitable social surroundings. Certainly the www could help to facilitate this. Those brokers would be recruiters representing the interests of both communities and those of displaced individuals. These communitarian brokers/agents would cooperate with government and small business “head-hunters.” Dolan QST Model = h, where “fluc” indicated fluctuation. Gram for gram, a Bose condensate constitutes a gravitational source equal in strength to that constituted by a fermi degenerate gas. “More than a few have spoken with God’s voice, and yet no one has heard this voice.” It is in terms of a (we think) reliable social construct of reality that we discount the reality of the peculiar voices that people sometimes do hear. This construct is in part based in the reality where most people in fact do not “hear voices.” The larger construct required to discount the cross-cultural and cross-historical scope of theistic belief might connote a transcendent reality that might tend to substantiate theism.

Although many sensitive and highly intelligent people openly assert the unbelief in an intelligent designer and creator of the Universe, and have adopted biases within many areas of human knowledge and endeavor, there may be a repressed, underlying assent to a divine creator and sustainer of the order of existence. This proposition would be argued from absence of metaphysical curiosity. epi=

”One’s confidence is assured so long as the ground does not shift underneath one.” “All that makes you who you are is other than yourself.” This is the very implication of a Godless worldview. Without the unshakable grounding of one’s identity in the Truth of God’s Being, one has no identity. Identity is just an illusion, mere “Identity,” scratches on paper, the mnemonic traces in the gray matter for executing such scratches, a passing articulate wave packet of mutually interfering and dissipating pressure fluctuations in wispy atmosphere, one composed mostly of neutral, diatomic Nitrogen. It is largely human or anthropocentric chauvinism that causes as to regard our existence to be so remarkable so that something special besides natural processes must be needed to account for this. If Psi collapse is neither random nor governed by some preexistent order, then every such collapse may be understood to contribute some quantity of information to the Universe. Psi collapse is then seen to be anti-entropic or, negentropic. The superposition of mutually exclusive, eigenstates may act as a naturally occurring massively parallel quantum computation. Physicist Paul Davies has suggested that nature must in some important manner (as yet undiscovered) put to use the colossal potential for quantum parallel computing. When on occasion I’m asked by someone whether or not I’m happy, I’m in the habit of saying by way of answering that I consider myself

fortunate and that for this I’m grateful. This answer is no kind of dodge but an attempt to suggest to the questioner that his question might have been given a more thoughtful formulation. The coherent embedding substrate of the brain with this brain undergoes specific resonances (the nature of which may be affected by changes in both the brain and its embedding quantum substrate, whenever it finds itself in state in part comprised by determinate contents, is likely to preexist the physical gray matter and contribute to its development during gestation. How is the mutual interaction of quantum brain fluctuations with quantum system fluctuations different from the mutual interaction of quantum brain fluctuations with themselves. Perhaps pure consciousness is but an abstract projection of the individual consciousness and that the 1st limitation of Being is not universal consciousness, i.e., consciousness as such, but the consciousness of some particular individual. The seemingly independent lines of causation that intersect to give one existence must have not really each originated from some altogether separate starting point for otherwise how could we account for the coherence and cohesiveness of our being within spacetime? Though perhaps the departure points for each collection of causal influences leading to the formation of each time and space bound human entity are located, to be found, within irreconcilably separate and disjoint domains. The fundamentally different types of quantum correlations exist: those of a single vacuum versus those manifested from out of distinct vacua. Monadic nature of consciousness. Do we directly intuit the passage of time or do we simply observe the density or spatial frequency of its markers? Do we directly intuit our

own consciousness or just observe consciousness, itself not ever glimpsed?

experiences

within

this

Born’s ontological and Heisenberg’s epistemological interpretations of quantum uncertainty treat the concept of probability in basically different ways – what are they? Is the difference here simply one of subjective probability (constructed from boundary conditions upon the kinematics and dynamics of particles and fields and the observers manner of physically interacting with them to produce an observation versus one of boundary conditions upon the wavefunction itself? If one happened to recollect memories from a past life so that it appeared obvious that one had ben reincarnated, then the notion of a soul, separable from the body and capable of existing independently of it. Would be established for oneself beyond all doubt. Yet which is indeed the more remarkable feat, reincarnation or incarnation for the first time? Certainly the latter since both body and soul must in this case have been engendered and joined together without any help from continuity with preexisting structure. A woman friend who walks by in a crowd catches a glimpse of me sitting with herself and becomes jealous. A carpenter’s square is seen by me laying on the ledge of a bathtub and suddenly is seen to shift its position, but after a double-take appears to be in its original position and not to have moved at all. Death does not mean the de-struction of consciousness (consciousness is not a “struct-ure” anyway), only the dissolution of the ego – as a structuring of consciousness, i.e., self-consciousness. Consciousness permits but not necessitate the reference to an ego in a similar fashion to how other symbols refer to their objects, projective or real.

Experience requires both an appropriate structuring of consciousness and a certain reference. The contexts seem to be required here, one for the subject, another for the object. Television affected the standards of physical beauty in a couple of important ways. Firstly, the television camera makes actors and actresses appear about 10 to 15 lbs. Heavier than normal. Secondly, it is more difficult for the television camera to pick up and present the facial features of actors and actresses to view than can be easily done by the unaided eye in a face to face view of human subjects present in normal lighting. Social surrogancy might significantly help to reverse the dysgenic threat posed by the faster breeding, less intelligent sections of the population. But as film and television technology has greatly improved over the last couple of decades, the preferences of the casting agent has not adjusted to reflect this so that film and television shows are now filed with actors and actresses possessing almost grotesquely exaggerated facial beauty feature-markers. Those who view the fabulous success of screen stars with petty envy and begrudging resentment might be thought to be at opposite ends of a spectrum from those fans who seem to worship and adore them. But in many cases, this adoration of the fan for the star is the expression of what Freud termed a reaction formation. #########################################################

There is a component of order to the genome that requires explanation apart from the forms set by natural selection. This is the order that is an integral part of the DNA as a system of signals and linguistic signs, i.e., the order integral to DNA understood as a language possessing both

syntax and semantics and embedded in an information processing system. Perhaps, like normal human languages, DNA is an evolved sociological construct. Because the presence of real fermions disturbs the fermi-dirac vacuum fluctuation statistics, the bose-einstein fluctuation statistics of the vacuum are also perturbed. This perturbation of bose-einstein vacuum statistics manifest itself as increased probability density of virtual boson exchanges between the 3-vacuum and itself. Thus, the vacuum develops a small mass-energy component. If the energy uncertainty of the brain like that of any other quantum system, originates from outside (since brain is just a collection of boundary conditions), then the reduction of the energy uncertainty of the brain cannot be consistently represented as the flow of uncertainty out of the system. Can information only be transferred from one open system to another, say, through tunneling or some other nonlocal process? It is not necessary to be able to predict the particulars of what one is going to do. It is far more useful to make very robust, general predictions of the person’s choices and actions based on what we observe about his character and temperament. We cannot properly explain the ability of the brain to produce complex conscious states just from a study and analysis of the physical conditions of the brain that were concurrent with its conscious products. We cannot do this because we have still to take into account the earlier stages of completely through which this brain evolved. Evolution rather than an unfolding of latent or implicit structure/order is a dialectical process in its potentialities for further expression. Universal consciousness is the field that selects the degeneracy of would-be individual consciousness observers.

Data has no content – only information has content. transmitted through spacetime – information cannot.

Data can be

Establishing a nonlocal connection between a QM system and an open system induces an irreducible change in this system’s state, i.e., collapse of the system’s Psi function. By disconnecting from the intersubjective reality network in which the impulses of irrational wish fulfillment on the part of the network’s component subjectivities normally cancel each other out and being equipped with only an incomplete and fuzzy memory of the rules (and of how to internally implement these rules) governing the externally collectively projected world of causal relations, one becomes able to dominate the process of the informing of chaos through force of an unopposed will. The disturbing thought for some philosophers of consciousness cannot be indifferent to the forms and representations inhering and transforming through it. But then this means that consciousness is not a passive medium of representation but participates in the “life” of the forms to which it gives rise, but then so too do these forms participate in the dynamism of consciousness (as such?) Does this mean then that the notion of pure consciousness is ust an intellectual hallucination – a false idea? An implication of the Platonic Theory of eternal forms is that of pure consciousness as the purely passive medium of these forms’ subsistence. But isn’t this notion of pure passive medium merely posited to satisfy a metaphysical prejudice, having no other purpose or function? Nonlocal fields need not possess boundary conditions. Associative thinking as a broader and deeper basis for thought than class exclusion and inclusion.

Enlightenment may be likened to the fish realizing he’s swimming in water. Pioneer spacecraft acceleration anomaly can be explained in terms of my mock gravitation mechanism based on the effect of general relativity time dilation on the strength of the vacuum energy density time-rate-ofchange spatial gradient. Gravitation as the result of the disturbance of vacuum supersymmetry by non-supersymmetric matter. Automaticity/ behaviorism and insight/intuition as not components but forms of embodied consciousness. Religious/church hymn composer inspired by mastery of the canonical forms and devices of composition within this genre. Of course, one finds oneself occupying the top species of intelligent life. This is due to conscious embodied existence being the intersection of the descent of being with the ascent of biological evolution. This explains one’s vertical placement within the chain of biologically evolved life’s chain of being. The lack of more advanced intelligent life in the Universe may also be explained along these lines. The anthropic quantum solipsistic cosmological principle explains the existence of the horizontal order. Paradoxically, the subjective nature of experience distinctive to each individual conscious mind, by transcending an intersubjective definition, must be objectively real in a deeper sense than entities within any particular universe of discourse. If we assume that there are different states of pure consciousness at least potentially accessible to each conscious person, than wouldn’t we have to view each of these pure consciousnesses as distinctly different forms

of consciousness as such, and hence not really states of pure consciousness at all? If each individual consciousness is in this way a particular form of consciousness as such, than the operation of the transformation of one such form into another while preserving the underlying substance of pure consciousness should be definable and so possible. Moreover, each individual consciousness becomes now just a particular state of the pure (or absolute) consciousness. The relative difference of these particular forms of pure consciousness would not be accessible to each, but only could be compared and contrasted by the transcending pure consciousness. I cannot even say what it is like to be me. Indeterminate in the past is continuous with nonlocal, eternal present. Onset of irreversibility with cleaning of degeneracy of would-be quantum observers.

We said that the unknown had a structure because of there being a different unknown in relation to each mind. The question is whether the unknowns of each individual person eventually merge or remain separate. We are here inquiring about the topology, if you will, of the unknown in relation to the duality of duality vs. transcendence and plurality vs. unity. It is probable that these two dual distinctions cut across one another, creating an inherent difficulty for rational mind in its quest to submit all of reality to its descriptive grasp. We have to realize that knowledge transcends the discursive, transcends the capacity for description.

If consciousness is figure, what is ground? Analogy is necessarily to intersubjective communication. Why should it be at all necessary for infrasubjective communication, say, for example, from an evolutionary standpoint? We seek answers that can be communicated, but still more, those that cannot be communicated, but only known to the individual and without this what’s being known by the individual’s possessing any analogue for another. But this knowledge should still be knowable for the Other? Nora’s reaction to have a dream – adaptation of the general human nature to the particulars of the individual’s circumstances rather than human nature being just abstractions. (predestination vs. foreknowledge) Back-reaction is an altogether different thing from reversibility. In fact, it’s the underlying cause of irreversibility, if you think about the vacuum that’s supposed to be the very ground of physical being itself be surprised by some sudden development within other wise dead, inorganic matter, say with the 1st switching on of life or consciousness. I think that the way inflection influences the content sometimes in very substantive ways, the content of what we are saying that’s inflected indicates something of perhaps deep importance about the proactive nature of something that’s not exactly pure individual consciousness nor purely formal or linguistic that’s taking possession of the otherwise ordinary process of reporting information. Fundamental particles of matter are indifferent to the passage of time, and yet it is thought by the same people that somehow the vastness itself geologic intervals of time makes evolution of complexity more probable. Einstein’s derivation of the inertia of energy is based on a thought experiment involving the scattering of a photon between two mirrors. Time dilation derived form considering the reflection of a photon from a

mirror when this photon originates from a body moving relatively to this mirror. We may conceive of the mirror as analogous to the orthogonality of the energy component of the 4-momentum, relative to the components of three momentum, combined with the fact of continual exchange of energy between all matter and the quantum vacuum reservoir of energy fluctuations. Observation by a quantum observer causes back-reaction of phenomena upon their ground state. A replacement of the merely abstract entities, i.e., atoms, molecules, in my brain over time does not affect the continuity of my conscious identity because the ground of which these entities are abstractions has not been substantively effected. Overdetermined of experience is essential to stability of the sense of the self and the external world. Space and time are aesthetic intuitions of consciousness so it doesn’t make sense to talk about consciousness being in the brain. Modernist cultural artifacts are characterized by their appeal to phenomenology, by their representation of the ordinary at reduced levels of percetual/cognitive processing (and perhaps at greater levels of such processing, e.g., the introspection of a protagonist, etc.). Consciousness that is isomorphic to the underlying brain processes that are supposedly responsible for not only structuring but also producing this consciousness would lead, if concrete substance (and its causal powers, c.f., Searle) are truly irrelevant, then this functioning of consciousness would in turn produce another layer of consciousness. Contrary to the case of the understanding of atoms and molecules, there is no larger framework in which consciousness may be understood that does not altogether transcend the capacity for understanding of any finite

individual mind. The structuring of consciousness is dependent upon spacelike inputs, which are locally connected but the coherence of these structures into an integrated form is dependent upon nonlocally connected timelike inputs. Nonlocal coneectivity cannot be explained in terms of mere local connectivity. Although the phenomena of self-consciousness as a high level structure of consciousness may be explained in terms of brain function, consciousness as such cannot. Archetypes  Elementary Ideas  Folk Ideas To permit genuine creation, limitation had to ensue only after Being had irreconcilably whether this applies to each apparently distinct species of intelligent life. That which requires no sustaining of itself was not founded upon an act of the determination of ground. There is a blurring of the distinction of question, assertion, command and explanation. Polyphony and rhetoric as non-separability of sign and symbol. The difference which is a difference but makes no difference epistemologically – only ontologically. Because consciousness itself is not within experience of the individual, it makes non difference to the quality of experience. Solution to the otherness problem here. But there wold be a difference between consciousnesses to a transcendentally consciousness. A new organism can be trained by downloading of instruction sets without need for participation with an environment (context), that is, its

training can be symbolically represented, if it is not capable of conscious encoding of experience. To ask if God Exists is similarly misguided as the question whether consciousness is an experience. The active principle of language is its intrinsic tendency of exhibiting the speaker’s intended denotation. How can symbolic description be passive and purely abstract, when the symbol back-reacts upon and self-extracts deeper meanings? Consciousness as pure epiphenomenon, then the rays, if you will, of consciousness radiate outward forever, at infinite velocity, and never hit anything – never strike the screen, as it were. As monumental as seems one’s evolution from the 1 st tentative stirrings of infantile consciousness to that height of consciousness represented by the pinnacle of one’s intellectual and spiritual development – this amounts to but the tiniest amount of metaphysical labor. That is, the sum total of one’s experiential opus manages to enlarge creation, but only by the tiniest increment. We must think of this transformation towards which some of us realize we seem to be accelerating is entirely outside, nor should it be thought of as something unfolding entirely within the selves of harbinger souls, if you will. (Intersubjectivity of each person’s Other). It’s perhaps a collective self fulfilling prophecy. Maybe if we all talk about it and look for it enough, this will make it an inevitable event at some stage. All of the non-pedestrian states of consciousness fall into one or another of the Psychiatric diagnostician’s categories. But does that necessarily invalidate these extraordinary experiences? Perhaps it tends to invalidate the practice if not the theory or psychiatry?

To be able to rationalize in the sense of channeling along societally defined useful pathways, the peculiar impulses and vagaries of the individual, or to simply shut these out altogether when no conventional way can be found for in this way channeling them – this is the principle object of the institute of the psychiatric profession besides the generally applicable professional interest of making lots of money. So when someone somewhat gets to know you and then this only to decide that one isn’t all that interesting, then, apart from the consideration whether this person hasn’t just decided that you’re no real use to them, you shouldn’t really take this to heart or too seriously because we are each of us transcendentally mutually other. Machines don’t communicate with each other because what is exchanged between them doesn’t mean anything (to them). One thing that psychedelics can teach us is that all of the forms that might be manifest in culture both past and for the foreseeable future (and perhaps beyond) that all of these forms are latent and hardwired within the operating system of the human psyche. Does the Napster metaphor work as an analogy of the sharing of images between individual unconsciousness who are the author, necessarily for at least a small percentage of the images within their personal stock of archetypal images? But these unique images, particular to each self have to be adapted to some common format if they are to have currency in the collective. Certainly there had to be some sorts of error correction system arise by which the brain could differentiate inside from outside stimuli. Space and Time versus Visual and Auditory Whoever discovered water, it certainly wasn’t a fish. McCluhan

– Marshall

Mind as conduit or terminal rather than repository/ computer. The human mind had to be able to form generalizations from just the barest handful of particular instance. This required a highly developed capacity for abstraction, the positing of assumptions and induction from those assumptions. One system for the brain protecting itself from incidental fluctuations in itself would have been to link all these fluctuations together into a rational system through streamlining and filtering to produce basic elements that could be permuted and combined. And anything entering this mix that didn’t bear the imprint or signature of this filtering procedure should be interpreted as having stemmed from outside. Outside sensory stimuli, in other words, modulate fluctuations within the matrix of internal glitches. Isn’t it uncanny how all the reasons we give for what we love about our mates have so little to do with our original reasons for being attracted to and liking them. I don’t know whether I’m having an insight or just being paranoid. To act alone is to risk acting out of madness. sorry..byt could not resist your colleciton sorry for the excessive accesses that's ok, but i've been plagued by socket errors which sometimes cause people to be accidentally kicked off hmm sorry if that happens to you hey no probs I assure you it's unintentional I'll take a look at your list but r u a professor or somehting ?

please by all means I'm what might be termed a "wanna-be professor" haha ? aha ? that means that I'd like to be a professor or haha ? but have to make a living right now that's laughter hmm so r u a student ? . . . . (10 minutes of boring chat) . . . you can always email me if you have questions about how these programs work I know most of the stufdf seem to be in queue hey thanks..I will When you find some good programs, you can send them my way, ok? offcourse deal try the song GANGA from my list.. its a hindi song..I dont know how much sense it will make to you I have studied Hinduism and Buddhism so maybe I'll appreciate it thanks, I will try to download it well its a complaint to Ganges the river which flows across india why dont you improve the lots of the people there why dont you make them into proud humans.. etc That's Hinduism at the level of the common people, I'm afraid I've only studied the Advaita, Shankara, Ramanuja, etc. the philosophical stuff ! But I think I'll like it damm it..

you are.. at level 5. will have to descend.. whats the essence.. from all tha study clark ? key point.. ? you learnt ? It seems that in the West our concept of God is personal but all of our monotheisms are infused with mysticism, i.e., Sufi mysticism, Jewish Kabbala, Christian gnosticism, etc. While in the East the conception of God is of being *Impersonal* but the people practice their religion interms of God being personalized in the form of many household deities and greater deities I think RELIGION is hard wired.. into human brains. Which means we have an innate. Desire to worship. And that gives rise to the various froms ofr GODs..religion it makes for an interesting comparison of East and West, I think Exactly I agree I dont know if this.. stands any trial of your sudies or more erudite..inquiry.. but I htink man should start and iqnuiry of themind.. before of the GOD how is it that so many human beings have spoken with God's voice if it's true that they have never heard His voice - that's the problem I have with Atheism And how is it that man is supposed to have originated in blind evolutionary process yet Man is not himself blind? that is, unconscious Hmm Its much like the Heizenbergs uncertainty principal.. what possible evolutionary purpose could there have been for consciousness? yes, rather we need to study.. brain..with brain.. indeed and since religion is hard coded..in the brain

and only tool available to us to study is brain we will never be able to truly know the orginis.. unless some superior beigns examine us ! but ultimately we can't lift ourselves up by our own bootstraps if its just the brain looking at and probing itself Consciousness.. = how do you define it ? yep it is the medium and ground of thought and experience for this reason, consciousness cannot itself *be a thought* or *be an experience* do you see? hmm it is prior to thought by being thought's very necessary precondition and therefore cannot be encompassed *within thought* that's why consciousness *as such* is transcendental In otherwords, consciousness has a reference to something that is beyond form, beyond space and time could it be that..lower animals have cosciousness but no thought ? time and space are just intuitions entertained by consciousness correct since they had only the neonatal..parts of the brain.. just think of the nature of consciousness during a dream Question: hmm is the brain a closed system? or is it open? I think I need some coffee to keep up with this discussion for later anwer( what would be the evolutionay purpose of DREAM ?) let me think can you wait a couple of minutes

? this is interesting i am on thinking with an open system.. getting coffee can you briefly ...define..a closed system.. so that we are on the same thread here. what is the key difference in a closed system there is no distinction between different rates of times passage or of its direction time is just a spatial dimension within a closed system notice that /\t x /\E > h /\t represents the typical timescale of temporal processes within a quantum system keep it simple.. intuitive.. /\E is the energy uncertainty that is comprised by all the energy fluctuations with which a closed system interacts and exchanges energy so as to become an open system based on exprience and my own philosophy.. (I will answer based on this> thus achieving temporality let me digest In quantum mechanics the lifetime and decay times of quantum states are determined by the magnitude of the / /\E of the system the degree to which the system is perturbed by energy fluctuations of the quantum vacuum in its vicinity I used to take grad course in physics though nonmatriculating i can see that I was informally collaborating with a physics professor who had a quantum gravity theory he was working on

wow thats the last piece (gravity) you need to crack why did u leave that? he believed that gravity was not based on spacetime curvature but upon spatiotemporal variations in vacuum momentum-energy density because I ran out of money I didn't have an assistantship i had to work through school shame. hmm but i'm planning on maybe going back u must I still correspond with him and exchange ideas he left academia also hw is it relvant to the dicsussion on brain ? and is a PhD physical chemist for a german polymer company i mean say gravity energy ? more lucrative, I guess yep... end...game..is money few.. continue.. to have belief for that.. one has to be FOOLISH and LUCKY it is complex but the only way that mutually perpendicular time lines of individual consciousness can interact is with a spacetime that possess at least some spacetime curvature that cuvature comes by gravity ? otherwise the distinct subjective temporalities cannot connect correct like in the black hole ? rather than the other way around collapse.. which is what Einstein believed uh

in a black hole time and space axes have been completely interchanged again whats the relevance with brains open and closed system > I am not getting htis.. all energy fluctuations become 3-momentum fluctuations mediating binding forces holding the black hole together and so the hole is cut off from the perturbing effects of the quantum vacuum energy fluctuations assuming a brain to be a biochemical device.. its is a closed system > the brain as a quantum system is embedded in this quantum vacuum yet the output (thoughts) it produces..is not controllable..and hence it is an open system the electrons within the microtubules within each neuron act as waveguides resonating to the quantum vacuum fluctuations in energy the brain does not produce consciousness but is a kind of reducing valve and tuning device no ? i see. thats very interesting ? each brain tunes to its own unique spectrum of vacuum signals each person's consciousness taps into its own quantum vacuum energy so each observer projects his own wavefunction onto quantum systems that can be observed there is a different state function for each observer or potential observer these distinct vacua only couple within a curved spacetime in fact, according to David Bohm, all causal relationships between expectation values can be alternatively

represented in terms of correlations of fluctuations about these expectation values the local causality is underpinned by nonlocal correlation in other words ? nonlocal interactions are faster than light and are infrasubjective Can you relate it to a common lay ..explanation..please local interactions are causal and are inter-subjective the connection of the mind to itself is nonlocal the connection between distinct minds is local and causal I see. energies less than the energy uncertainty are nonlocally connected energies larger than the enregy uncertainty are locally connectable Summarise please in common terms.. layterms.. ( I recommend you read Simon Singh;s books) you will reach out.. to lay people like me better ! He is a PHD in particle physics.. well, the basis of the integration of the individual's consciousness by virtue of which the individual is self-conscious cannot be represented abstractly or in terms of formal symbols it is beyond la wrote about Fermats theorem.. best selller.. but the basis of the interrelation of distinct consciousness is formally describable I think I've heard of this book read it.. most of the proof was using a computer program, I seem to recall his ability to relate the erudite scientific concepts to a

lay mans terms is fantastic well..Andrew Weils..used.. three sets of mathematics by induction I can put some of this better in lay terms but it takes too much thought to do it on the fly, as it werre sorry about that, but I'm still trying to understand all of this stuff myself I know.. can appreciate but which also means that you are losing audience... we believe induction is valid because it's worked so well as a method of inference in the past :) the local connection! brain to brain connection.. is not in sync induction has to invoke itself for its justification in other words kinda circular hmm wow.. i think that there is not explanation for consciousness because there has to be something from which everything else derives naturally whatever that is will itself not be derivable from anything else other than itself so the explanation of what consciousness is is - simply the experience of pure consciousness itself which,of course, if beyond any particular structure or function or form Tell me.. once in the meditation.. these are days when I went into extended meditations and I would want the how do you explain that ? meditation is just allowing the mind to stop throwing up all of these particular forms of itself throwind ? it is kinda like the experience by the ocean of itself when

there are no waves or disturbance in it hmm pure consciousness is no different from nonbeing or pure being they are the same the circle is completed pure being and pure nonbeing are identical and from this contradiction of being and nonbeing all things follow pure being transcends the merely relative dual distinction of existence versus nonexistence this is why the question "Does God Exist?" is naive and misguided hmm because God transcends the distinction of existence versus nonexistence existence and nonexistence are just the two most general forms that pure being can take when it first seeks to manifest itself yep.. so of course this thing which transcends existence versus nonexistence is reality and we don't have to question its reality that's the answer there has to have always been something and what better candidate for this something than that from which everything can originate are you saying.. we can connect..with our own ..existince and nonEx? through manifestation are you saying.. we can connect..with our own ..existince and nonEx? only through nodoing and nonthinking meditation ? Karma is a Sanskrit word for "doing" doing

act so when you escape the cycle of rebirth, that is, Karma you are in the state of nondoing u could escape that..while stillll living ? i mena via meditation.. where u seemingly STOP the stringing together of moments of one's life into a continous track is what reincarnation really is in its most general aspect all htoughts.. but then death..put a file marker..or sorts.. and how do you connect from one filemarker to another.. living is a manifestation of pure consciousness within time and space though which in its essence transcends time and space ! thats very interesting there ar limitations associated with being infinite such as not being able to experience uncertainty, surprise, learning, growth, communication, etc. so there's a reason for each infinite being to descend into time and space hmm perfect communication is the reduction of the uncertainty of another mind about something when you're infinite you don't have any uncertainty that can be reduced by anybody so you can't communicate with or contact another mind you're cosmically lonely if you will all the more reason to make the leap of faith and limit yourself risk existence in the hope that others will being doing the same !

aha so finite living is a limitation ! you see, the world is a negotiated collective enterprise on the part of myriad transcendent minds who have all volutarily and foolishly jumped into the realm of limitation to enter into community with the other so we all .. are we scared of infinite.,, ? but it is our natural state that may explain that I was scared... in a state of mediation.. that's where you came from when I start losing.. would not be able to call myself BACK if you like.. very interesting.. don't you realize that you are God? deep within yourself you have to realize this each of us is God ! but the descent into spacetime was not through limitation borne of simple negation if that were true, then you could just go back by negating the negation by which you came here it would all be a game and there would be no real risk in volved you would not really have left the confines of your cosmic loniliness you would not really connect with the other in this way hmm each of us had to risk being lost and never finding our way back otherwise it's just playing and doesn't mean anything like a role playing game

you have to really lose your connection from your transcendent self to actually meet with other beings who are doing the same thing some people, like Buddha or Jesus learned how to reconnect to their transcendent selves but u cant meet them because they r infinite..? you might say that each of us is a more or less unsuccessulf attempt to make a Jesus can infinite communicate with the infinite ? no loneliness hmm essence else there wont be lonliness eh the infinite must become finite and enter a common medium with other infinite beings who've also limited their selves to communicate beautiful mediation is limitation that's why we have to become embodied become part of a common medium spacetime or ether other whatever but it necessariliy means we have to leave the transcendent state transcendence is absolute, *unmediated being* you see ? hmm without mediation and hence limitation there is no communication i am here damm it but if we were both beyond space and time then there'd be no here or there between which communication could ensue you know

what I mean? but then is it possible for the infinite to communicate with the finite..WHY the gAps.. why is there a gap.. that is a good question why is there a informtaiton (or packet) loss when infinite manifests into finite why packet loss ? because not medium can contain the nonmediated sorry if this seems a play of words but language can sometimes fail us when we try to speak of the unspeakable :) hmm it just did did not answer eh I never said that I had *all the answers* :) hmm i know.. i decided to tease.. part of being FINITE :) just I've picked up some good ideas from eastern thought and quantum physics and its philosophy yep I think religion and science would converge one day! Are you of Indian ancestry? an anti DARK ages.. I am an indian way to be in US for last 6 montsh only what part of India are you from ? but lived in ME for 5 yrs.. UK for some time and india balance of the ealry life of 33yrs

Rajasthan ? jaipur I have a Bengali friend who I work with ? norht north he is proud of being a Brahmin, I suspect hmm I can speak bengali I like that language a lot ! is it related to Sanskrit ? whatss there to be so proud of? well its the highest caste, isn't it? I dont know.. I think the best he will do is to brag of being an Indian yeah rest must dissolve..Bull Shit.. Indian philosophy is the deepest I think well it used to be sorry for that use yes back when Europeans were still in animal skins and living in caves I would htink so.. but why ? why did it happen there ? Indians had an advanced civilization may be because we had peacefull civilisation hmm yes peace.. where peoplke had time to THINK key to innovation by being less restless you as a people were more open to

the whisperings of the transcendent telll there is an innate desire.. to be in a continuum hmm you were able to listen easier to what God is always trying to tell us better stated... I think we also chose a sorta SHORT CUT to GOD yes which is by yoursefl as you said god is YOU so the shortest route would be to be with yourself.. meditate...etc think Indian Philosophy cut to the heart of all of the big questions where as the west is taking the circutious route..of sciences..emperical..testing hmm Well, Rajeev, I'm going to send you some emails restless if that's ok please do you have some writings or other stuff you'd like to send? happy to read them some of it maybe naive, but if you'd care to comment, I'd appreciate it thanks its not complete offcourse I wanted u to htink..on one more ok question

sure which is why do I have this desire to be connected.. in a sense of continuum ? ANd musci seem to give that in the sense in many ways.. the intent to be an anlogue..device.. let me write to you I've wondered about that somewhat vaguely, but never really asked the question to myself ok cool will chat some other time U know music seem to provide that chalo .. let reconnect someothe day yes, I'm going to rest my brain need to address some finite needs Hey, you've been a really sharp chat partner hmm yep is it ! whats your email ? Well, I'll take off for now . . I'll send you some more programs send me..he meail I will know [email protected] by bye enjoyed it. . .talk to you soon! Negative pressure of the vacuum in inflationary theory: a negative pressure implies either an imaginary velocity of propagation throughout the medium in which this pressure exists or if the velocity of propagation in this medium is to be real-valued, then the energy density of this medium must also be negative. V(sound) = sort[pc**2/e]

The creation of matter (mass-energy) was associated with a switching of the vacuum pressure from negative to positive. The field and particle concepts are complementary. Therefore, when new particles are produced from the energy of collision of a number of other particles, one may describe this conversion as either the excitation of the vacuum transforming virtual particles into real ones. Or, the overcoming of equal and opposite, that is, negative, binding energies within the colliding particles themselves. In the absence of real particles, virtual particles must “emerge from the vacuum” in particle-antiparticle pairs to conserve momentum and then only for a fleeting period of time specified by the uncertainty principle to conserve energy. However, in the presence of matter virtual particles may appear without a partner with which to annihilate because, the real matter particles nearby may move so as to balance momentum and energy in combination with the created particle. So vacuum momentum-energy, i.e., vacuum 4-momentum is not conserved in the presence of real (as opposed to virtual) matter. This is what we mean when we speak of the effect of matter upon vacuum wherein the vacuum’s spacetime symmetry is broken by matter. Force as the suppression of the “annihilating partner.” The time order of causality related events is preserve in all frames of reference. The time order of causally unrelated events I completely relativized. The conversion of mass into energy is the countervailing of all of the mass’ binding energies. From: Russell S Clark [[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, July 05, 2006 11:25 PM To: '[email protected]' Subject: RE: Math classes at LSU Dan, I don’t know how Jim does it. I’ve already had differential equations,

partial differential equations, linear algebra, and a lot of physics and electrical engineering courses that were really thinly disguised math courses. What I really need is to learn tensors, group theory, more general relativity, quantum field theory and statistical physics (with perhaps an emphasis in condensed matter) – at least 30 semester hours of stuff, I’d say. I think that with the rapid evolution of the high bandwidth Internet, there should arise some new opportunities for just what you speak of – own-paced self-study, but which is more collaborative than what has been traditionally available. Someday an appropriately motivated (and talented) individual might be able to gain considerably more than the mid-21st Century equivalent of a “certificate in VCR repair” in such areas of study as Gödelian Number Theory or relativistic QFT – and all without sacrificing any of the duties and responsibilities of a petty bureaucratic sinecure. LOL Russ March 2009

“What I mean is when I am around a large group of people I notice that I try to contribute to the conversation but when I do, people just start talking over me completing disregarding that I am talking. I notice people do that alot to me. am I a damn loser? its embarressing and makes me just want to isolate myself in large groups.” rusmann Best Answer - Chosen by Voters I think this communication problem of yours is conditioned by two factors: 1) to what degree are you native to the language being spoken in the group and 2) to what degree are you native to the culture of the participants in the group discussion. So the solution to this problem shall ultimately come down to your ability to gain these two types of fluency. That's where it gets complicated. If you are not as knowledgeable or experienced as are the members of the group with the people, places, things or events that are being referred to in the discussion, then the group will automatically assume you don't have anything substantive or

new to contribute to the discussion. They will regard you as a kind of "hanger on" to the group and not of full social standing, i.e., not a "peer". If you do not possess as rich a history of shared mutual experiences as the members of the group do with one another, then likewise, the group will regard you as more or less a social voyeur or outsider, that is, as a person who does not really have any commitment to the values and interests of the group, or to the topics of current discussion, and there will be no expectation on the part of the group that you'll "get" any of the private jokes or inside references, all of which puts you at a lower priority among the discussion participants requiring a response. One bad habit is to repeat yourself if you are talked over chances are you were heard and ignored. Better for the time being to not be too persistent if your contributions are being skipped over and to concentrate on addressing the deeper root problem. If you have a hobby or interest or you belong to a professional or charitable organization that you are committed to and which you pursue over a period of years in common with other group members, then the acquaintances you make in such a context with whom you'll have built up many shared experiences - these folks will become your friends - and they will listen to you and not talk over you. Watch for it! Now somebody else (not you) will be the outsider who'll get talked over (by you!) A paradox is at work here similar to the case where banks only loan a person money if the person doesn't need it, say. You may indeed have to arrive on the scene with a certain amount of already extant social standing (clout) in order to participate in a new group and build up your social standing there. Having a socially well-adjusted girlfriend (or even a girlfriend figure) to participate in group activities along with you will usually accelerate your admission into the group's "peerage". Realize that if you become a part of something bigger than yourself for a significant period of time and really commit yourself to that something whatever it is - you will inevitably develop relationships of mutual respect. And should you return to the group who formerly "dissed" you, now with those life experiences under you belt, the members of the group will sense something different about you and they shall very likely give you more of the respect that is instinctively felt by some to automatically be their

due. Ironically, you're only a loser if you disallow your own participation in the game. It's only in the context of this game so-called that one earns the respect which makes of one a peer whose experiences, opinions and advice shall be valued and respected. Otherwise, folks are just not going to naturally glimpse any inner nobility or greatness that you think or hope you possess. This having been said, sometimes the fix is to give a more careful examination to the values, commitments, interests and personalities of the group, determine them to be seriously deficient in some way, exit stage left and stop blaming yourself. If the problem you've described happens again though - and keeps happening, and you actually care about having the group members' respect, then the earlier points of discussion remain in force. cit=

The Major Transitions in Evolution (1995) by John Maynard Smith The Origins of Order (1993) by Stuart Kauffman http://www.scribd.com/doc/222478894/The-Origins-of-Order-Stuart-aKauffman cit=

(Need a future dead links section – search for app or utility that resurrects dead links similar to the “Wayback Machine”, but dynamic. http://www.helloquizzy.com/quizzy/take epi=

"My dear Watson, it's a battle pitched between misheard and misquoted lyrics." http://truthtellers.org/alerts/GeneticResearchConfirmsKhazarTheory.htm l kwo=

“All life is only a set of pictures in the brain, among which there is no difference betwixt those born of real things and those born of inward dreamings, and no cause to value the one above the other.” – H. P. Lovecraft

http://grooveshark.com/s/Boondocks+Theme+ending/2EPz3K?src=5 https://secure.survivallife.com/products/credit-card-knife/index.php? Contact0LeadSourceId=11703 Hey Dan, that is great news. And of course, I was happy to help you and your campaign out with a contribution. I will have to start following you and the District Attorney campaign on Twitter and on the campaign website. Could you send me the links? Now I'll make another prediction: this is just the beginning! Your District and your State are very fortunate to have you and shall enjoy the great benefit of your leadership for many years to come! Best of luck and wishes to you and your family! Dan Dow for District Attorney 2014! Russell S. Clark Health Physicist, State of Louisiana and Proud 30 Year Veteran of the Louisiana Army National Guard