Non-Local Consciousness

There's so much exciting work on consciousness being done by real scientists who are looking at real evidence and making real advances in real time. See Revonsuo, Inner Presence: Consciousness as a Biological Phenomenon ; Consciousness:The Science of Subjectivity. These studies are backed by many experiments, not just a few, and become the foundation for cautious conclusions that become subjects of further empirical testing, not definitive confirmation of some ancient metaphysical system based on sweeping overgeneralizations. That's the way I think real progress will be made in discovering the relationship between consciousness and the human mind. Our feelings about the relationship between consciousness and "the Now" are pretty much irrelevant to this enterprise.

 

Have you heard of the Alain Aspect experiment of 1982, or the Gisin experiment of 1997? I am admittedly new on the scene of Quantum Mechanics, but my new interest in it comes from my interest in Esoteric studies.

Putting aside the notion that all of reality is Consciousness for a moment, from what I am reading, it looks as if it has already been shown time and again that physical reality is non-local. The first experiment showed Quantum non-locality over the distance 13 meters, the second experiment covered 7 miles, which is quite vast on quantum scales. It very well may be that Non-locality is the underlying principle of the entire Cosmos.

And everyone is their own real Scientist, who can use their own real evidence in real time.

 

Except that the mind can remember the past, and anticipate and plan for the future. If physical existence only exists in the present, then mind therefore transcends the physical dimensions, and the physical now. If the fourth dimension is a realm of pure energy, then it is timeless and therefore there is an eternal now. The concept of time only becomes relevant when we drop below the speed of light.

I believe that the physical realm consists of continuous points of Now—which I refer to as the Quantum Now—each quantum now is the only point where physical existence manifests, and represents all simultaneous quantum wave collapses across the universe. The previous quantum collapses are of the past, and no longer have physical existence. The next series of quantum wave collapses are of the future and will not have physical existence until that quantum now. Thus the universe has entropy. But reality is more phenomena than it is concrete physicality---as the philosopher Berkeley said, “Existence is perception.” Another way to look at this is that each Quantum Now represents a hologram---a four dimensional hologram.

From your perspective, because reality must be perceived, you could use this to argue that consciousness and the now are equivalent. I however relegate the physical now to physical reality and therefore separate mind from this fleeting present.

I think that the Eastern focus on the here and now is more a centering technique---as the physical now is so fleeting, yet we each are our own universal center, and that center begins in the physical dimensions and moves up through multiple dimensions.

I would say that it is the fleeting manifestation of atoms, particles, and other quanta, from their natural and eternal state of super-positioned probability waves (well, I guess by eternal I mean the life of this universe).

I did see that thread. However I was not referring to the squeezing the emptiness from space, but rather squeezing the emptiness or void from matter. For example, if we take the earth, and squeeze out almost all of the empty space within matter, we would have a ball, a bit smaller than a golf ball---but it would still have the same weight as the earth at its original size. Then if we remove that last little amount of empty space, we get a black hole.

The aether in modern terms, by the way, would be the zero-point energy field. One of the possible scenarios about the fundamental make up of reality, in addition to string theory, would not allow mass to exist outside of the zero-point energy field.

Scientifically, decoherence is the dynamic by which probability wave collapses occur without a conscious observer----basically two quanta interact in such a way that their mutual positions are determined. For example, on a distant dead planet on the other side of the galaxy, where no sentient being exists, a ray of light touches a rock. Let’s break down what is happening to one planck time—light, as a probability wave strikes an atom within the rock, which is also super-positioned as a probability wave. But in that moment the light wave will be absorbed into the atom, the interaction is such that the wave of light has a distinct position in space-time, as does the atom---the atom undergoes a probability wave collapse as an atom, and the light becomes a photon. They are suddenly physical. Now the time it takes for a photon to be absorbed into an atom is certainly longer than one planck time, so both the atom and the photon will undergo many decoherent events in the time it takes for the photon to be absorbed. Meanwhile, as the photon is absorbed, another is released, also undergoing decoherent events. One Quantum Now is the length of time for just one probability wave collapse---but it represents, clear across the universe, all simultaneous probability wave collapses, including those which represent observation by sentient beings.

To go further into this problem takes us from science and into individual subjective interpretation of belief.

The question becomes, how does physical reality remain so consistent from one moment to the next, and from one millennium to the next, in a universe that is no longer concrete, but more like a frothy rapidly blinking binary hologram of being/nothingness? (especially if mass is nothing more than light trapped by the light energy of the zero-point energy field as one very recent theory suggests---I have written elsewhere about this---the zero-point energy field providing the inertia of mass, such that light replaces m in Newton’s law: f = ma. This plays out in ways that we could compare with the Higgs Field Theory, and is amazingly predictive. This is why I said mass may not exist outside of the zero-point energy field.)

This question carries us right back to Aristotle and Plato, and their ideas were influenced by older indigenous concepts of reality handed down. It isn’t hard to carry this into the universal mind (nous) which was probably best explored by Aristotle. What keeps reality consistent would be Aristotle’s form---or as it later became, hylomorphic form. Regardless of how you want to frame it, it is essentialist in nature.

But my philosophy of Archephenomenalism embraces multiplicity, not a duality. So it should allow for, and give meaning to, multiple interpretations, from Hinduism and Buddhism to Christianity and even atheism. Archephenomenalism is fundamentally idealist, however I have included within it a different category that allows for a materialist interpretation. Nonetheless, Arche in Ancient Greek, refers to, among a number of different things (and each of which equally applies), ‘First Cause’ and I believe the first cause to be consciousness. So yes, I do believe that consciousness is behind the consistency of the universe; in other words, even the probability wave collapses resulting from decoherence are the result of some kind of consciousness---that the universe is in fact, alive. I am, after all, an animist. I would say that this consciousness which, a Hindu, for example, would label as Atman, is of a higher dimension then that of human consciousness.

I place a lot of emphasis on the individual and free will. Therefore I believe that we are individuals even in the higher dimension where our own consciousness is centered. (In fact one description of my philosophy is as an existentialist essentialism.) Yes—there may very well be a higher level of consciousness, where everything becomes one, but I say, who cares---it is time to break free of that objectivist group ethic that has plagued man since the dawn of the Planter cultures---an ethic that has culminated in the objectivist nihilism of the modern age----and to celebrate the individual.

Yes----but why not celebrate that we all represent!

 

Going to take me a while to soak all of that in. I read most of it but just need to soak it in.

In the meantime, I will address this from my perspective.

Except that the mind can remember the past, and anticipate and plan for the future. If physical existence only exists in the present, then mind therefore transcends the physical dimensions, and the physical now. If the fourth dimension is a realm of pure energy, then it is timeless and therefore there is an eternal now. The concept of time only becomes relevant when we drop below the speed of light.

Right, but the remembering or envisioning of the past and future is still happening in the eternal Now. It's always in the present moment that something can take place or happen it seems.

I'm definitely interested in the 4th Dimension, but still don't fully understand what it is. I feel that the Astral plays a part in it, and also Time. Dreamtime perhaps? I also feel that some sort of Psi Culture could birth itself from some aspect of the 4th Dimension.

So is Mind the same as the brain or does it mean consciousness? Or is it a Cosmic Brain, and/or Cosmic Consciousness? Some sort of Source for our Consciousness?

 

Edmund Husserl, the other father of existentialism (in addition to Kierkegaard---telling me that the mother must have been an indigenous woman from the Amazon---because that is where it is a common tribal belief that to conceive a well-rounded child, a woman must have other sexual partners in addition to the main father, each contributing seed... ;-) ), said that the human mind has an attribute he called, 'Retention' in order to make sense of reality from one moment to the next. He did not mean retention in the usual sense, but rather a deeper understanding that gave reality a consistent sequence from one moment to the next. For example, we can sit and enjoy a song from one moment to the next without starting all over from the beginning at each new moment of time---because we retain a sense of the melody up to that point.

If only the present exists, then we need to transcend the present in some manner in orde to function within, and make sense of, the physical world-----because anything out of the present does not exist. Otherwise music, for example, would become meaningless--as we would only be aware of the single note of that moment.

Then you have cases of premonitions, experiences of past lives, and so forth...

I see the fourth dimension as that dimension where light (or energy), as described by Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity exists. I guess we could consider it metaphorically in terms of the three physical dimensions---let's consider just the side to side dimension, existentially this one dimension does not make sense without the up-down, and front-back dimensions (especially since they all curve into each other) yet from our perspective, side to side is always different from up-down and front-back (this is subjectively true even if my side-side is your front-back or up-down or somewhere in between).

Each additional higher dimension adds an infinite number of new directions, yet consciously we are trapped by the physical dimensions (because the ego limits our perception to physical reality. The subconscious allows us to perceive higher dimensions, but we still understand it in terms of our perception of physical reality). The fourth dimension is the next highest dimension so it seems to us to be amazingly absolute, it encompasses all of our physical dimensions, and then directions we cannot perceive (literally directions in between those we know), not to mention the fact that, being beyond the barrier of the speed of light, it is physically out of our reach. If we were to experience the fourth dimension through meditation, for example, then everything truly would seem to be interconnected and as one, because we are trying to make sense of a higher dimension from the physical 3 dimensions. Consider what the up-down dimension would seem like to an entity that existed in only a 2 dimensional world of side- side and front-back dimensions. This up-dimension would seem to be all-encompassing and would go in every direction they cannot perceive.

To me, what one would experience as the astral plane, is a still higher dimension where human consciousness is centered. I refer to this as the Mind Dimension. The human mind has incredible potential to do all kinds of things-----just as in the movie, ‘Lucy.’ However, since the ego filters out almost all non-physical stimulus and phenomena, what we can and cannot do becomes a matter of belief. But then, if we could do all that we can truly do, what would be the purpose of life? Nothing would be gained, or truly experienced, if we continuously shaped reality to fit our needs. Life would end up dull and meaningless, a senseless trap in Rod Serling’s, the twilight zone

I equate mind with consciousness. The brain is the physical counterpart---or the physical manifestation of mind. I mean this literally. The one area I believe we have the most power to shape reality is who we are physically, and how we manifest.

Let me add here that our ability to shape our own reality is based on an interplay of three different things—our own mind and intentions, the intentions of others, and the natural trend of things. The first two factors, in the quantum mechanical sense, involve observation, while the third one is decoherence.

The more genuine we are (as Kierkegaard would say), or the more individuated we are (as Jung would say) the more control we have over our own reality---but I believe very strongly in existential freedom and free will. Our own belief in what we can control has to be greater than the perceptions of others (otherwise we allow them to shape reality) and the natural trend of things.

Essentialism traditionally breaks down in this regard---or should I say, turns against humanity----because it traps people into the concept that it is their nature, or their essence. It held that a good person is good, or an evil person is evil, because it is their nature. Or at best, an evil person can only become good through the acceptance of God into their life.

However, if a subjective consciousness is primary to our own essence, then we are not trapped by our own nature---but freed by it---free to be who we choose to be.

 

There is some great experiments being done by real scientists that demonstrate the non-local nature of consciousness as well---for example, the work done at MIT, which I described from the book I posted about on both this thread and the last one. No one ever seems to respond to it.

Regardless, the problem is that science, as long as it adheres to a materialist dogma, does not provide anything but an observer’s sterile view of a dead inanimate world of things. In a nihilistic world void of true value and meaning, what does such an objectivistic perspective of reality provide us?

Take love, for example, we can explain it in terms of chemicals released in the brain, and other biological interactions within our bodies. We can explain our choice for a mate in terms of social, familial and cultural factors. That may all be very interesting, but what existential value does it give to us in order that we do not treat our mate as merely an object in our possession? What values should I take away from this that would induce me to make the relationship work for the rest of our lives?

In the research you provided, is there something that would tell me, in a world where all values, including those of people, have been reduced to arbitrary price tags, and market values, why I should seek out an intrinsic non-market, non-vanity based value in another person? Is there a scientific reason why any person, outside of my own self-centered self (the objective observer), should be treated in any manner other than another number or statistic?

In a world without any true meaning, value, and truth, where do we turn for such things? And consciousness is one of those subjects that takes us to the core problem---takes us to the big WHY of our existence. In fact it is very pompous of science, which is unable to truly define what this non-material thing we call consciousness truly is, to think it can force any such values upon us.

 

Sorry man. I will re-read these last two posts of yours later today.

 

That's cool! My wife has been struggling with a bad case of the flu all week, so I have had very little time to post, as I've had to take care of her about every 2 minutes, and manage everything else around the house.

 

I wanted to post this earlier but didn’t have a chance-----I have agreed with the comments that Goswami took Quantum Mechanics into the realm of Hinduism, and I criticized Stenger for taking quantum mechanics to atheist conclusions. But then by post # 57, it becomes unquestionably obvious that I take quantum mechanics into the philosophical realm as well.

So the question could be asked, how am I any different from Goswami and Stenger?

Well first of all the Doctors here at the Colorado State Home for the Mentally Deranged insist that I am God, while I tell them that they are delusional. …wait, someone uses the word delusional, but that’s not important. I am God… …did I mention that I have a t-shirt that says, ‘Trust me I’m a Doctor?’

All joking aside, the first thing is that my conclusions are not reductionist. As I stated in an earlier post, while my philosophy is openly idealist and essentialist in nature, it allows for multiple interpretations of reality, including that of atheism. Any unifying truth for culture in the globalized modern world has to be multiplistic. It is time to discard the dualistic and reductionist beliefs we have carried from our planter culture ancestors.

Second of all, I do not pick and choose the experiments and results to suit my dogma. I think my philosophy would do just fine even if the double slit experiment failed to demonstrate that the conscious observer was critical to the results. But the fact is, there is the experiment where the measurements of individual particles were taken at random times and without recording the measurements. The screen continuously displayed an interference pattern. In other words, without a conscious observer being able to determine that a measurement of individual particles had taken place, even after the fact, the probability wave collapse never registered. On the other hand, the control side of the experiment was observed by a scientist and whenever the random measurement of individual photons was made, the scientist observed it, and the interference pattern changed to that of 2 slits thereby registering that a quantum wave collapse had occurred. I have been trying to find more information on this one (as I said in the last thread I have the abstract packed away in my storage room), or for information on other labs trying to duplicate this experiment. But this experiment has been successfully tucked under a rug by the scientific community like a bastard child secretly hidden in a castle tower.

The other question is why we should consider such things. Why should we drag science, which is peer reviewed, empirically verified, mathematically determined, and almost wholly objective, into metaphysical speculation, and abstract philosophical musings?

I answered this in a post earlier this weekend:

Philosophy has its own rules and standards, and simply making up a bunch of crazy stuff will not do. It is its own science, which is why it has its own hallowed halls. There was a time when science and philosophy where, combined with religion, as one science. Kant split them apart enabling the Modern Age to truly come about.

But today, the Modern Age has done all it can under the existing zeitgeist ---therefore Modern Man faces nihilism and decadence. We live in a culture that has become malignant. And this malignancy has spread all around the world. It became malignant because, as a culture, it had no genuine unifying truth. Instead, it offered a shallow resolution in the form of consumerism. A resolution that made perfect sense in a world that had embraced objectivist rationalism, and where the value of life had given way to value as defined by the market place, and greed.
Middle Eastern Jihad is one reaction to this malignancy. American anti-science is another reaction to it. But these reactions are destructive, and seek to take us back to a time when religion served as the unifying truth of culture---but that cannot be. It would be like 19th Century Romanticists turning whole industrialized societies back to a pastoral culture with feudal kingdoms.

Our only hope is to move forward. But if we do not rediscover meaning, truth, and value, we are inevitably heading into our own demise. It is therefore time for philosophy and science to come back together again---it is time to close the chasm between them that Kant had created.

One point where science and philosophy came together to deal with these deeper questions to the meaning of life and the nature of reality was that of metaphysics. After Kant, metaphysics became a dirty word of sorts to both philosophers and scientists. Kant, in his ‘Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics,’ posed the question that put an end to Metaphysics when he wrote, “All metaphysicians are therefore solemnly and legally suspended from their occupations till they shall have satisfactorily answered the question: How are synthetic cognitions a priori possible? For the answer contains the only credentials which they must show when they have anything to offer us in the name of pure reason. But if they do not possess these credentials, they can expect nothing else of reasonable people, who have been deceived so often, than to be dismissed without further ado.”

Almost a century later we have the final metaphysician, Friedrich Nietzsche, who didn’t really need to answer Kant’s question, because he ended metaphysics with, “God is dead.” And, without surprise, we are in the very age of nihilism that he predicted.

I humbly present my own philosophy, a tying together of science and philosophy, as a potential answer to the Post-Modern crisis and its struggle out of nihilism. Whether or not it is accepted as the answer, or even fails adequately to provide meaning and get philosophy back on track, it at least serves as an example of how we might resolve this critical issue. And yes, I believe that I have answered Kant’s question quite well----even better than Kant himself tried to answer it.

Regardless, this is why we need to push the envelope, and question science in this manner.

 

Second of all, I do not pick and choose the experiments and results to suit my dogma. I think my philosophy would do just fine even if the double slit experiment failed to demonstrate that the conscious observer was critical to the results. But the fact is, there is the experiment where the measurements of individual particles were taken at random times and without recording the measurements. The screen continuously displayed an interference pattern. In other words, without a conscious observer being able to determine that a measurement of individual particles had taken place, even after the fact, the probability wave collapse never registered. On the other hand, the control side of the experiment was observed by a scientist and whenever the random measurement of individual photons was made, the scientist observed it, and the interference pattern changed to that of 2 slits thereby registering that a quantum wave collapse had occurred. I have been trying to find more information on this one (as I said in the last thread I have the abstract packed away in my storage room), or for information on other labs trying to duplicate this experiment. But this experiment has been successfully tucked under a rug by the scientific community like a bastard child secretly hidden in a castle tower.

Do you mind re-posting this into the Determinism thread that guerilla posted? Or do you care if i do?

The other question is why we should consider such things. Why should we drag science, which is peer reviewed, empirically verified, mathematically determined, and almost wholly objective, into metaphysical speculation, and abstract philosophical musings?

I would argue that Science can never be fully "objective", since it's regarding Scientists, who are humans, and are imperfect by nature. And I also feel that Objective and Subjective are ultimately one thing.

If we bring this into Metaphysics then we can incorporate Magick into the conversation. Keeping this out of the conversation is why I feel that it has been "tucked under a rug by the Scientific Community like a bastard child secretly hidden in a castle tower" (beautifully stated)....and this is the reason why it all went underground and became the Mystery Traditions that have taken many forms through the centuries. Even before Quantum Mechanics came along, it may have always been understood by the select few that the Observer plays such a crucial role in manifestation and reality. You don't necessarily need Quantum Mechanics to understand this, but nonetheless Quantum Mechanics is showing this. It almost seems like Quantum Physicists stumbled upon certain Quantum answers to Alchemy in the same way that the Alchemists stumbled upon useful knowledge for the up and coming Chemistry in the Medieval period. For, the Consciousness of the Alchemist has always been a crucial aspect of both Internal and External Alchemy.

Why keep this out of the discussion? Because you can't control people if they know this about their Consciousness. I think that more and more people realize that we live in a corrupt economic system, and that we are slaves to the 1 percent elite. But once again, through Consciousness and Awareness, that can change via a Cultural Revolution. You can't break out of slavery if you don't realize that you're a slave. The age of Initiation into a Mystery Tradition with Occult knowledge is also outdated just as materialist Science is, and the post-2012 Era is where everyone has all the knowledge they need if they are willing to find it and sift through the mis-information. This sifting through is the new challenge of the day.

The only difference that would be added to the Science experiments by adding in Magick would be to start testing the results of Will incorporated with the double slit experiments. Have a Scientist, Magician, or both DECIDE on which one they would like to see happen more often than not (regarding wave vs. particle) and maybe incorporate a ritual into it prior to the Science experiment. Have the Magician and Scientist be present and observing and record those results.

To me, that would be practical Science-Magick in a nutshell.

And any idea when that study was done? And if you could somehow get to that storage unit in the near future, or maybe we can find the study online, I feel that that would be crucial to all of this. It's unfortunate that these crucial findings in Quantum experiments are few and far between, but I have found my own handful, and it's all enough to be intrigued by to say the least, not to mention silencing Writer's ravings of "show me the money!". I'm not surprised that they are few and far between and simultaneously ignored overall. The sheep follow the pack in Science just as much as the rest of society, and the pack up to this point is a materialist pack.

 

I finally read all of this. Little did I know that you said all that I feel for the most part. I have that Kant book! (Prelegomena to Any Future Metaphysics). It took me a while to realize he was trying to end Metaphysics.

Funny memory. In 2010 I was at College and decided to take Acid and go to my 'Knowledge and Reality' Philosophy class. I had sunglasses on, and participated very much during that class. Classic times. I got that book among others from that class.

 

Still need to read two more of your posts, Wolf...I can't explain it but I have to time it right...

 

Let me clarify though that he was a religious man, and it isn't that he wanted to end metaphysics. Hos real goal was to separate the two sciences----empirical (the physical sciences) from that of the mind (religion and philosophy). He even presented his own metaphysics-------but he believed that just as we cannot truly know the thing in itself, there can be no authentic metaphysical proof.

Now, through Quantum Mechanics, we are able to gain knowledge of the thing-in-itself.

 

Sure that is fine. I could post it, or you could---did you want just this paragraph? I saw that thread, but it had gotten so long without me participating that I decided not to join in. To a certain extent I have to pick and choose, or I would not get any of my own writing done. In the past I have spent whole days almost on this forum. I enjoy it, but like I said, I wouldn’t get anything done on my books.

I agree, which is why I said, ‘almost’ wholly objective. However I do make a clear distinction between objective and subjective. The objective is the world of objects. While the subjective deals with the individual self. Our overemphasis on objective reality allows us to objectify everything around us, including living things. If we instead had a greater appreciation of subjective reality, then empathy and acceptance of individuality would be increased. There would be a greater focus on life.

I agree that we are approaching a cultural revolution/evolution. I write quite a bit about this, and speak of how we are currently in a state of what the Ancient Greeks called, the Metamorphosis of the Gods---basically a state where the need for change seems to float heavy in the air. Though I do not see it all in such conspiratorial terms. I don’t think the 1% is smart nor organized together enough to use materialism against the masses. And while the power and influence the 1% have over the masses has reached levels not seen since the Robber Barons of the late 1800’s, almost all of us are at fault in creating and maintaining the dysfunctional society we struggle with.

I think that the previous gilded age, right around 1900, represented a more bona fide case of conspiracy. America had a more homogenous population, and the lines of control were more clearly drawn. I forget the actual percentage, but upwards of 80% or more of the population worked under only a handful of Robber Barons, the Rockefellers, Carnegies, and one or two others. The control and manipulation was far more direct.

I know firsthand that many of the top 10% of the population have a robber baron mentality. Romney certainly couldn’t hide his in the last election. But that doesn’t mean the 1% orchestrated the credit crisis of 2007. They certainly benefitted from it. And they have certainly been pushing the trickledown economic policies that have given them so much wealth while depriving it from much of the rest of the Nation. They are certainly shoving large amounts of money into politics in hopes of influencing National policy. On the other hand, in many ways they just happened to be in the right place at the right time. The present nihilism, and certainly the greed that stretches through all levels of society is just as much to blame as they are. We are living in a Nation that is embracing the Apollonian dynamic, a nation of laborers objectified into slaves, because of much bigger forces than the 1%----it is the objectivism of the collective unconscious as it plays out through the heartless inanimate soul of the corporation------struggling with the context of a Nation, even a world, that is facing its limits, its own potential demise.

Unfortunately I can’t remember anymore---somewhere I have notes on it as well. But what is worse is that the abstract is not in a storage unit------it is in my storage room in my basement. It has been buried in for several years---but even worse----with all the rain we had last spring or early summer, we had some flooding in our basement. I know that it is safe from the water----but a lot more junk got piled into the storage room and, in fact, much of our basement has been in shambles ever since, and we have not had time to deal with it. There is a lot of junk in the storage room I would like to get rid of-----but I have 5 step kids and my son, and then there is my wife’s stuff------all their stuff is in there…

One day for sure I will dig it out.

On the other hand---didn’t you post the article stating that they successfully demonstrated the Zeno Effect? I think that this is just as significant as that Double Slit experiment! This is why----an atom of a radioactive material is always going to be subject to decoherent interactions with the universe around it. In other words, it will continuously undergo natural probability wave collapses, in somewhat of a random, but continuous process. Yet it will still decay at an expected natural rate. However, they have shown that by repeatedly observing this atom, they are causing probability wave collapses that essentially keep it in an undecayed state, because each observation briefly freezes it into that state. One cannot argue that this is simply decoherence, because it already experiences decoherence. Therefore the difference is that it has to be a consciously observed state---or more correctly a conscious awareness of a reality.

 

What books are you writing? Also, which one is the Zeno effect again? I have posted 3 studies that are quite interesting, but i need to re-look at them as I am brand new to the Quantum world.

 

Here is yet another experiment done. Please drop the bias and read the full article to anyone that is skeptical. I tried to access the full study but my computer wouldn't take me to the page. It's referenced in the article. Maybe someone else will have better luck? I say this because I don't want it to seem that I'm just posting only a "New Age" source. http://www.nextext.o...um-physics.html

 

Here, I found the full study...http://arxiv.org/pdf/1508.05949v1.pdf

 

My main books deal with the Post Modern Crisis. They are three books, possibly four. I started with one that has the working title: The Cave, the Blossom, and the Sacred Hoop, A history of the sacred feminine and the major impact of gender on mankind's language, spirituality, and civilization.

The original title was different, but I realized I was trying to cram too much into it, so I split it off into several books.

The next one is the one that deals directly with my philosophy and has the working title, The Philosophy of the Quantum Now, The theory of relativity, quantum mechanics, mind, spirit, and the philosophy of archephenomenalism.

Finally there is the one with the working title, Metamorphosis of the Gods, The future of mankind in the face of the post-modern crisis. This one ties the other two books together and explores how I believe we must resolve the Post-Modern Crisis. I believe there are a lot of social trends in place that are already helping us----for example, in the first book I explore how the rise of the feminine, as it becomes more integrated into our culture, will help us break down the inflated ego-shadow complex we have. This is part of the process of breaking free of the various dynamics in the Modern zeitgeist that we have carried from our Planter culture ancestors----namely duality, group ethic, and so forth, all of which empowers modern day objectivist rationalism (this is something I first explore in the first book.) But we are rapidly approaching a cross roads---I like to describe it as a choice that will decide whether a sharpened stick or a quantum computer will be the future technology that will best define man's development

The first book deals with the oldest word in the human language---I say it is the oldest because the root plays through every single language on earth. A lot of vocabulary in every language has evolved from the etymology of this word. I am talking about the C-word. ...that's right, cancer. (I'm joking, the other c-word.) This book has the option of becoming a banned book and therefore an instant cult classic----because it is probably the best global dictionary of words for pussy, dick, fornication and other sexual words, including slang that one will ever find---from obscure aboriginal languages, and ancient tongues to common world languages today. And even explores how those words have come to be.

On a more important note, the book also demonstrates how language holds the clues that our hunter-gatherer ancestors did not view gender in terms of dominance----instead it was two halves to a whole. I think we are returning to this viewpoint. The book also explores the global archetype of the axis mundi/world tree/world mountain/world cave. I think much of the book reads a lot like Joseph Campbell.

It has taken a long time to write these books---when I started them I still worked in the stock market, so my time was limited. My stepson destroyed the first book after the first 4 or 5 years of working on it---it was on a computer that no one was supposed to use. It had a broken disk drive so I hadn't made copies of my work... I gave up on it for almost a year, but I coudln't stop thinking about it, so I started again.

I left the stock market to write full time---but we spent the first 3 or 4 years traveling everywhere. If we weren't traveling we were resting in the hotsprings up in the mountains. We don't travel as much now, but I still have one problem------my wife doesn't seem to understand how much work it takes to write a book. She constantly has me doing this or doing that. Though, in her defense, she doesn't drive...

I have one other book, which is about 60 pages or so short of being finished---The Worm Will Turn, How to identify market tops and bottoms and trade or invest like a pro. I was going to publish this one as an e-book. I should finish it, but I am really on a momentum now with my other books, so I put all my time---when I can, into those. But all the most important stuff is already in that book----I just send it out for free to people that want it as a .pdf. It is unedited and written tongue in cheek, But the subject matter is very serious, and in my opinion, it is far more useful than 90% or more of the crap investment advice that is out there. This book would have gotten people out of the market near the top in 2007, and back in near the bottom in 2009----I say this because it is exactly what I was teaching people back then, and it was why I was telling them to get out at the top, and get back in at the bottom.

I

 

Oh yeah, there is a 4th book that I may or may not write----The Mind Dimension. It was my original idea, when I first broke up the first book, that I replaced with The Philosophy of the Quantum Now. It kind of covers the same thing, but included some of my own experiences that shattered my own adherence to rationalist dogma. The very first chapter started out with how my stepdaughter was healed by a native healer in the Philippines----from a near catatonic state. Western medicine could do nothing for her, It took him only about 5 minutes to heal her. Even more strange was the fact that it involved the recent death of her biological father and that he did not know the way to the other side, but that she was too young and did not understand her own gift as a psychopomp, and was lost somewhere in between. She was 9 years old---even the doctors said that this type of breakdown was very strange for someone so young. They were never close to their biological dad. (My wife's ancestors were from a long line of traditional healers---but those traditions have been all but destroyed by the Catholic church. They all have these gifts but don't understand them. Anyway---it was a mind blowing experience to say the least.

I might still write this one later as a more simplified and less academic version of The Philosophy of the Quantum Now.


I have been published----many magazine articles and what not over the years. I used to write a column for the Mainichi Daily News in Japan----the English version. Working in the stock market made it very hard to get published. It would have to go through compliance, and the general response was always no for fear of a conflict of interest.

 

Here is the last part of my post that I did this evening in the thread on Quantum Mechanics and determinism: