Sort of like "the theater of the mind" being a popular resting place for many?
The thing with "explaining consciousness as the movie theater of consciousness as a 3-d movie theater which the self responds to with all its senses..." is "the self" is already like yet another n-d feelie theater within the idealized 3-d movie theater, held within a delicately balanced protein-folded and also hydrogen-bonded tension within the enfolding variable mass-density environment, etc., etc.
And, like "mind", I consider our term: "self" as a wildly ambiguous term.
The approach that I think is best, of course, is the trail I have experienced and followed. Roughly, the one I'm on starts our in an chaotic cauldron, and then passes through "fields of study" of surveying and mapping, civil and structural engineering, chemical and biochemical properties, transactions, unit operations and systems, seasoned with a smattering of Buckminster Fuller's synergetics, and then punctuating that with some variety of religious experience wherein I get the impression I'm asked if I'd like to present a scientific discovery.
From there, basically, the discovery/creation of magnetic tetrahedra (http://magtet.com) syncs with
ALL the sp3-hybridized artifacts (water, ammonia, organic carbon, silicates, etc.) and prompts the insights of analog math as primary, the underlying general principle of structured~duality, and, after a fashion, noticing objectivity as just a strong repeatable form of subjectivity, different from the stochastic and rarely repeatable types. At some point, also in agreement with Julian Barbour's intriguing slant in physics, I separately began entertaining that experience exists, but time, actually, does not.
Somewhere along this line, I vaguely notice I am, metaphorically, no longer in Kansas any more, Toto. I've passed through an opening in the paradigm shield wall and somehow still exist.
Given this 22 line backdrop, ~all of reality reduces to, or unifies as everyday, run on the mill nested resonant structured~duality (NRSD).
Looking within Colin's lament about the myopic focus of the NCC (neural correlates of consciousness) crowd, the scientific facts of our matter are that, up-gradient from the measured synaptic discharges, the respiration reaction distributed in each of us is generating 10^20 water molecules per second concurrently with scavenging electrons to push, I estimate, a few hundred milliseconds later over into the nural/synaptic displays.
BECAUSE I previously, mindlessly and rather catatonically played around with [I might wish scholars to read this as: "investigated"] magnetic tetrahedra for a few years after studying organic and bio-chemistry, I was prepared to make the connection that each water molecule that forms in each respiratory site can form/orient in let's call it, six different orientations or structurally coded states. A string of twelve units can thus form in or structurally code in 6^12 or about 2.2 billion different ways. Physics says that re[eatable conditions in the surroundings really ought to generate similar or the ~same patterns of codings forming naturally within us as we live and breathe.
Newly formed stacks and sequences of water molecules are really just coded stacks and sequences of hydrogen bonding packets which have or ARE delicate patterns of attractions and repulsions: *feels*. Scientists typically understand that hydrogen bonding plays an deep and influential role in protein formation and protein folding, which are both yet another closely related type of structural coding (guided by the related genetic structural coding).
Then, returning to the senses, self, mind, etc., in the trial theory I am running, having an integrated internal representation along with "what it is like (feels like something)" all functioning in tune with Libet's delay, of of this is naturally inherent in our structural coding. If you consider nesting or staging differentiated respiration regions, impressions can get smeared out in various strengths and combinations. As well, if you would please Google and ponder on the nested arrangement in the worded impressions on "the feeling wheel", hopefully, you can notice that there are fewer category errors with the integrated nested resonant structured~duality (and underlying single internal analog language) than with the competing trial theories you and others are running and/or advocate.
As well, as described pretty well in the helpful book ["How We Love -Discover your love style, Enhance your marriage", by Kay and Milan Yerkovitch, Waterbrook Press 2008], a lot of our attachment connections and reaction routines get coded in the pre-verbal, implicit "memory". Then, later, after acquiring language, we get into associations that are integrated with protein folding sequences that we typically label: "words" (written, spoken, thought,felt).
Getting this, and short- and medium- and long-term memory, plus imagination, plus rational (stoichiometric) impressions, as well as levels of un-sub-consciousness to all run automatically, as well as accounting for the anomalous multi-phasic and other multiple state variations, it's all quite straight forward to model, present and appreciate when cast into the trial theory or NESD and the single internal analog structural coding model I am advocating.
I'm basically advocating a roll-back of just a mere 350-orbits to metaphorically redo, or remediate, or extend from the Cartesian cube/subject-object split/initial approximation. As we step over to initialize and low-level formatting carbon-water-based consciousness as "magnetic tetrahedral" or "binary tetrahedral" analog math, we find ourselves immediately possessing physical intuition on, and knowledgeable about structural coding, variable mass-density and nested resonant multiple states.
I am thinking that perhaps Tom Mandel knows, but it seems like there probably should be some general systems theory rule that says that the model having the broader and higher information compression ratio (and thus the smallest footprint) propagates faster and wider and thus is the one that can be preferred.
If we are going to back-pedal to "sensorium", looks to me like we're talking single internal analog structural coding.
Consider the 10^20 per second water molecule generate rate, body-wide. It's an active,energetic surface that, with it's various pushes and pulls, already feels like something.
If we are serious as a group about taking first steps in effective global science education, if the goal is widespread growth of physical intuition, taking first steps in primary analog math can deliver common, uniform, implicit memories on the basic subject material, despite secondary abstract math, and descriptive linguistic and multiple language complexities.
Do we take the short-cut to muliple-states and variable mass-density, or should we continue to get lost in the long journey through the flawed cube/subjective-object states?
Thoughts? Care to hold your breath to prove the point? What's your pleasure?
Best regards,
Ralph Frost
With joy you will draw water
from the wells of salvation. Isaiah 12:3
http://structuredduality.blogspot.com
--- In jcs-online@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Tintner"
>
> Ralph,
>
> Maybe this private response of mine to Christopher may be relevant here:
>
> "
> well, vision is the natural easy starting place, because that's actually - I think - the centre/focus (the movie screen) of our sensorium
>
> but of course we are reacting to and imaging the world with our whole sensorium
>
> I think the best way to talk about all this may be to describe consciousness as the movie theater of consciousness - but a 3-d movie theater which the self responds to with all its senses - visual, sounds, smell, taste, kinaesthetic (linked with 3-d), heat, balance etc.
>
> if you have alternative thoughts to this - or improvements -do say
>
> I think something like the "movie theater of consciousness" ("a multisense movie- theater" - all-senses, not just one) is a good starting point"
>
No comments:
Post a Comment
Leave a comment