Conversations On-Line
Intuition Network: Physics - open forum

11

                  Subject: Inner/Outer Realities                 Date: 12/19/96  03:18 PM

'Continuum precedes Quantum'

Well, it seems that a jovial holiday spirit has lightened up this AdHoc family of late! Minds well met!

Quite a number of you sent me direct-email after the post I made just before I left for Tucson last week, saying that you appreciated the clarity of my description of interactive hierarchies/assemblies. I thank each of you! You read and understood. Except for Roland, who wrote me: "ok, that's nice. But still, what's your point?". In the hopes that a Poincare dissonance has
successfully dislodged him from Sarfatti The Great's netherworld :-), I offer this one last 1996 missive on some of the fundamentals of the Integrity Paradigm. The importance of an idea is not your particular point-of-view, but rather, access to others ... the journeys that bind us and the processes that are Essense of Existence.

I quote from a letter to my friend:

About my anti-Descartian comment to the AdHoc group, John, you are right about "out-there/in-here". In-here is the "duplicate", not vice-versa. I haven't read Wheeler, but if he said that "bit" *creates* the image of the out-there, it's like saying that a movie screen "creates" the movie just because that is where the light which emanated from "out-there" coalesces. The knit of atoms which mesh to capture (reflect) the incoming light are not the "same" as the dynamics of full-spectrum light which actively passed through randomly opaque and translucent material (the events occurring and initiating "out there") ... the screen's knit of atoms (correlating to "our mind") has its own intrinsic structure/function/activities/self-ness which is different and distinct from whatever is "really" happening out-there, but, the "out-there" is impacting that "intrinsic-ness" by the emmissions it sent and that we capture (translate) and experience. Both "realities" co-exist. But a movie screen cannot spontaneously generate a "movie". Our minds don't spontaneously "create" the rest of the universe in the absense of encounters and experiences!

So, the quantum theorists who have backed themselves into that conceptual corner - that human consciousness "creates" the events it "wants" or gets involved with - are in big big trouble (whether they see it or not). Whatever *externally derived information* our brain structure reorganizes into data/dynamics that the brain self-recognizes must be homeomorphic with the patterns our brain structure ends up making "self"-evident. The information (energy patterns) are captured and there, if not the full original energy.   The movie-on-the-screen doesn't have to "be" identical or perfectly isomorphic with light-passing-through-film-running-through-a-projector in order for us to accept the similarities of the internal and external events. Sure the mental event isn't the external event, but that's no grounds for saying that the communications links are questionable or invalid ... or non existent. No one is "trapped" inside their heads. We are not cut-off from some "outside" objective world.

The movie-o-t-s is "visible" only because the screen mesh is an unbroken non-quantized surface continuum. That doesn't negate however the "fact" that out there is a continuing process of quantum states (the film frames) which generate the internally/mentally experienced "movie". It doesn't negate the fact that we might only "experience smoothness" because our "internal" is quantized slightly out of phase with the incoming signals, so there is blending and smoothing on our own internal quantum-like structure. But I'm getting off the track with that comment...

The only thing that bothers me is that Bohm and Sarfatti and their ilk are struggling to retain quantumization even in the finest structure of existence. If all we can propose is that "something" - like "implicate order" or "pilot waves" or "back-action" - are part of the behind the scenes activites ...like what goes on *before* light passes through the rolling film frames, we are also
in trouble. We can imagine all sorts of mechanisms and dynamics, if that side of "reality" isn't accessible.

I am not challenging the possibility that Sarfatti or Bohm et al are "correct", for no matter what the specific mechanism turns out to be beneath the Planck observation threshhold, the thing the Integrity Paradigm stresses is that even as we delve behind-the-scenes such "machinery-of-being" - regardless of "how" it is all specifically organized - must be existentially compatible with itself, and information there must have an unbroken unquantized forum and structure to operate through. Even the not-quite-isomorphic model of film "frames" (Turing units) are embedded in the temporal continuum called "film" (Turing Continuum). And the n-q-i model of what the behind-the-scenes "film projector" is that gets the info from here-to-there might be like where the "mechanism" has an action-intricacy where correlate components - the "gears", light source, pinions and meshing teeth, energy source, etc - can be traced as having continuous contact and connectedness in its own "spacetime". You just can't maintain "continuum" if there is absolutely nothing that joins the quantums.

I touched on this at the end of my conversation this past week with Alwyn Scott.   I told him that Stapp was curious about how I interpreted Prigogine's work ... if P had any notions that were similar to Stapp's idea of "sustainability" ... which is Stapp's way of dealing with smooth behavior continuity (of thought patterns and wave forms) in the face of quantum discontinuities that don't encourage (let alone require) any {behavioral} connection between collapsed waves. I told Al that even the great Prigogine was forced to concede that smooth-time "pre-dates" the bed-rock of QM ... contrary to all his Nobel Prize work! I didn't have time to get into details but Al gave a silent nod of accession just before I left him, as I scribbled the notation "X(Sigma)" on his blackboard. Sigma <the sum-sign> stood for any statistical formula. The "X" stood for a requisite gradient-continuum which is generally ignored and never written in statistical considerations ... such as QM. Time is one
potential gradient. Gravity is another potential gradient. Weak force, strong force, E-M force are others.

The Integrity Paradigm studies have indicated for years that "continuums" are the bed-rock on which QM is built, not the other way around. Especially the temporal continuums. In fact, it wouldn't be incorrect to say that just as "mind" interprets quantum reality, quantum-dynamics is an interpretation of underlying TGD and/or the "structure" of the implicate order (with back action,
of course :-)).

But, whether we are concerned with this side or the far side of quantum threshholds, tracing how information moves and transcribes is the KEY to understanding the diversity of consciousness dynamics ... no matter what level of assembly is examined or discussed.

Jamie

Ceptualist
INTEGRITY PARADIGM

DISTRIBUTION LIST
rcook@ JPL.Verhey@ sarfatti@ vjs@srh@sam.sternberg@wordenr@pzielins@pwg@mgm@Lyle_Fuller@
anderson@kimato@J.R.Gribbin@cramer@kelvin@physics@puthoff@GGLake@bdj10@lcrowell@wolfr@mschlitz@
creon@mv12437@kimato@hubey@maximus@tmoody@md2738@P.Bains@rhett@heuvel@matpitka@rfelder@
rwarner@onesong@pdavies@vignes@Lotte_Lundell@acs@ami_kes@parlor@aa023@