Wikipedia
I am without speech….
Arthur Clarke – Fractals – The Colors Of Infinity 1 of 6
Arthur Clarke – Fractals – The Colors Of Infinity 2 of 6
Arthur Clarke – Fractals – The Colors Of Infinity 3 of 6
Arthur Clarke – Fractals – The Colors Of Infinity 4 of 6
Arthur Clarke – Fractals – The Colors Of Infinity 5 of 6
Butterfly (tessellation 70), Escher
Justin Curry is utterly charming:
Gödel, Escher, Bach – Lecture 1: Part 1 of 7
Gödel, Escher, Bach – Lecture 1: Part 2 of 7
Gödel, Escher, Bach – Lecture 1: Part 3 of 7
Gödel, Escher, Bach – Lecture 1: Part 4 of 7
Gödel, Escher, Bach – Lecture 1: Part 5 of 7
Gödel, Escher, Bach – Lecture 1: Part 6 of 7
Gödel, Escher, Bach – Lecture 1: Part 7 of 7
This lecture series is available through MIT’s Open Courseware
Gonzalo Gutierrez, 500px.com
While this series is a bit of a tease – M theory does not really come up – it is an awesome, clear, detailed mathematical odyssey. Enjoy!
Lecture 1: String Theory and M Theory
Lecture 2: String Theory and M Theory
Lecture 3: String Theory and M Theory
Lecture 4: String Theory and M Theory
Lecture 5: String Theory and M Theory
Lecture 6: String Theory and M Theory
Lecture 7: String Theory and M Theory
Lecture 8: String Theory and M Theory
Antonio M. Rosario, 500px.com
This series shows how mathematics and reality are intertwined. A brilliant, subtle approach…takes your breath away!
Edward Witten – Knots and Quantum Theory, Part 1
Edward Witten – Knots and Quantum Theory, Part 2
Check out this really cool, absolutely fascinating discussion of biological quantum processes in plants: Quantum Mechanics of Photosynthetic Light Harvesting
Photo taken from NASA video, Solar Dynamics Observatory
What is really cool is that Penrose challenges the time-symmetry of quantum mechanics from two directions, the non-reversibility of the reduction of the Schrodinger wave and the irreversibility of entropy according to the second law of thermodynamics. He shows that while the linear superposition exists going forward in time for a particle in the classic, simple half-silvered mirror scenario, when one attempts to reverse the process it becomes obvious that once R has occurred, absurdities, such as emission of a photon from a non-light source which absorbed it, will occur. R seems, therefore, to be related to entropy, another irreversible process.
Penrose discusses how entropy is related to gravity using the idea of light cones. On the theory of general relativity, he proposes that the gravitational field is a kind of all-pervasive refracting medium, tilting light cones in space, thereby influencing the direction of light (by curving it), and thus, influencing the relations of cause and effect. He reminds us that cause and effect are only relevant under general relativity and not under Newtonian physics, because in relativity theory, light has a speed limit beyond which paradoxes occur in time-space. This is crucial when one is considering quantum superpositions, as there are also time-space paradoxes involved in their current mathematical description.
In The Emperor’s New Mind, Penrose states:
“…there was a huge gain in entropy due to gravitational contraction…all the remarkable lowness of entropy that we find about us – and which provides this most puzzling aspect of the second law – must be attributed to the fact that vast amounts of entropy can be gained through the gravitational contraction of diffuse gas into stars.” (417)
In fact, what is really bizarre is the assertion that such a low entropy state as the original singularity could have existed spontaneously, as the “natural” state of matter is a high-entropy state of thermal equilibrium. In discussing why entropy is not time-symmetric, Penrose notes that, on the basis of the phase-space model of entropy:
“Our phase-space argument gave us completely the wrong answer when we tried to apply it in the reverse direction of time!…What that argument actually showed was that for a given low-entropy state (say for a gas tucked in a corner of a box), then, in the absence of any other factors constraining the system, the entropy would be expected to increase in both directions in time away from the given state…The argument has not worked in the past direction in time precisely because there were such factors. There was indeed something constraining the system in the past. The tendency towards high entropy in the future is no surprise. The high-entropy states are, in a sense, the ‘natural’ states which do not need further explanation. But the low-entropy states in the past are a puzzle. What constrained the entropy of our world to be so low in the past? The common presence of states in which the entropy is absurdly low is an amazing fact of the actual universe that we inhabit – though such states are so commonplace and familiar to us that we do not normally tend to regard them as amazing. We ourselves are configurations of ridiculously low entropy!” (410)
So, entropy and gravity are related.
Penrose notes that in the space-time of general relativity there is an ‘obstruction,’ called the WEYL tensor, which is the conformal part of the relativistic equations. This obstruction prevents uniformity of space-time in terms of his illustration using light cones; that is, the light cones cannot be aligned perfectly with one another because of WEYL:
“The tensor WEYL describes just half of the information – the ‘conformal’ half – that is contained in the full Reimann curvature tensor of space-time…Only if WEYL is zero can we rotate all the light cones into the Minkowskian arrangement [i.e. perfectly aligned with one another]. The tensor WEYL measures the gravitational field – in the sense of the gravitational tidal distortion – so it is precisely the gravitational field, in this sense, that provides the obstruction…”(Shadows of the Mind, 224)
The point about light cone tilting is that this action, this character of gravity had gone unnoticed in classical physics and was only identified in Einstein’s theory. Recent observations of gravitational lensing have provided good evidence for this hitherto “invisible” aspect of gravity. Analogously, perhaps there is some unseen, non-computational aspect of physical matter that is organized in biological design for the purpose of producing consciousness.
Penrose argues that instances of quantum superposition in nature are rare and unstable. The occurrence of coherent, prolonged quantum superposition in a biological organism must be the result of design and constitutes a novel use, in nature, of such special properties of matter that are not well understood. Stuart Hameroff alludes to this when he mentions that the objective reduction time of an individual particle in space, which avoided decoherence, would be in the order of 10 million years, and that it would be of low frequency, low intensity. The implication is that for consciousness to occur on the basis of the objective reduction of coherent quantum superpositions, a special design which organizes this phenomenon is necessary.
500px.com
“…mathematical understanding is something different from computation and cannot be completely supplanted by it. Computation can supply extremely valuable aid to understanding, but it never supplies actual understanding itself.” (Penrose, Shadows of the Mind, 199)
Basically, mathematics is a descriptive language, like any other language, and as such is not a generator of conscious perception.
Penrose’s discussions of quantum physics explore its mathematical “ability” to describe reality. This line of inquiry appears to be motivated by his conjecture that there must be some property of physical reality that is related to the production of consciousness which science has either overlooked or not discovered yet:
“…the phenomenon of consciousness can arise only in the presence of some non-computational physical process taking place in the brain. One must presume, however, that such (putative) non-computational processes would also have to be inherent in the action of inanimate matter…First, why is it that the phenomenon of consciousness appears to occur, as far as we know, only in (or in relation to) brains…Second, we must ask how it could be that such a seemingly (putative) ingredient as non-computational behaviour, presumed to be inherent – potentially at least – in the actions of all material things, so far has entirely escaped the notice of physicists?” (SotM, 216)
Penrose finds this ingredient in the diaphanous vicissitudes of the gravitational field because, “gravity actually influences the causal relationships between space-time events, and it is the only physical quantity that has this effect” (SotM, 219). Gravity really alters the geometry of space-time and of all particulate matter found within it. Because particles (or “lumps” of matter with specific mass-energies) in superposition also have a gravitational field which also must be part of the superposition, “the state involves a superposition of two different gravitational fields. According to Einstein’s theory, this implies that we have two different space-time geometries superposed!” (SotM, 337)
“The point is that we really have no conception of how to consider linear superpositions of states when the states themselves involve different space-time geometries. A fundamental difficulty with ‘standard theory’ is that when the geometries become significantly different from each other, we have no absolute means of identifying a point in one geometry with any particular point in the other – the two geometries are strictly separate spaces – so the very idea that one could form a superposition of the matter states within these two separate spaces becomes profoundly obscure.” (SotM, 337)
This is where the rubber really hits the road for the brilliant Sir. It is stunning, awesome and totally amazing to witness the invention, right before our very eyes, of a beginning of a new mathematical description of reality.
The density matrix becomes important at this point because it is the mathematics of the density matrix, rather than simply the state vector, ψ, that is involved in the state vector Reduction or “measurement” process. The density matrix is a deliberately fuzzy description of multiple state vectors, a “probability mixture”:
“…with a density matrix, there is a (deliberate) confusion, in this description, between these classical probabilities, occurring in this probability-weighted mixture and the quantum-mechanical probabilities that would result from the R-procedure. The idea is that one cannot operationally distinguish between the two, so a mathematical description – the density matrix – which does not distinguish between them is operationally appropriate. (SotM, 317)
As a description, Penrose calls the density matrix “elegant” and useful “for all practical purposes” (FAPP); however, as a complete description of reality, it will not do:
“The fact that the physicist considers that the state of his detector is described by the density matrix D does not in any way explain why he always finds that the detector is either in a YES state…or else in a NO state…For precisely the same density matrix would be given if the state were an equal-probability-weighted combination of classical absurdities…(…the quantum linear absurdities ‘YES plus NO’ and ‘YES minus NO’)!…The upshot of all this is that merely knowing that the density matrix is some D does not tell us that the system is a probability mixture of some particular set of states that give rise to a particular D. There are always numerous completely different ways of getting the same D, most of which would be ‘absurd’ from the common-sense point of view. Moreover, this kind of ambiguity holds for any density matrix whatsoever.” (SotM, 326-7)
What is being said, here, is that there is no reason whatsoever given by the current, state-of-the-art mathematical description why a quantum system assumes some particular real, observable, even in principle, classical answer to the experimental question, Where is the particle now? Even more bizarrely, one cannot ascertain why, on the basis of the density matrix, one ever finds a real answer, a real position, a real particle, at all!
What this really means, argues Sir Penrose, is that the R procedure cannot and does not follow from the unitary evolution of the wave equation and seems to represent a completely independent and as yet not understood process of which R is only an approximation. R must be some kind of gravitational or gravitationally-related process; in fact, it must be a quantum gravitational process:
“[in a quantum superposition] when are two geometries to be considered as actually ‘significantly different’ from one another? It is here, in effect, that the Planck scale of 10^-33 cm comes in. The argument would roughly be that the scale of the difference between these geometries has to be, in an appropriate sense, something like 10^-33 cm or more for reduction to take place. We might, for example, attempt to imagine that these two geometries are trying to be forced into coincidence, but when the measure of the difference becomes too large, on this kind of scale, reduction R takes place – so, rather than the superposition involved in U being maintained, Nature must choose one geometry or the other.” (SotM, 337)
The reasoning, it seems, is that we don’t have a mathematics of quantum gravity and this must be why scientists have not found a non-computable physical process as described above. So, Penrose sets out to develop one for us!
Hence, the need for The New Criterion. Penrose simply and elegantly surmises that the reduction of a quantum superposition is analogous to the spontaneous decay of atomic nuclei in that it is unstable. He calculates the simple gravitational displacement, in absolute units (see 338-9) and:
“…we ask that there be a rate of state-vector reduction determined by such a difference measure. The greater the difference, the faster would be the rate at which reduction takes place…In general, when we consider an object in a superposition of two spatially displaced states, we simply ask for the energy that it would take to effect this displacement, considering only the gravitational interaction between the two. The reciprocal of this energy measures a kind of ‘half-life’ for the superposed state. The larger this energy, the shorter would be the time that the superposed state could persist.” (SotM, 339, 341)
Penrose goes on to explain that the numbers at the Planck scale for this descriptive equation, E= h/t, correspond well with observations of nature, “It is reassuring that this provides very ‘reasonable’ answers in certain simple situations.” (340) (cf Diósi) In terms of biological systems,
“A biological system, being very much entangled with its environment…would have its own state continually reduced because of the continual reduction of its environment. We may imagine, on the other hand, that for some reason it might be favourable to a biological system that its state remain unreduced for a long time, in appropriate circumstances. In such cases it would be necessary for the system to be, in some way, very effectively insulated from its surroundings.” (SotM, 343)
Here we have the rudiments of a mathematical language for consciousness. We will now have to wait till I finish the book to see how this all ties in with brain science. For a preview, see Stuart Hameroff’s YouTube video, A New Marriage of Brain and Computer.
Here’s something to hold us over until I get a better handle on Penrose’s argument for consciousness from gravity.
April 2005
If we think about geometrical concepts, e.g., circles, squares, or hyperspheres, we notice that they are, first of all, imaginary and second, perfect. These imaginary objects do not change, do not move, they are static, localized, timeless figures. In a sense, they are eternal. Conversely, natural, or real physical geometries are not perfect; they are dynamic, they move and change, form and decay, constantly, chaotically, some more slowly (i.e., stars, galaxies, etc.) and some more quickly (i.e., uranium atoms, weather patterns, plants, etc.). This reflects the biblical concept of the Fall, not only of humanity, but of the entire universe – that the state of existence in which we find ourselves is one of alienation and contingency, a probabilistic reality and not an absolute one.
Our ability to conceive these perfect geometrical objects is a spiritual ability, and one must agree that the great mathematicians were obviously inspired. They themselves admit that their insights are of God (e.g., Einstein). This makes them prophets in a sense, seers of the mysteries of reality, leading us toward an understanding, a communication with God through an understanding of the universe. In order to reach these pure geometrical forms, to touch them, we must enter their realm, the realm of perfection, of unchangeability, of timelessness, spacelessness, stillness.
The realm exists and is shown to exist by mathematical language which describes reality. Mathematics has been demonstrated to describe reality by the technological advances and scientific discoveries of the last century or two especially. So science supports the biblical assertion of a realm of perfection which really, physically exists in higher dimensions. Science also posits and even calculates the enormous amount of energy required to realize this realm.
It seems as though the biblical writers, the ancient prophets, received information, often in the form of mental images or of words, of a unified universe that exists eternally, right now. Somehow it is imminent and present, as God is imminent and present, only we, or most of us, cannot see it. I believe we are only blinded by our perspective, the way we look at things, or have been taught, conditioned, to look at the world – and in talk of dimension, perspective is the appropriate word. For instance, take the blindness of Aristotle and Ptolemy to the fourth dimension – time/location, or timespace. We had to wait 2000 years for Einstein, et.al. They could have discovered it but they put on blinders, in effect, blinding everyone else who followed their creed of 3D space.
In recent science, we discover the higher symmetries of reality in the mathematics of theoretical physics, such as the 5D symmetry of spacetime/matter-energy of general relativity, or the symmetry of the wave theory of the universe with the 0 cosmological constant, i.e., that infinite universes with infinite wormhole connections magically “turns into” a 0 cosmological constant in 10D space, and that rather than there being 10^100 times the observed amount of excess radiation appearing in the vacuum (the expected amount based on symmetry-breaking equations), there is none! Kaku calls this “magical”, one of the most astounding symmetries discovered to date. Then there are the symmetries of string theory, in which both gravity and quantum mechanics “turn into” each other in 10/26D space, or that certain modular functions reflect the numbers 10 and 24(+2) – the exact number of necessary dimensions for a field theory of gravity.
Add to these astounding correlations the fact that string theory was discovered “by accident”, or “too early”, that the equations cannot be solved, that modular functions were given to a child in his dreams (see Kaku, Hyperspace, pp. 172-4: “Srinivasa Ramanujan was the strangest man in all of mathematics, probably in the entire history of science. He has been compared to a bursting supernova, illuminating the darkest, most profound corners of mathematics…Working in total isolation from the main currents of his field, he was able to rederive 100 years’ worth of Western mathematics on his own…Ramanujan used to say that the goddess of Namakkal inspired him with the formulae in dreams.”), that the solution to Einstein’s gravity equation was given as if by answer to prayer by an obscure scholar using Reimann’s field equations in 5D, equations which had been ignored for 60 years – that the most beautiful equations ever seen by theoretical mathematicians, the general theory of relativity, were revealed conceptually and not discovered experimentally! – and we begin to see that even scientists are discovering some disturbing, coincidental, almost mystical emergences of answers to questions that cannot be proven, even though they appear to be right both intuitively and by mathematical “beauty” or correlation or “simplicity and elegance.” The string field equations cannot be solved and yet, there they are!
How do scientists explain this? Well, they don’t, and some won’t even acknowledge the equations of string theory because they feel they are an affront to science itself – not being provable, either by math or by experiment – i.e., the Plank length at 10^-35 m contains too much power to ever be “explored”, the 10th dimension is a realm of infinite power/energy – we can’t see it and we can’t go there, or the 10D field equations are too complex, infinite in length, and cannot be solved to a degree of certainty.
Thus we find that science does not adequately explain reality by its own standards, that is, by experiment, observation or theoretical or mathematical proof. Scientific speculation is fraught with belief systems, hypotheses, theories and models which science itself admits do not adequately or completely explain the phenomena it observes in the universe. In short, the problem of science can be epitomized by the question, “If science has explained reality, why is there still science?”
500px.com
June 2005 (This was all Michio Kaku’s fault!)
How are we to understand the quantum model of matter? It appears that all particles are literally made of light. What the model shows is that the constitutive forces, the strong nuclear and weak nuclear Yang Mills fields are quanta of light which are exchanged within the atom, between the point particles – quarks and leptons. These fields hold the atom together. They are quanta of electromagnetism; they originated with the big bang; they are infinite in number; they are averages of constituent vibrations, apparently atemporal, crossing dimensional boundaries that are the result of the asymmetry of 10(/26) dimensional space caused by the breaking of the original supersymmetrical universe, which came apart in the creation of our 4 dimensional, visible universe and the invisible 6 dimensional universe, which collapsed.
The strong nuclear field (gluons) cannot be broken, i.e., protons do not decay. It is the force of a photon, an electromagnetic field vibration, fortified by the exchange of π mesons, also vibrations, localized light “strings”, the foundation of life. They originate in stars, formed by gravity. Protons are forced together in stars by gravity to form all the elements of which all other matter is made. Most elements are stable, except the heavier ones, whose protons may tunnel, emitting strong radiation from mesons. The strong vibrations which constitute these forces (Yang-Mills fields) look like waves in four dimensions as they total up statistically, sum over, and cancel each other out, so that their average locations in 4 dimensions make wave-like formations – forces – which seem to be non-local under special circumstances, when we look closely at their behavior (Heisenberg, Schrodinger, Bohr).
Now here is the interesting part: the string vibrations are heterotic, they cross over dimensional boundaries. This is necessary for them to be self-consistent and to form our kind of universe. This translates into atemporality, i.e., the average, wave-like forces they create travel both forwards (“retarded wave”) and backwards (“advanced wave”) in time. This is part of their ability to localize – by acting non-locally. Actually, they localize themselves through all dimensions and we only see part of their interdimensional locality in 4 dimensions. We do not see their atemporal nature, but we do see some of its effects, i.e., non-locality, inertia, interference patterns, wave-particle duality, the constant speed of light, gravity, electromagnetism, visible light, black holes, stars, matter…everything that exists is formed by the effects of their geometrical, interdimensional properties.
Gravity and light seem to be the most basic components – gravity because the graviton is the smallest string structure and corresponds to Plank sizes, and light because of its mysterious atemporal and aspatial nature. Plank’s measurement of light quanta involves a constant, Plank’s constant, a very small number, multiplied by the frequency of the light waves to give the quantum energy of a particular group of photons. This amount of energy is produced by a string vibration (in erg seconds). Same for a gravitational quantum.
It is the combination of the geometric shape of hyperspace imparting its properties to the way the string is limited in its movement and vibration that results in the quanta of photons and all other particles. This geometrical principle, or shape, is what gives the photon its power to hold atoms together, but what gives light its speed? It is also the geometrical principle – the interdimensional vibration of light quanta gives the illusion of movement in 4 dimensions, because for the photon, space and time are symmetrical. The vibrations that form light quanta are time-symmetric and space-symmetric – they move both ways at once over timespace in 10(/26) dimensions. This is how they can behave non-locally and so, hold time and space together. This is how hyperspace is made of strings, vibrating over a complex topography.
This geometry is what holds atoms together and it is the geometry of all the particles in your body. You are made of light and so, the atoms of your physical structure communicate with the entire universe by the forces holding them together.
It was symmetry-breaking that caused the vibration of the strings. Symmetry-breaking caused the release of energy that was holding the symmetry together, unstably. Light came out of the fissure of the once unified dimensional plurality. The power of light comes from its release from the originally unstable, supersymmetrical state and it lends its power to the evolving structure of the universe, along with the other forces (gravity, strong and weak nuclear), working together with them, entangled with them so to speak, in the unravelling of the original supersymmetric state of all ‘energy’ or ‘form’.
The particles which make up the world we experience have maintained their connections to each other in higher dimensions and we see this in the forces at work in and through them. The forces are evidence of the connectedness of particles in this way and of the original supersymmetric state from which they were released to form matter. The mathematics and experiments show that the universe is completely integrated – all matter (vibrations) appears to be aware (inertia), connected in an atemporal way, an instantaneous way, by forces and by the phenomenon of non-locality. All types of particles, photons, electrons, atoms, buckeyballs…, exhibit these properties.
Superstring theory model posits that all matter is symmetrical in 10(/26) dimensions; that is, all the different types of particles can ‘turn into’ all other types. It is even being argued that photons of any type can turn into matter, particles, of any type, and back again! This makes complete sense in view of the constituent role of photons in atoms at every level, i.e., that photons are matter. Also, the infinite quantity of photons emerging from atoms supports this view; whereas certain other particles, such as electrons and quarks, are maintained in the universe at constant levels – indicating a closed universe; that is, the universe must contain the photons in order for them to produce matter. Without the boundary of a finite universe, there would be no universe. However, the theory also requires an infinite number of connected finite universes. This results in the absorption by these other universes of the excess photons produced in this one.
So, ‘the universe’ is now all that is possible to exist, not merely ‘all that exists’. Without the concomitant universes, there would be an excess of energy emerging into our universe which would alter the balance of forces such that this universe would either expand more quickly than the speed of light or it would contract under too much gravity. So, in a sense, ‘the universe’ is infinite but in a more complex way, which is really kind of cool. This would explain the necessity of black holes as tunnels to alternate regions of the universe in an unimaginably complex topology, through which the excess energy must escape. It is a marvelous new world we are discovering ‘out there’ in our new quantum model.
So, we imagine that the original supersymmetric state was motionless and dark, but that this geometrical entity contained energy, or what we call ‘energy’, in the force that held it together – its form – like a giant, coiled up spring, a hyperspring. When the supersymmetry broke, vibrations of various frequencies began resonating, each frequency corresponding to a potential particle, and first came light (photons), then gravity, then subatomic, then atomic forces. The subatomic and atomic forces were resonances of light and gravity. At a certain point, quarks became ‘confined’ by gravitons and gluons. Leptons condensed from photons and became entangled with protons by bosons at slightly different resonances, dictated by 10(/26)D topology.
Time began and Space emerged from the broken symmetry, molded by gravity through interdimensional timespace symmetric resonances of the particles of which it was composed. Gravitational resonances entangled stars and galaxies, and massive black holes began to form, tunneling to new universes in order to allow this universe to normalize, or balance out its energy levels into a stable state [rather like the edge of a fitted sheet snapping off one corner of a mattress and finding a new, more stable equilibrium].
Where did the supersymmetric object come from? Why is the construction of matter so beautifully complex, astonishingly useful, astoundingly powerful, ‘magically’ integrated, mysteriously enormous and apparently impossible? I mean, all this still doesn’t really explain anything! It does not seem to have any intrinsic meaning.
Here is one fascinating implication, however. Rather than everything being predetermined, as some scientists surmise (e.g., Bell), it is possible, on the quantum model, to suppose that all of the elements in my body (my ‘consciousness machine’) are being constantly ‘oriented’ by these heterotic vibrations, these ‘future waves’, so that they know how to proceed in accordance with the universe. Therefore, my consciousness will be, to some extent (and this remains to be investigated) affected by the future, or by probable futures as a sum-over history of all trajectories. So, when I make a choice, consciously, I will, in turn, affect these trajectories and possibly alter or create outcomes at certain strategic points – as experience often shows in, say, realizations that I made the wrong choice or the right choice in relation to certain outcomes (as ‘hindsight’). It seems that I can imagine alternatives and this would not be possible if there were not really alternatives.
Perhaps relative futures that are predetermined by the heterotic nature of matter can be manipulated by the conscious will of an individual as part of the sum-over histories of these fields to either a greater or lesser extent – i.e., certain futures are more or less likely, depending on how close one is to the quantum level of determination, or on the extent that one consciously interferes with these determinations in time (or within certain macro-time and quantum atemporal limitations). That is, by a conscious act of will, I can affect the entire universe in the future; or, since it may be surmised that consciousness is, to an extent, atemporal, I may be ‘aware’ of the future in some sense…
David C. Schultz, 500px.com
Here’s another old journal article from July 2005 where I attempt to create the universe from pure consciousness, along the lines of Husserl’s phenomenology combined with mathematics and quantum theory (Dennett probably also had something to do with it):
The argument for a subconscious or subliminal mind is an argument from silence. In terms of agency, one could just as well argue for spirits and demons. What the subjective reports suggest is the priority of feelings and inner voices arising from they know not where. Sometimes they accord with conscious, volitional tendencies and sometimes they are opposed. It seems to the subject as if he were two selves conversing, or that some powerful external agent were communicating with him, in his inner self, sometimes articulately and sometimes inarticulately, or a combination of both.
One could argue that spiritual and demonic agency is entangled in material agencies of various forms and media. This is how one can discriminate between the moral value of a thing or thought ‘in itself’ and the moral intention of a thing or thought. Things ‘in themselves’ are generally morally neutral; moral value arises solely from intention in relation to contingent moral models or frames of reference (narratives).
This is also why it is easy to confuse or to be unable to discriminate between one’s own conscious agency and those that are ‘foreign’. Psychologists label these foreign agencies subconscious or subliminal but this is merely an assumption, a working theoretical model of mind which tries to explain where certain inclinations or thoughts originate without reference to anything external to the brain. Therefore, this assumption reveals its biases and limitations in terms of its conception of reality in general.
Dennett’s position of memes as external shaping forces for consciousness is helpful in admitting and identifying one type of external source that informs and creates consciousness. However, these memes are also subject to moral discriminations in terms of their inherent and intentional values. His theory is also consistent with materialist philosophy.
However, if one’s understanding of ‘material’ should include that matter – physical matter, ‘particles’ and ‘waves’ – itself is conscious, based on recent, state of the art science which demonstrates that elementary particles exhibit non-local ‘awareness’ and that their very existence as solid, localized, ‘real’ things is totally dependent upon their being consciously observed, and that the evidence from experiment is now pointing toward the existence of higher spatial dimensions and time symmetric properties (i.e. that particles are aware of the future as well as the past), one’s understanding of ‘materialism’ will undergo, must undergo some modification.
I am going to go front to back on this one. Here is my theory:
God created a living universe that originated in a perfect geometrical concept, this being the nature of God who is consciousness. The consciousness ‘realized’ an externality by ‘speaking’, moving itself into original motion, breaking the silence of its concept into tiny bits, vibrations, which it observed. The complexity of this concept is evident by our observation of the universe, and reality as we know it is the epiphenomenon of this complex concept.
Therefore, vibration, movement resulted in the appearance of particulate matter – light – whose properties are yet mysterious and from which the entire universe, visible and invisible, is composed [see John Gribbin, Schrodinger’s Kittens, for a discussion on how all particles are made of light, or photons; see also Michio Kaku, Hyperspace, for an even more detailed discussion]. Light is a combination of concept (wave), and percept (particle). It is extremely malleable and powerful as a building material of the most intricate, hypergeometric, supersymmetric structures.
The Apostle Paul wrote to the Romans: “…since the knowledge of God is manifest among them; for God has openly shown it to them. For his unseen qualities have been observable, by reason, from the things made in the creation of the universe, which [qualities] are his amazing power and divinity..”
We know from observation of nature that these perfect geometrical concepts are conceptual, virtual objects that exist in consciousness, by consciousness, yet they are the basis and the ground of all function, all universal laws by which particulate matter holds together and by which it works in its productions for perception, both of itself and by the ‘machines’ which it composes. ‘Mechanics’ is a conscious process, proceeding from design, which proceeds from the thought of God.
God did not hack off a piece of himself and make matter out of it. Matter proceeds from awareness by design, and so it seems to us and to God. Thus, this real-seeming universe, as a production of the alien consciousness, the spirit of God, APPEARS and we appear within it, as constructs of it and of God’s consciousness. Consciousness pervades every particle, ‘realizing’ it and so, each particle realizes every other, conceptually, immediately, hyper-dimensionally, geometrically.
So particles are pieces of God’s consciousness that he has observed. The meaning of observation in this sense reveals to us the nature of God as all powerful, because by our own observations of particulate matter, we find a tremendous force in their reality – that God’s observation enforces the particles with such energy [εργα] that we find them mysteriously indestructible. Protons do not decay, their lifetime is longer than that of the universe. We also discover, by different observations, that they maintain their purely conceptual nature and conscious properties, i.e., the corresponding wave form of a particle such that the particle does not exist until it collapses by observation into something real. Recent developments in the science of theoretical physics and mathematics reveal that particles are the geometrical manifestations of the symmetries of higher dimensions that have been dissected in our lower dimensional frame of reference, but that this perspective is what results in particles and their properties. From the perspective of hyper-dimensional geometry (‘space’), the differentiated qualities are united by the principle of supersymmetry, a symmetry that is above what we can observe in nature – a conceptual simplification of reality, of details, from a higher perspective (which explains certain ‘invisible’ forces, as gravity for example).
These dimensions are impossible to visualize in the sense of optical vision or images related to or based on optical images, but they can be ‘visualized’ conceptually, especially mathematically, but also metaphorically. The beauty of mathematics is its precision, both in terms of scope and in terms of definition. Math helps us to ‘see’ what we cannot see visually. Its symbols of representation are poetic, derived from specific aspects of reality and yet abstracted, pure. They are a combination of perception and concept, and so, mathematics moves upward from perception to concept, whereas reality moves downward from concept to perception.
And so, we and all matter are localized within a dimensional plurality which is not entirely perceptual but is entirely conceptual. This is reflected in our awareness of qualities of reality that only ‘appear’ to us abstractly, as opposed to literally, e.g. color – qualities of which our consciousness is constructed in concert with qualities consciously perceived. The conceptual and perceptual qualities of matter combine in design to form the great machine, the universe, and the various mechanistic entities existing in it, all of which are conscious and directed by the thought, the will, the intention of God.
God is a free being, unfettered and unhindered. His consciousness knows no limitation, especially no limitation in terms of his creation. His intention manifests in the universe as a necessity of its being entirely his production, just as we find our imaginations to appear limitless and without restriction in the creation of our thoughts, our personal universe, our selves. We are able to do this as an extension of the nature of the universe, the nature of the matter of which we are made, and the nature of God as its maker.
Saved By Gödel 