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 everything-list@googlegroups.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 everything-list@googlegroups.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.

Reply via email to