The direct realist view [11] is incredible because it suggests that we can have experience of objects out in the world directly, beyond the sensory surface, as if bypassing the chain of sensory processing.
The pattern of electrochemical activity that corresponds to our
conscious experience can take a form that reflects the properties of
external objects, but our consciousness is necessarily confined to the experience of those internal effigies of external objects,
rather than of external objects themselves. Unless the principle of
direct perception can be demonstrated in a simple artificial sensory
system, this explanation remains as mysterious as the property of
consciousness it is supposed to explain.[1] But the indirect realist
view is also incredible, for it suggests that the world that we perceive
is merely a pattern of energy in the physical brain inside our head.
This could only mean that the head we have come to know as our own is
not our true physical head, but merely a miniature copy of it inside a
copy of the world contained within our true physical skull. outside.The
external world and its phenomenal replica cannot be spatially
superimposed, for one is inside your physical head, and the other is
The existential vertigo occasioned by this concept of perception is so
disorienting that only a handful of researchers have seriously
entertained this notion or pursued its implications to its logical
conclusion. (Kant 1781/1991, Koffka 1935, Köhler 1971 p. 125, Russell
1927 pp 137–143, Smythies 1989, 1994, current, Harrison 1989, Hoffman
1998, Lehar current, Hameroff current)"[1]
Direct and indirect realism
What is the value of an awareness of "
a construct"
that we would assign as a background a formulation of the perceived by
the perceiver? An archetype, created? A top down recognition in the
square of opposition's use of the transcendent which could reveal an
understanding of the essence of universals in face of "statistical
prediction" in today's world? Symmetry.
A digital manifestation perhaps then that is clearly marked as to a
recognition of a type of realism, or is it just noise(coherence as a
contradiction). I might say that the realism here suggests to me a
underlying recognition of the ability to perceive, to recognize facets
of it own creation as to suggest, that it is quite capable of its
ability to perceive beyond the confines of the construct given as a
reality.
The
connection between superfluidity and symmetry breaking has had a
glorious history. It has left us a rich legacy of fertile ideas, that
seems far from exhaustion. PG 60 Superfluidity and Symmetry Breaking
***
Yes there were thoughts about the n
ature of the gap and you had asked to me to define this. I had trouble doing so even though the nature of the reduction was
a gap with which information to me was accessible.
"Penrose Physics, Microtubules & Consciousness
psyche-d / March 15, 1995
According to the arguments for OR put forth in Penrose (1994),
superposed states each have their own space-time geometries (see
Shadows of the Mind, p. 338). When the degree of coherent mass-energy
difference leads to sufficient separation of space-time geometry, the
system must choose and decay (reduce, collapse) to a single universe
state [avoiding the need for multiple universes as discussed by, for
example, Everett (1957) and Wheeler (1957)]. In this way, a transient
superposition of slightly differing space-time geometries persists
until an abrupt quantum to classical reduction occurs. If as various
philosophers claim (cf. Chalmers, 1994; 1996) the nature of conscious
experience is somehow embedded in the nature of reality,
self-selections in fundamental space-time geometry may address the
"hard problem" of consciousness.
Unlike the random, "subjective reduction" (SR, or R) of standard
quantum theory caused by observation or environmental entanglement, the
OR we propose in microtubules is a self-collapse and it results in
particular patterns of microtubule-tubulin conformational ("eigen-")
states that regulate neuronal activities including synaptic functions.
Possibilities and probabilities for post-reduction tubulin states are
influenced by factors including attachments of microtubule-associated
proteins (MAPs) acting as "nodes" which tune and "orchestrate" the
quantum oscillations. We thus term the particular self-tuning OR
process in microtubules "orchestrated objective reduction" ("Orch OR"),
and calculate an estimate for the number of tubulins (and neurons)
whose coherence for relevant time periods (e.g. 500 milliseconds) will
elicit Orch OR.
Stuart Hameroff"
The Platonist reality to me was a recognition of a informational reality where all information exists as energy, and that such integration with the physical body was a connection through the synapse as a reductionist ability to form through wave length function.
The point I wanted to make was that it is was as if there are two heads, that if it could be seen, one head moves through a whole wave length function potential as if walking through an ocean of wavelength like reality called information and such reduction of that information had to have a link between the material world in the brain/mind. I am trying to gather my thoughts here. Be clearer.
My thought of a glass of water was analogous here to what can exist in between a space , and have solid matter added to the glass without raising the water, somehow had me envision the gap in the water, as revealing the potential of that matter as filling a space that was not immediately obvious, but exists.
Matter then is not a solid.....but a potential realization of a condensation of that wave function. I am not altogether clear here.....so I am working on this.
I think it is right to point out universal permeate of that energy as information. Think of the pattern of the quasi-crystal as consolidating wavelength like pattern. A pure state. How much closer are we then to recognize a wavelike pattern(
chaldni) as an emergent product pattern of the idea?
I am having some difficulties here in solidifying a position here as to it being completely sound, so I am open to having philosophical interaction to help make this so.
***
Knowing Penrose's attribute toward a Platonist ideal, the
Goldberg idea may have come from how he saw what could be happening within the
cosmic background as demonstration cyclical to the universe as always
being born in certain locations(CCC). While
now showing this theory to be false as defined as circles and located in WMAP, one gets a sense of his thinking of a Platonist.
The answer lies in the fact that the high entropy of the microwave background refers only to the matter content of the universe and not to the gravitation field, as would be encoded in its space-time geometry in accordance with Einstein’s general relativity. What we find, in the early universe, is an extraordinary uniformity, and this can be interpreted as the gravitational degrees of freedom that are potentially available to the universe being not excited
at all. As time progresses, the entropy rises as the initially uniform distribution of matter begins to clump, as the
gravitational degrees of freedom begin to be taken up. BEFORE THE BIG BANG: ;AN OUTRAGEOUS NEW PERSPECTIVE AND ITS IMPLICATIONS FOR PARTICLE PHYSICS
Sir Roger Penrose was really fond of Escher .How might on see a relationship to Goldberg?
Penrose's Influence on Escher
During the later half of the 1950’s, Maurits Cornelius Escher received a
letter from Lionel and Roger Penrose. This letter consisted of a report
by the father and son team that focused on impossible figures. By this
time, Escher had begun exploring impossible worlds. He had recently
produced the lithograph Belvedere based on the “rib-cube,”
an impossible cuboid named by Escher (Teuber 161). However, the letter
by the Penroses, which would later appear in the British Journal of
Psychology, enlightened Escher to two new impossible objects; the
Penrose triangle and the Penrose stairs. With these figures, Escher went
on to create further impossible worlds that break the laws of
three-dimensional space, mystify one’s mind, and give a window to the
artist heart.
***
How does one recognize "pure states?" There is a lot of science that is
attached to this, and if one has not done their homework they might
never understand exactly what this means. To relate self in this picture
would somehow seem contradictory, but, as an idea regarding symmetry,
one has to be able to speak about this possibility as well too.
While seemingly lost in history as to thinking its all Greek and not
worth the time, there is more now to this realization having given some
perspective about the Platonist that is current.
Well in today's world we might know what that might mean, not given
time to further inspect what is being said. So we might call it this
"other thing," a metaphysics. As a Platonist, I see the third realm as
informational energy, so getting to that "as a pure state[a
Form of the Good]," would in my view reveal something quite intrinsic
about how we use that information. How we get to that information.
My question for you, recognizing that we are quite capable of getting
to that informational energy, how do you resolve the quote given by Sir Roger
Penrose given the Second law of thermodynamics with
regards to entropy? You see the contradiction?
See:
Order and Chaos, by Escher (lithograph, 1950)
You see Sir Roger Penrose had to be able say that such mini big bangs happen all
the time.......and they do. Do you know where such pure states are given
when considering this idea? Its happening in nature all around us right
now. So if you assume this, how do we recognize it? While I hint here
at (more then)one demonstration of a pure state, there is another.
***
See Also:
