Thinking of the new noun.

Oddly, the first task in the budding science of consciousness is to think the new thought and discover the new noun that can be swapped into place for "consciousness" thereby properly defining the science. Not to belabor the point, the new word is "structured duality", getting us to the "science of structured duality", which is to say, an accurate and informative statement that allows us to now move forward.

For those new to this discussion it might helpful to take a moment to consider consciousness as and as akin to the new phlogiston. That is, according to the history of chemistry and also answers.com, phlogiston is a noun meaning "a hypothetical substance formerly thought to be a volatile constituent of all combustible substances, released as flame in combustion". Then in 1774 Joseph Priestly discovered oxygen and subsequently, from there the explanations of combustion, and oxidation-reduction and thermodynamics developed in more rational ways.

Similarly, consciousness is a vague and ill-fitting term once thought to be the substance and process of one's internal mental life(ves) and states and experience. Then, in 1981, and then early in the 21st century people became aware of the underlying principle and the fact that reality, science, descriptions of science and reality, and thus the so-called consciousness are all, also structured duality. And, from there, from that small paradigmatic shift, then the new science develops.

For those readers who are provisionally open to experimenting with such a transposition, one should begin to notice that walking around mulling over the science of structured duality opens a trap door down into a lower level of integration where, at once one is knitting together one model which fits and holds for all of the components and sub-components of quantum gravity, or the emerging more unified physical models as well as the entire region of stuff we would have previously been pointing at via the archaic term of "consciousness". This is the sort of thing we are all looking for and expecting to encounter. Even so, when we encounter it, it still does look and feel extremely odd.

Take a deep breath. Give the new noun some thought.

Best regards,
Ralph

QGEM: Quantum Gravitational Enhanced Meditation: An introduction to quantum gravity

So, here we are in the early 21st century riding along on a complex soliton  wave curving into the  more unified scientific models.  For lack of a better phrase, we might just as well call the emerging, more unified model  "quantum gravity" due to the upheavals last century in quantum mechanics and  so-called relativity.  Things are compressing and expanding again  as the classical model peels away revealing the underlying non-linear, non-classical, more unified  features.

It's a disquieting thought, to try to come up to periscope depth and face this paradigm shift in science. It's awkward, inconvenient, uncomely, uncomfortable.  Not that the new emerging orientations are or will be perfect either, or will resolve all of our various life, energy, climate and developmental difficulties,  but coming out of denial about the change does reveal this liberating, yet indelicate perspective.  A portion of our social, economic, educational, and environmental problems are, in fact, arising from us running on an excessively approximate scientific trial theory.  Our model turns out to be flawed and outdated, mis-aligning ALL that we do.   Reality is NOT following simple linear, classical rules and laws.  The entire thing is --How do we say it?--  quantum gravitational.  And worse yet, we only now are beginning to come up with crude approximations to  spark and convey a fuller appreciation of the new terrain.

Moreover, and this is quite intriguing, consider the task of trying to create, say, the first useful quantum gravitational math expression.  I guess we are to call it math.  What then?  How does one scribble it out? How big is the napkin? Or, worse still, what is the napkin and the ink made of and under what light is it to be read?

The fact is that, initially,  here we find ourselves realizing that abstract math symbols and expressions are secondary to, and themselves arising from primary quantum gravitational, or what we generally might call, primary "analog math" transactions.  This, indeed, is an awkward state of affairs, much like regressing back to  Faraday's  expressions "scribbled"  with wires and magnets that preceded Maxwell's subsequent abstract math approximation by some five decades.  If STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) education in the modern era is to roll forward,  how does that proceed when the crown jewel of abstract math must sit idly by,  impotent, waiting it's turn  after some horrendously inelegant approximation must be carved out, discovered, or created amid all this gross physical  debris?  

Suffice it to say that this paradigm transition is simply not an easy one.   There is no abstract math expression that is robust enough to spark and convey the new awareness. And, thus,  even regular forms of  scholarly efforts and publishing can  not be much help or support in the initial going. The "acceptable math" simply is not there.  So we face seeing what has not been seen, and saying what has no description.  That is, we face making something up. Using the unacceptable math, creating the new math and/or forming the awkward transitional analog math expressions.   

Now, the odd thing is, once one crosses the boundary from abstract math symbolisms back into the active analog math (sometimes known as the realm of physical experiments, or tactile learning)  the problem shifts from having no instances of quantum gravity over to there being, er, a few too many. In fact, there is such a tangle and large number of actual instances of quantum gravitational artifacts, such feast, that then the problem becomes a bit of an embarrassment of great riches.  We could pick up a rock, or a stick.  Or we could point to a HEP accelerator, or the first generation designs of electrical power generators. The list is endless. Each one a perfect instance.

But that large a set is not exactly what the teachers or students want or need.  The one we want is simply the first half-decent approximation of quantum gravity. Something that has sufficient features but still is simple enough for people to be able work with and learn from.  In the old days this would call for something like searching for a non-classical simple machine, analogous to playing around with the classical simple machines.

But, to invoke this non-classical instance, what we need is something that at least exhibits multiple-states, position and momentum relations, field-field interactions, variable mass-density and anharmonic motion and balance, preferably  in a rather compact, hand-held package that is amenable to introductory  teaching-learning situations. 

The instance I have come by, used and that I have found or claim is illuminating   in this introductory transitional effort is the "quantum gravitational artifact" I call a magnetic tetrahedra -- the thing one gets when answering the inquiry: "What do you get when you build a tetrahedron out of (four) magnets?".   It turns out we get something that exhibits multiple-states, position and momentum relations, field-field interactions, variable mass-density and anharmonic motion and balance, all in a rather compact, hand-held package that is amenable for use in introductory  teaching-learning situations. 

"Hey, how you learn about quantum gravity?"

"Simple. Magnetic tetrahedra."

Now, of course one or all can claim that this sort of bootstrapping and re-framing approach is worthless and there is  no such thing as quantum gravity and no need for developing any appreciation for such an emerging, more unified scientific theory.  It might be best to  not make the attempt but, rather, to merely wait, like sheep or serfs on the feudal plain, perhaps until the final abstract math is fully developed --assuming that possible with no accompanying conceptual consideration, appreciation or exploration. Or, of course, one and all can also seek out an improved analog model...

But, and here we have the crux of this matter, "Improved compared with what initial approximation?" 

So it is, like it or not, once one considers the initial approximation here, we are all set onto the new course.  We can seek other instances, and surely better ones MUST exist, perhaps in the other inner or outer  magnetic polyhedra, or in the deeper patterns of structural chemistry. However, as we race or meander forward on this phase of the journey the fact remains we have, we can and we may pass into the quantum gravitational realm by passing through the tactile lens of the magnetic tetrahedra. 

It's an strange state of affairs. In this odd manner is quantum gravity introduced.


MagneticTetrahedra.com

Powered by Qumana

More on the structure of water from SLAC via World Science

" THE WORLD SCIENCE
"Dance restaurant" theory of water takes shape
Aug. 14, 2009 Courtesy SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory and World Science staff

Everyone knows water -- it shapes our bodies and our planet. But de­spite this abundance, the molecular structure of water has remained a mystery. Com­pared to other liquids, water has strange properties that are still poorly understood.

Recent work at the U.S. Department of Energy’s SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory and universities in Sweden and Japan, though, is shedding new light on water’s molecular idiosyncrasies, offering insight into its odd properties.

How water molecules arrange themselves in the substance’s solid form, ice, was long ago established: the molecules form a tight “tetrahedral” lattice, with each molecule binding to four others.

Discovering the molecular arrangement in liquid water, however, is proving to be much more complex.

Nilsson and colleagues recently directed powerful X-rays at samples of liquid water. Their results suggested the textbook model of water at ordinary conditions was wrong and that, unexpectedly, two distinct structures, either very disordered or very tetrahedral, exist no matter the temperature.

In a paper published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, the researchers reported the additional finding that the two types of structure are spatially separated, with the tetrahedral structures existing in "clumps" made of up to about 100 molecules surrounded by disordered regions."

The whole story is at http://www.world-science.net/othernews/090814_water

-- End announcement --

-- In respiration sites within cells, as molecules form one at a time or in small numbers at a time per location it seems reasonable for a  propensity for ordered tetrahedral arrangements.        -- Ralph Frost

Powered by Qumana

Implementing longer-term memory in the ordered water model

In the "ordered water" trial theory of consciousness, the neurology is seen as secondary to and dependent upon the underlying respiration reaction. Taking a closer look at this somewhat odd, but also old notion it turn out that the energy flow in the neurology does indeed have it's origin in respiration -- that respiration is primary and neurology is secondary. Focusing in closer on the respiration reaction itself, here simplified to:

organics + oxygen => carbon dioxide + water + energy flow

it also turns out that there are some 10^20 water molecules per second being formed (body-wide). This investigator has noticed that this incredible internal structural flux presents us with several intriguing opportunities to account for some of our various *feelings*, impressions and potentially, even our thoughts as being "scribbled in the ordered water".

Surprisingly, when one considers the plus-plus-minus-minus ~tetrahedral structure of a water molecule, it turns out that, within an enfolding field, each water molecule can form in one of at least six different orientations (or states). This leads to the awareness that for n-molecules forming sequentially in any one given respiration site, those n-molecules can form in 6^n different patterns (contrasted to the familiar 2^n model). Twelve molecules yield 6^12 or 2 billion options. Eighteen molecules support 10^14 possible associations.

Interestingly enough, given just this small a start, it is not all that difficult to envision that repeating vibrational patterns in our surroundings actually ought to have a strong tendency to "scribble out" similar, repeating patterns in the sequences of water molecules concurrently forming at respiration sites. That's not magic, it's just physics. Stronger, more coherent signals ought to influence more respiration sites. So the quaint imagery works, by itself, for free, as if balancing on a knife's edge.


Therefore, with slight effort we have awareness of a wonderful ongoing flux of water molecules which orient via the influences of surroundings into patterns reflective of our experience within the local surroundings – all ahead of any new neural activity.

Then comes the logical question of getting ordered water patterns to persist. The short answer is "bound water layers are persistent".

That is, “research shows” that committing something to longer term memory does involve some protein synthesis. In the process of linking amino acids together to form protein, water molecules serve as scaffolding and become “bound water” on the surface and within the newly formed protein matrix.

The bound water is persistent. Driving off the bound water takes a lot more energy than is available at 98.6 degrees Fahrenheit.

So, let’s say we’re inside a respiring cell and lots of the recently created water molecules are in similar ordered water stacks and the call goes out to form a protein? Which sort of patterns in the ordered water are most likely to get incorporated into the bound water layer of the newly formed protein?

Logic and statistics reply that it should be the ordered water stacks present in the higher concentration.

Replicate that over many adjacent respiration sites and cells. Then, perhaps, interconnect various cells containing the same or similar ~ordered water pattern. Then, later, when the same vibrational sequence generates even lower concentrations of the same/similar ordered water stacks there’s no sense, necessarily, to re-make that protein/bound water stack again so then, if the thought dawns on you, the whole Christmas tree really ought to light up... or else, generally, the signal activates previously developed cyclic “gel-sol”/reactive/interactive/creative cycles.

It turns out, then, that scribbling experience into patterns in ordered water and then getting those patterns to persist in a form to serve as longer-term memory is all quite natural.

Best regards,
Ralph Frost

See the images - Debye diagrams

Powered by Qumana

Intriguing Link to Yale Study on Brain Energy...

Neural imaging tracks on 1% of  the brain's energy flow or activity. What's the rest of the picture?  World Science lists a recent Yale study -- "Brain energy use proposed as key to understanding consciousness".  

Related to the ordered water/respiration  trial theory, the so-called coded ordered water model  of consciousness that is emerging  here,  our respiration reactions  are steadily  creating some 10^20 odd water molecules per second body-wide, with a large fraction forming in the brain.   This quantity is an oxygen equivalent, or ATP-energy equivalent in our systems.  

Concurrent with the energy flow, however,  is the immediate creation of stacks and sequences of water molecules which form in particular, individually repeatable ways related to surrounding influences (our experience). This shifting formation  "conditions" an individual's base-level structured duality ahead of neural/synaptic energy-consuming activity.  This on-going reflection of  our surroundings, through the province of hydrogen-bonding, is naturally linked with protein-folding and replication  and thus with expression and motility.  In this manner there is a natural link with optimizing energy transactions which surface to us  as generally helpful responses to stimuli, ie., intelligent responses -- consciousness.

The Yale study group, probably unaware of the existence of the trial theory here may see things differently...  but their results point attention beyond the firefly sparks monitored in standard neural activity imaging. 

What's next?    Stay tuned...

Powered by Qumana

Quick and dirty summary - 1977 to 2009...

...The real "magical thinking"  is in the emergence of the notions I am presenting which, itself, is one instance of consciousness. It starts with a "near-death" event September 27, 1977 followed immediately by the auditory event of "How would you like to present a scientific discovery?" Then discovery of the world's first magnetic tetrahedron and then the foot-draggingly slow period of ineffabilty -- of "So what?". Then noticing the the five primary patterns, and, the secondary one that arise when the tetrahedron is primary and then inserted within the secondary XYZ framework. [That is, the order of being conscious of things, how the frameworks are sequenced influences the nature of what and how we are conscious of things.] Then noticing that "consciousness is carbon-based", then seeing the ubiquitous binary tetrahedral pattern, then noticing the ordered water level, and the internal analog language, then the respiration reaction forging echoes of our experience in the 6^n analog language -- the structured conditioning close in with the protein folding and synthesis. More recently, noticing the 10^20th water molecules per second that are emerging from all the respiration sites in everyone's body into the on-going 6^n analog math. The numbers AND the haptics and the protein folding are still working out.

Powered by Qumana

Relating to Libet's delay...

I found a post linking to, or hand-wavingly explaining Libet's apparent delay in consciousness...

This  was written December 10, 2008, a week before discovering I needed a surprise quintuple bypass surgery.  The idea is, or was, Libet measured a half second delay - neurons firing AFTER a response.  Consider that the response is actually done in  the ordered water level of  organization and the neuronal firing occurs afterwards when, for instance, the event is written to backup  memory  or sent for further reporting or coordination.

Think about it.

Powered by Qumana