Craig, You sound like the ultimate flower girl, all touchy and feelie. However, yo might very well be right. Richard
On Sat, Jan 12, 2013 at 3:35 PM, Craig Weinberg <whatsons...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Saturday, January 12, 2013 10:33:11 AM UTC-5, yanniru wrote: >> >> EM waves and fields clearly exist in spacetime. > > > How do you know that they don't exist in matter? > >> >> Yet I would classify >> them along with quantum waves as part of the quantum mind and >> nonphysical. > > > I don't see anything as nonphysical, only public and private ranges of > physics. > >> >> The photon particle and quantum particles appear to bridge the gap >> between the physical and the mind in a mind/body duality or as Roger >> puts it, a dual aspect theory. > > > That's because they don't consider that matter is inherently sensitive. Once > you consider that possibility, there is no need to imagine phantom particles > and waves in a vacuum full of 'energy'...it's all Emperor's New Clothes > stuff that keeps coming back again and again - aether, phlogiston, prana, > chi, radiation, élan vital. It's screamingly obvious to me now that these > are all the same misapplication of private range physics to public range > experience because we cannot accept that private experience is real or that > public realism is an experience. > >> >> What I picture is that if everything happens instantly in the quantum >> mind, quantum and EM waves can collapse instantly into something the >> size of particles so that they may interact with other particles at >> the Planck scale. > > > None of it is real. EM waves are feelings that matter shares with matter. > Nothing collapses, Planck scale is a mathematical abstraction, and quantum > mind is just plain old ordinary sense. > >> >> >> I think this is a necessary step, a collapse of waves to a particle >> size, even for MWI, in order to obtain multiple physical worlds. So it >> does not rule out MWI. > > > A universe based on the foundation of perceptual participation (sense) makes > MWI unlikely and irrelevant. > >> >> >> But if waves can collapse instantly in the quantum mind, then the >> Feynman method of cancelling the infinities of Quantum >> Electrodynamics, equivalent to Cramer's Transactional Analysis, can be >> used to obtain a single world. The anti-particles that come back >> instantly from the future, so to speak, may cancel out all the extra >> worlds of MWI. >> >> Now it took some intelligence for Feynman to make his method work. So >> I imagine that the quantum mind must possess some form of >> consciousness and intelligence to choose which anti-particles are >> needed to cancel all the quantum states but one in any >> particle-particle interaction. I suspect that the quantum mind in each >> of us possesses similar consciousness. >> >> Moreover, I have come to accept the notion of a few consciousness >> investigators that consciousness is the energy of the quantum mind. I >> base my acceptance on how I focus my own consciousness to accomplish >> almost anything. It's like just putting out the energy of >> consciousness helps thoughts to emerge. > > > Consciousness isn't an energy, energy is a model of sensory-motor experience > with the personal orientation stripped out of it. Useful, but not concretely > real - just another name for the presumed external universal resource like > élan vital. > >> >> Intelligence and free will may >> differ from consciousness but such intention can guide consciousness. >> Therefore intelligence and free will may have a deeper source. > > > The more sense elaborates within itself, fragments into layers upon layers > of embodied feelings, the more the quality is enriched. Consciousness > encapsulates many awarenesses, awareness encapsulates feelings, feeling > encapsulates perceptions, perception encapsulates sensations, etc. It is the > elaboration of sense which allows experiences to become intelligent, and > with intelligence, the higher quality of sense educates the motivations, > expands the experience of time so that instincts can be interrupted and > replaced by more refined considerations. This virtuous cycle between > intelligence and free will is inevitable, but it is will beneath > intelligence which integrates information and utilizes it. > > Craig > >> Richard >> >> >> On Sat, Jan 12, 2013 at 7:01 AM, Telmo Menezes <te...@telmomenezes.com> >> wrote: >> > Hi Roger, >> > >> > How can you have a wave without some notion of spatial/temporal >> > dimensions? >> > >> > >> > On Sat, Jan 12, 2013 at 12:52 PM, Roger Clough <rcl...@verizon.net> >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> Hi everything-list, >> >> >> >> I don't believe that Descartes would accept the MWI. >> >> Here's why: >> >> >> >> I think that the ManyWorldsInterpretation of QM is incorrect, >> >> due to the mistaken notion (IMHO) that quantum waves >> >> are physical waves, so that everything is physical and materialistic. >> >> >> >> This seems to deny "quantum weirdness" observed >> >> in the two-slit experiment. Seemingly if both the wave >> >> and the photon are physical, there should be nothing weird >> >> happening. >> >> >> >> My own view is that the weirdness arises because the >> >> waves and the photons are residents of two completely >> >> different but interpenetrating worlds, where: >> >> >> >> 1) the photon is a resident of the physical world, >> >> where by physical I mean (along with Descartes) >> >> "extended in space", >> >> >> >> 2) the quantum wave in nonphysical, being a resident of >> >> the nonphysical world (the world of mind), which has no >> >> extension in space. >> >> >> >> Under these conditions, there is no need >> >> to create an additional physical world, since each >> >> can exist as aspects of the the same world, >> >> one moving in spactime and being physical, the other, like >> >> mind, moving simulataneously in the nonphysical world >> >> beyond spacetime. >> >> >> >> [Roger Clough], [rcl...@verizon.net] >> >> 1/12/2013 >> >> "Forever is a long time, especially near the end." - Woody Allen >> >> >> >> -- >> >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >> >> Groups >> >> "Everything List" group. >> >> To post to this group, send email to everyth...@googlegroups.com. >> >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> >> everything-li...@googlegroups.com. >> >> For more options, visit this group at >> >> http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. >> >> >> > >> > -- >> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >> > Groups >> > "Everything List" group. >> > To post to this group, send email to everyth...@googlegroups.com. >> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> > everything-li...@googlegroups.com. >> > For more options, visit this group at >> > http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/-/XOYz42fEIc8J. > To post to this group, send email to email@example.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to firstname.lastname@example.org. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.