Thought for one day.

I still advocate that the group focus in just on the scientific paradigm transition. Dial back to 1640; Comenius pops the question on the underlying general principle; fast-forward to the present era: synergetics, magnetic tetrahedra, nested structured duality, respiration-driven structurally coded consciousness, quantum gravity and ecology makes sense, bend a knee - plant a tree,  care for God,  one another and Heaven and Earth.   Bob's your uncle.

On-goiing conversation in JCS-Online April 1, 2011

  See: http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/jcs-online/

 

Re: Energy, the one and the many

Posted by: "Ralph" ralph@frostscientific.com   ralphedwardfrost

Fri Apr 1, 2011 12:20 am (PDT)

--- In jcs-online@yahoogroups.com, "Chris Nunn" wrote:
>
>
>Subject: [jcs-online] Re: Energy, the one and the many
 
>
> Hi Ralph, Tom and all,
>
> Thanks for the comment below, Ralph:-
> [rf] < I expect evidence has already or soon will emerge showing that the types of field punctuations you theorize about here are naturally and readily provided by the small field explosions occurring in the respiration reaction, in massively parallel form. The formation of each water molecule, or a sequence of n-water molecules, for example, presents a certain type of rational field signature within a certain period, structurally tuned or tempered, of course, by multiple layers of ~enzymatic catalysis/inhibition. Respiration sites adjacent in "space-time" (aka, 'the dancing field') would, in effect, sustain, cascade, or resonate/amplify the disruptions into signals.>
>
>
> The idea I like is that events with an 'objective' energy sufficiently precise to go with a Heisenberg temporal uncertanty of the same order as EEG frequencies could perhaps allow a translation of meaningful brain activity into modulations of a 'consciousness field'. I'd agree that

Grab your own end of the more unified knowledge worm-hole.

One of the odd idiosyncratic advantages of this  "structuredduality::"  modeling effort is it began and begins with a physical exemplar -- a physical model.  This doesn't mean that the exemplar is perfect or needs to be revered or worshiped. Far from it.  But, cast as it is  in terms of the multiple states inherent in the magnetic tetrahedron, this artifact is more of a non-classical rather than merely a classical device.  And, thus, playing around with the exemplar provides physical intuition of the shape, actions, states and behaviors of one non-classical artifact and thus provides some familiarity with ALL non-classical artifacts.  One holds and feels a "hand-sized" magnetic tetrahedron and creates the five primary isomers or states by giving the four magnets one-half spin each, and instantly, one acquire some impressions relating to the actions, states and behaviors of water, ammonia, methane derivatives and the like, including the 6^n structural coding occurring in the 10^20 per second respiration reaction that we're all running at the base of our consciousness.

So, while we may not be highly skilled in abstract math, playing around with, or even visualizing the new analog math, leaves us with useful impressions of some of the multiple-states features of our being. Together we acquire a common, rudimentary knowledge of one instance of quantum gravity and our home-schooling continues.

While visualization may be sufficient, for those people who would like to learn from experience,  Magtet.Com has recently begun offering the "Classic Magnetic Tetrahedron" design. If you are so moved, check it out. Grab your own end of the more unified knowledge worm-hole.

Respiration as von Neumann's 'process 1'

In his article  "Philosophy of Mind and the Problem of Free Will in the Light of Quantum Mechanics", Henry P. Stapp of Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, University of California recently made references to John von Neumann's development of quantum mechanics and our intertwined observational relationships as involving a undefined "process 1" action.

This “free” choice plays a fundamental role in von Neumann’s rigorous formulation of quantum mechanics, and he gives the physical aspect of this probing action the name “process 1” (von Neumann, p. 351, 418, 421). This process 1 action is not necessarily determined, even statistically, by the physically described aspects of the theory. http://arxiv.org/abs/0805.0116 (p 15)

 It is downright intriguing to accept  that the 10^20 unit per second , 6^n multiple state structural coding analog math occurring in respiration reaction sites fits nicely as von Neumann's 'process 1'.

-Ralph Frost - Februrary 11, 2011

A thought worthy of speech

Try this link.  (Listen to an excerpt from a recent jsc-online post.)

--Ralph

Mind as a general term for the emerging internal analog language

Whether one calls it "world-modeling", or laying out the emerging paradigm or the next trial theory in the "science of consciousness", one of the nice things about happening onto and scribbling out a working approximation of the underlying analog math and language that we are all using to fashion together our expressions is, as it emerges the new model explains things that are very puzzling in the prior, less differentiated model or trial theory.


Take "qualia", for instance, or "mind". In the absence of a clear picture, or ANY visualization on the emerging internal analog math/language -- stuck in the subject-object regions of Old Cartesia, qualia and mind are seemingly rock-hard and fundamental. No one can really say clearly WHAT they are, but we are generally all pretty much convinced that thoughts "feel like something", and that each of us have and know about and think we know what we all mean by the term "mind".

Yet, skip through the crack in the paradigm boundary and go out into the new open region.

Step 1 in the paradigm transition: Start with magnetic tetrahedron.

Dial back about 350 years and one of Descartes' messages was, "Start with the cube".  From there flows a lot of abstract math that turns out to have uncanny connections to features in physical reality.  Why? So far, we don't have a clear understanding why that is. 

Dial back about 100 years and we notice that Descartes' classical start is straining under the load.  Time has gone from being absolute to relative, and the mechanistic world turns out to be composed of  inner fundamentals of shimmering multiple states.

Dial back, say, 50 to  70 years and a person named R. Buckminster Fuller,  among other things, said, "Start with tetrahedron" and he went on to develop geodesic domes, the dymaxion map, and to predict the structure and existence of what have since become known as  "fullerenes" which are important in chemistry and nano-technology.

Dial back about 25 years and this author idly differentiated  Fuller's structural perspective by asking "What  do you get when you build a tetrahedron out of magnets. In effect  saying, "Start with a magnetic tetrahedron".

The outcome unfolds in an interesting manner.  There are five ways  to align four rod magnets along the radii of a tetrahedron. That is, immediately, one is dealing  directly with structurally  similar but energetically different multiple states.  Moreover, there are two ways to form states which have the same look and feel locally, but which differ in their  relative function within the enfolding field. As well, some of the states exhibit variable mass-density.  And these features are ALL   expressed in haptic, analog mathematically  "terms" which deliver physical intuition with absolutely NO abstract math pre-requisite. 

"Why is this?", one may  wonder.