Wednesday, December 23, 2015

PUTTING CONSCIOUSNESS INTO THE EQUATIONS PARTS 6 & 7


The role of TDVP

From the broader viewpoint of TDVP, it is not surprising that mainstream science, focused as it is on the limiting philosophy of reductionist materialism, has lost touch with its metaphysical roots, and thus cannot explain how it is that a large part of reality is not available to us for direct observation, but makes its existence known only indirectly through quantum phenomena like non-locality and quantum entanglement, as well as the near light-speed vortical spin of fermions7; 69 28; 70 and the effects of so-called dark matter and dark energy 7; 12; 69 in the rotation of spiral galaxies 45

TDVP also answers the real need to explain why we sometimes catch glimpses of a broader reality in rare extra-corporeal (out-of-body) experiences and other documented psi phenomena. The current mainstream scientific paradigm cannot explain so-called anomalous phenomena and the “missing” portions of reality because there is no place in its formulation for phenomena that may involve more than matter and energy interacting in three-dimensions of space and one dimension of time. TDVP, on the other hand, reveals a multi-dimensional reality and the need to recognize a third form of reality, not measurable as mass or energy, in the equations of science. As we shall see, TDVP provides a theoretical basis for a much deeper understanding of reality, as well as providing the appropriate tools for exploring it.

Refutation of atomic materialism
In other publications, we have refuted materialism at the atomic level mathematically 1. This is because protons plus neutrons plus electrons alone, or quarks plus electrons alone cannot form the stable integral combinations that we call atoms and molecules. There has to be a third substance. 1 Without extra TRUE units of “gimmel”, volumetrically atoms cannot exist as stable combinations of integer multiples of TRUE units. 11

Effectively, this means that our current perception of any atom or element without gimmel, the mass-less, energy-less third substance, most likely linked with consciousness, will not provide an atom that can exist for any length of time, which is why the pure Standard Model of reductionist materialist Physics has to be incorrect. 1 Moreover, although we’re dealing with gimmel here, even without applying gimmel calculations, the mathematical derivation cannot result in stable atoms even when applied either volumetrically or based on mass calculations. 1 Effectively, the quantal concept of the atom existing in a universe of pure materialism is simply incorrect because without a third substance it cannot be an integer. 1, 11



DO WE LIVE IN AN ACCIDENTAL UNIVERSE OF RANDOM COINCIDENCES? (PART 6)

Dividing the world of our experiences into the internal or subjective and the external, assumed to be completely independent of any form of consciousness as the current scientific paradigm does, alienates consciousness from the ‘real’ world of the physical universe and leads to an endless chain of irresolvable paradoxes. Consciousness remains left out of the equations of mathematics and physics.

Alternate realities

The prevalence of this attitude among scientists is expressed very well by MIT physicist and science writer Alan Lightman in his 2014 book “The Accidental Universe”. We know that if any one of a number of cosmological parameters were only a minimally different, there would be no chance for life as we know it. In talking about the apparent ‘fine-tuning’ of the physical universe, Lightman points out that “Intelligent Design is an answer to fine-tuning that does not appeal to most scientists.” (p. 12) 71r However, when confronted with the observer-related non-locality of Bohr’s solution to the EPR paradox 72, many scientists have preferred the “multiverse theory”, devised to preserve the ostensible Cartesian duality of a separate mind and body, except that the “mind” for them does not have relevance or exist, and the preference is to keep consciousness completely out of the picture of ‘scientific objectivity’. The “multiverse” has also been called the "alternate universes", meta-universe and parallel universes. Technically, with some linguistic and descriptive variations, they usually refer to as hypothetical sets of infinite or finite possible universes including our current 3S-1t human living experiences.
In the multiverse theory, there are many, many parallel universes. Just how many there are is unknown and unknowable, because your consciousness only exists in this one, and unfortunately you cannot experience any of the other universes. Thus, just like the spate of string theories, there is no hope of proving or disproving such a theory. Even though these scientists pride themselves in being ‘hard-nosed’ objective scientists (read: materialists), it doesn’t seem to bother them that string theory and the multiverse theory cannot be tested.
These models together comprise everything that exists relating to the entirety of space, time and matter and energy, plus the laws and constants in physics and biology that describe them. These constants likely vary with each “world”, and amongst the variations are describing probabilities. These superficially appear theoretical models that sound possibly feasible but they have their difficulties. At best, these models can only be internally consistent (reflecting ostensibly feasible possibilities) and thus, applying Popperian falsifiability, do not even qualify as scientific hypotheses 73. Variations occur for example, in Tegmark’s model, the limitations are set mathematically. 68; 74

LFAF: Multidimensional approaches

These models could qualify scientifically using the Neppe-Close model of Lower Dimensional Feasibility, Absent Falsification” (LFAF) 41 if they were feasible, but there are some problems, such as lack of dimensional definitions, category errors, internal contradictions of knowledge that are not taken into account, and definitions of the finite and infinite. We must be careful not to throw the baby out with the bath water and LFAF is directly involved with the study of multiple dimensions beyond the 3S-1t domain of the world revealed by our physical senses. 6; 75 5 The difficulty with these models is not so much what is conceptualized as what is ignored and left out; and what is ignored are aspects that we regard as key features of reality, namely additional dimensions, including dimensions of time and consciousness. The most basic axioms and theorems of pure number theory, confirmed by the calculus of dimensional distinctions 10, point to the existence of at least nine finite dimensional domains, sequentially embedded in groups of three. There is compelling evidence from relativity and quantum experimental data that the dimensions of each of these additional triadic dimensional domains, encompassing the 3S-1t domain, have progressively much more complex qualities than the dimensions of the domain available to us through the physical senses.

Calculus of distinctions and LFAF

The current standard model theories appear to make the category error of equating space and time, on the other hand, the TDVP model of a reality of at least nine-dimensions has clarified phenomena not explained by the current standard model, promises to explain more, and even more importantly, promises to unify all of our understanding of reality under one consistent paradigm. We make these comments not as pure speculations but as important pieces of the jigsaw puzzle of science. It does this by applying the Calculus of Distinctions (CoD) to clarify the relationship of dimensional measures to mass and energy, which in CoD reflect content. Therefore, although the current standard model paradigm might be feasible scientifically applying LFAF, it is difficult to fit their jigsaw pieces together when, at least in most varieties of the standard model, there are contradictions of category errors, and infinity is not incorporated in them.

Careful analyses with LFAF

Therefore, just because the theoretical concepts are feasible, the models have to show internal consistency and take into account all pieces of the jigsaw puzzle of reality. We believe that not only are many pieces missing because they take into account only 3S-1t, if the remaining further dimensions (e. g. our demonstrated 9-dimensional spin model) are ignored, some of those jigsaw puzzle pieces would simply not fit together.
To generalize is difficult, because each model is sometimes slightly or sometimes grossly different. However, a legitimate theory must be internally consistent taking everything into account. The limitation to the current models of physics and perceptions of multiple 3S-1t existences might involve incomplete knowledge because such factors as psi, non-locality, altered states of consciousness are not properly taken into account, and sometimes, not at all.



SUPPORT FOR THE HYPOTHESIS OF A 9-DIMENSIONAL SPIN FINITE REALITY MODEL (PART 7)


Validity of 9-D spin
The validity and predictive power of a 9-dimensional spin finite reality model is now well-established by the previous work of Close and Neppe 26 9. This predominantly relates to the first major discovery associated with the Neppe-Close Triadic Dimensional Vortical Paradigm (TDVP): derivation of the exact value of the Cabibbo angle from 9-dimensional spin model principles, but is also substantiated by additional supporting discoveries and data. The 9-D model is also necessary and important in the derivation of TRUE (Triadic Rotational Units of Equivalence) units and the third substance, gimmel.
Consequently, it is appropriate to discuss briefly the support for the 9-dimensional finite spin model here. The Cabibbo mixing angle is an empirically derived theoretical mixing angle in particle Physics that could not be derived from the prevalent current Standard Model of Particle Physics. Consequently, the reason why the strange empirical Cabibbo angle value of around 13.04 degrees perplexed scientists for 50 years 25 might have been because apparently, no-one had tested a 9-D spin hypothesis before. Our work in 2012 provided a solution. 24; 26

Close and Neppe applied well-defined physics, with well substantiated empirical data, including well-defined constants such as the Bohr radius (radius of the hydrogen atom), speed of light, Planck’s constant, rest mass of the electron, its radius and charge, the Coulomb constant, π and added well-defined equations and principles, such as the Lorentz correction, the principle of conservation of angular momentum, kinetic energy equation, De Broglie’s wave equation, Coulomb’s equation, the centrifugal force equation, the wave length of a rotating body and calculations of magnetic moment. These applications allowed for a detailed mathematical derivation of the mixing angle of elementary particle fermions, exemplified by a Cabibbo-like mixing angle in elementary particles, with the empirical calculation in quarks already having been found to have been the 13.04 degrees±0.05 and our derived figure being 13.032 degrees. 24 Furthermore, a thought experiment replication that we did found the figure to be 13.0392 degrees. 76

The authors also applied these principles to fermion rotation and intrinsic spin 28; 70 utilizing the basic concepts of a unified space-time-consciousness theory of finite reality from the Neppe-Close Triadic Dimensional distinction Vortical Paradigm (TDdVP) 5. This included applying two new mathematical techniques that we have developed as part of this TDVP model, namely dimensional extrapolation across rotating dimensions, and the principles of the calculus of distinctions. 10
We have shown how only a 9-dimensional vortical (spin) model produces a legitimate derivation. These results can easily be replicated by applying the relatively simple mathematics to the dynamic rotation of elementary particles as nine-dimensional objects.
However, both the Standard Model of Particle Physics and the various String Theories with folding dimensions and none of which involve 9-dimensional spin, fail. This result can only be derived by applying the dynamic rotation of elementary particles as nine-dimensional objects: Results using any other dimensional models with any number of dimensions besides 9 are falsified, although exponents of 9 (e.g. 81 dimensions) are not directly falsified.

Deriving the Cabibbo mixing angle mathematically supports a component of the broader TDVP hypothesis, namely that finite reality consists of a 9-dimensional vortical (spinning) model. As sentient beings, we may be able to distinguish only part of our finite reality, reflecting only our subjective 3S-1t experience of three spatial dimensions, in the present part of one time dimension. Nevertheless, those 4 dimensions could reflect part of the feasibility of the larger 9-dimensional spin (vortical) unified finite reality of the essential substrates, including mass/energy measurement of subatomic particles. This may produce results that are incomplete, based on the overt experiencing of three dimensions of space within a moment of time. 26 Yet, some dimensions may be hidden from us in our restricted 3S-1t subjective reality and we might get a more complete picture from mathematical analysis of particles spinning in 9D.

Our 9D spin findings, because of their breadth, have generated several novel ideas for testing and application. The authors have proposed that the essential substance of finite reality manifests as various dimensionally related combinations of matter, energy and consciousness in 9 finite dimensions. On-going research includes analyzing the third substance of reality we have called “gimmel”. 1 We propose that this third mass-less, energy-less substance is most likely related to consciousness, and that it is appropriate to examine this hypothesis in this paper. Although the TDVP hypothesis of a 9-dimensional finite reality is strongly supported by our findings, the relevant mathematical derivations do not explicitly reveal the nature of specific qualities of the dimensional substrates of Space, Time and gimmel as the postulated substance of consciousness.

The TDVP model and the multiverse

Our TDVP model of “life-tracks” has some superficial similarities to the multiverse because it recognizes that in the continuous infinite different experiential realities may exist. The universes are not parallel or alternate. They are very real in that they are dynamically existing, but they are covert and in the physical reality are limited to single individual choices. 8 77. Effectively, Consciousness is part of the equation of the measurable extent of reality just as space and time is. These make up numerous quantized finite dimensions, and these in turn, are embedded in an infinite continuity. Moreover, the content of Consciousness is as legitimate as mass and energy, not something to be excluded.

Therefore, the major difference in TDVP compared with the more classical broad ideas of parallel existences, is the critical inclusion of consciousness as part of that objective reality. The jigsaw feasibility puzzle here is producing testable results and explaining observations that the current materialistic paradigm cannot explain. Individual consciousness and a unification of realities (what we call Unified Monism) allow for the development of events that could change because of freedom of choice creating branches of a tree that may register in 3S-1t reality. These trees are tiny components of an infinite forest. So these do not reflect everything that exists. What exists is a reality that is molded and exhibits an infinite continuity and is dynamic and modifiable. In the classical multiverse, this is a finite series of events that happen, or parallel worlds, or transfinite realities. 77 The infinite is not perceived as an infinite continuity as in the TDVP concept of the infinite.
In this paper, we take the time to explain exactly how we put consciousness into the equations as part of objective reality, and show how doing so explains many things inexplicable in the current materialistic paradigm.

NOTE: This paper in its entirety is available on www.iqnexus.org. 

No comments:

Post a Comment