Project

Consciousness as the Natural State of the Quantum Field

Goal: An integrative model of consciousness is developed based on quantum realism.

The model is physically oriented in great part on the formation of the Hydrogen atom, or more generally, Hydrogen stability, as a relatable placeholder for a naturally stable quantum field self-interaction.

As an integrative functional model, it includes and affective (feeling) subject and object, and an effective (cognitive) subject and object, which are non-commuting.

The model is evidenced through the precise prediction of the wavelengths of the primary colors, based on the geometric alignment of underlying affective / effective gauge fields.

Updates
0 new
160
Recommendations
0 new
181
Followers
0 new
33
Reads
0 new
782

Project log

Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
Chalmers:
1. Materialism
2. Dualism
3. Idealism
then:
1A. Eliminative materialism, i.e. "consciousness is trivial"
1B. Explanatory gap, but no principal gap, i.e. "brain = consciousness"
1C. Explanatory gap, but there is a connection, i.e. "brain <--> consciousness"
and
2A. Consciousness just "dangles on" the physical process
2B. Consciousness influences the physical process
and
3A. Classical idealism (reality is a plain mental construct, anti-materialistic)
3B. Coordinate idealism (NEW - reality is a coordinated mental construct, not anti-materialistic, partially dualistic).
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
A video of the geometric origin of the primary colors, represented as an art installation can be viewed here:
It shows the consecutive geometric alignments resp. cardinal angles accurately predicting the wavelengths of the primary colors, within one octave over 180°.
We perceive colors, not waves. The idea is that primary colors constitute a sort of augmented perception due to a geometric alignment of the gauge field and the matter field, which are both involved in the sensory perception. Alternatively, the actual perception could be viewed as a form of hybrid entanglement between photons and electrons. This can be shown quite in detail, and is suggested to be carried by a sustained (radiant) Goldstone mode.
The matter wave represents a 2DF resonant phase, ~ De Broglie wave, and the nucleus is the confined stage. This way conscious perception is modeled like an atom, and a mathematical model of consciousness is thus not principally different from a mathematical model of an atom, provided time and space are not fundamental, but a collateral effect of perception.
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
The distinct pattern of the primary colors in the visible spectrum, which every child can see but no physicist can define or detect, is precisely predicted by the symmetry relations underlying our connection with the universe. The hidden geometries of the invisible (unconditional, non-local, universal) and visible (conditional, local, personal) creation spaces, each time they align, are found to accurately map the wavelength of one of the primary colors, thus proving their existence based on clear and direct evidence. It is quite literally the geometry of creation in plain sight!
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
"Parametric entanglement", is non-probabilistic, whereby spin states are continually parameterized by the internal phase cycle originating from phase space.
The entangled state consist of a static, dimensional wave component (angular velocity = 0) and a Goldstone mode (wave number = 0). They are interlocked, together forming the transitional state we call spin.
In principle it works for photons and electrons alike, typically in a Bell-like experiment, but also for qubits, and also I assume for Pauli electrons.
The underlying action and invariance is the enharmonic, non-linear self-interaction (don't mind the pleonasm), which is bifurcative when synchronized.
The latter, during dimensionalization, I propose constitutes a (rather) natural holonomic quantum state resp. -Bloch sphere, as there is no a-priori dimensional constraint.
The advantages in neuroscience resp. biophysics seem obvious. Among a host of other characteristics, parametric entanglement implies a vast, not to say infinite, simultaneous, non-local memory state, much in the vein as how Bohm would have wanted his pilot wave theory to work out.
More technically, in relation e.g. to PanMat (Poznanski) , the Goldstone mode conveys "non-local functionality" into the material realm. Together with the static component, this forms an idea of "non-inert matter". The static wave I suspect is closely related to the magnetic moment, however this seems a bit trivial. The dimensional isomorphism itself implies a potential well associated with "preconscious physical feeling". The final state is a gauge condition associated with cognition.
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
The question if and how quantum functionality could be effective (e.g.) over physiological distances, is related to the question, what is the meaning of (quantum) non-locality at all if there is no "spooky action"?
But I think this is not the right question, because the "spooky action" suggests whatever ephemeral form of physical, or physically detectible effect, which does not entirely justice to the pure idea of non-locality. This is turn relates to Bohr's objection against the EPR account of physical reality / realism, that it doesn't consider effects that are real but on principal grounds cannot be measured without being disturbed.
Perhaps indeed there is such type of "spooky action" (with "action" indeed being the precise mathematical principle), which indeed conveys "something" faster than light, but that is not information and certainly not energy. Yet it is, or can be, or can become highly non-trivial.
Could we ask then, is brain consciousness based on such form of spooky action? Or more fundamentally, is evolution that which atoms and molecules engage themselves in, in order to benefit from "spooky" action - as a guiding principle or attractor perhaps more than a coercive factor?
The (not at all controversial) concept that seems tailor made for such FTL ("spooky action") is phase waves, which De Broglie already proved to exist and indeed move way faster than light.
Yet there is nothing in the world of time, space and causality that can utilize or employ phase waves. My personal take on this is that a faculty that "employs" or is guided by, say, "spooky action" or phase waves, must exist prior to space-time-causality. Moreover, it's foremost concern is the very construction of time-space-causality, and in doing so is guided by "spooky action".
So what is this faculty? It is the conservation laws, and more precisely, Noether's theorem closely relating conservation laws and symmetry. The same in biochemistry, if there is a resultant guidance of "spooky action", leads to evolution, and then "spooky action" becomes "non-local functionality.
The irony is that the intellect that asks these questions, in order to get answers it needs to renounce the preeminence and absoluteness of time-space-causality, without which it ceases to exist. This is exactly what led to the present problems in QFT and relativity.
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
A theory of consciousness requires spacetime (and points in it) to be non-fundamental. Yet the phenomenal structure of spacetime, in particular the distances between objects at any scale, cannot be ignored - that would be unserious. Then how are distances "memorized" noumenally?
In a theory with non-a priori space time, based on geometrized action resp. self-interaction, one might suspect that the proverbial "ether" possesses some form of hidden geometrical substructure, accounting for discrete physical distances. But this is not quite correct: geometry alone by definition cannot account for physical dimensions, there must be at least a theoretical onset of physical interaction.
For this we could model a cold, but not zero, Hydrogen universe, so that there are interactive photons. The latter constitute a gauge- or informational state, yet relativistically (from the photon's point of view), with zero space and time lapses. Therefore the interactions are instantaneous and are virtually identical to simultaneous states describing the energy levels in the sending and receiving atoms.
This means that classical distances are counted as simultaneous wavelengths, as follows: E = h⋅f = h⋅c⋅k = h⋅c⋅n / s. or n = E⋅s / h⋅c.
E = energy (levels difference)
h = Planck Constant (action)
f = frequency
c = speed of light
k = wave number
s = distance between atoms
n = totaal wave count (simultaneous)
In the theory of geometrized / bifurcative self-interaction, spin is (topologically) defined as the ratio between the sequential and simultaneous cycle or wave. But it does not say anything about the wave count. This translates into the action being stationary in a scenario of "arbitrary" varying wave counts: h = E⋅s / n⋅c. In other words, the shape of the universe is noumenally preserved by an abstract (because geometrized) counting principle.
Considering the toroidal topology of spin (Dirac spinor), and without suggesting this is any more than a coincidence, the so called "bee dance" or "waggle dance" encoding distances to food sources, is perfectly illustrative of the principle.
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
London forces (proposed by R. R. Poznansky et al.) may after all be recognized as mediators of consciousness on the molecular level. Skipping over the details of the required characteristics, which have been discussed abundantly, while London forces purely by their binding nature are antagonistic to consciousness, in principle they form a pathway allowing (Higgs-like) mass generation to functionally resonate with, and control molecular shapes. It could be seen as an integrative morphogenetic eigenstate, analogous to and an extension of the same on the (sub) atomic scale, the core of my 2020 "Hydrogen" paper.
It has been shown that the geometrized self-interaction (~ Higgs mechanism) forms preferred angles with the dimensional gauge fields (calculation of the primary colors). The same, through London forces, could account for protein confirmation, and amino-acid shapes to begin with. A slightly simplified take is that mass itself is a resonant principle, which in 3D forms certain preferential patterns, or angular eigenstates.
By definition this cannot be achieved by ionic or any gauge interactions, including quantum-thermal eigenstates (Poznanski). I'm reminding of De Broglie's remark in this regard, which I referred to as "energy centric bias", which is essentially a materialistic bias.
Such a molecular scale prototype instance of mind is reminiscent of the Vedic concept of "cittanu", litt. citta + anu = smallest instance of mind-stuff.
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
The Tripartite Synapse and the Ca2+ wave as a non-commuting pair. The Tripartite Action involves homeostatic, rheostatic and allostatic action.
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
The association of the Tripartite Synapse (TPS) with the triple attributional (trifarious) action (or vice versa) is not trivial, i.e. not a mere numerical coincidence. The triplet of TPS interactions with the pre- and postsynaptic axon or Action Potentials (AP), and with the astrocyte process correspond to resp. rheostatic ("negative", pro-matter), homeostatic ("neutral", energy-conservative) and allostatic ("positive", pro-mind) actions, constituting a universal dissipative system equilibrium. Secondly, in the vein of Penrose-Hameroff vocabulary, we can distinguish 2 objective reductions and 2 subjective syntheses ("orchestrations"). The latter 2 + 2, due to the non-commuting nature of the system (Bohr complementarity), are cross-wise correlated with the affective and cognitive activation and gauge phases. This establishes the TPS (action) as primarily an affective control of the homeostasis. Cognition then cannot be else but be considered an emerging effect, regardless its extensive sway within its own jurisdiction of spacetime. One could visualize a proverbial "TPS-vector" circling in between the 3 interactions - however this is not really a sequential phenomenon but a simultaneous state. Through careful analysis of an (idealized) external, Ca2+ sequential micro-phenomenon, constituting the sum total objective counterpart of the TPS action, an integrative, underlying self-interaction can be inferred epitomizing the system's invariant, noumenal state or non-local functionality, and therefore it's sentiency. In the present diagram, the abstract Sarkar annotations are used for the 4 "chambers" or faculties of the causal framework. The Ca2+ "micro-wave" is conjectured on a "why not" basis, based on ample recorded evidence of the same on a larger scale, as well as proposed Voronoi tesselation, and is modeled with a Belousov-Zhabotinsky Automaton. The generation of common EEG waves is proposed based on the present model, but not detailed here.
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
(preliminary abstract)
We hypothesize that the sentiency of retinal and generally cortical tissue is epitomized by a resonant eigenstate of the integrative astrocyte and neuronal networks together with the intracellular matrix, with a central function for the Tripartite Synapse (TPS). In particular we propose the presence of complex microstates of the intracellular matrix, scaled in the order of the typical astrocyte spacings. A generic causal framework is introduced, in the line of the Aristotelian / Sarkar doctrine, where the synapses constitute the normative faculties or - attractors, and the astrocyte and neuronal soma represent the resp. objective counterparts. The physical component of the sentient eigenstate consists of a Ca2+ wave, typically in the form of a spiral section, coupling the TPS action with a Goldstone cycle of the integral matrix. The model is empirically validated by the accurate calculation of the primary color spectrum, from the geometrized feeling resp. cognitive faculties of the sentient cortical eigenstate.
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
Causal framework:
Energy and action cannot be separated, but they can been distinguished. In abstract form they constitute the resp. subjective faculties in the causal framework (Aristotle, Sarkar - "subjective" here in a generic sense, somewhat different from psychology; together similar to "preconscious experientiality" in PanMat). The objective counterparts are the entropic and negentropic termini. Entropy is facilitated by the action ((B) reduction) and advanced by energy ((A) synthesis). Vice versa, negentropy is facilitated by energy ((A) reduction) and actualized by the action ((B) synthesis). The latter are gauge effects. The subjective and objective faculties and their interactions constitute the causal framework.
Bio-chemistry based on strong self-reference:
In the intracellular matrix, the Ca2+ phenomenon (Vera Maura Fernandes de Lima, Alfredo Pereira Junior), if (and only if) it forms a vortex, the rotational- or phase wave amd the radiating- or physical wave cannot be separated, but they can be distinguished. As a dimensional isomorphism, the vortex is geometrized as follows:
π = 10 × α(n) × 2n = λ2 / (2 × r × λ1) (eq. 1)
where a(n) follows from the iterative (Pythagorean, triangulatory) approximation of a smooth circumference of the phase cycle. This establishes the Ca2+ wave as a self-referential phenomenon in the Aristotelian / Sarkar causal doctrine.
Selective color empathy:
During biological perception, the wave and "its" color cannot be separated, but they can be distinguished. In a formal causal doctrine, the concept of "quale" has become obsolete: the color is not subjective but objective, the perceiver or knower is the subject. The self-referential approach of the Hi-Vortex shows that, unlike in quantum physics, the "r" factor (eq.1) is continuous. This accounts for a continuous color spectrum. No further information can be obtained about the existence of an underlying, noumenal state or ground state, were it not for the fact that in idealized (3+1)D spacetime ("Maya" condition), the effective action concentrates somewhat around geometrical alignments. Thus the set of primary colors forms a bridge between the physical and the transcendental.
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
Besides the integral Goldstone mode, the geometry between the nuclei and the cell walls can reveil an underlying / inferred standing wave pattern especially where there is asymmetry, accounting for an integrative, action-based holarchy as well as strong self-reference. The latter must be be seen in relation to the actual physics, i.e. non-trivial local charges, topologically where the Goldstone mode bifurcates on a Euler 2-sphere in idealized spacetime aka cognition.
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
This is a differential analysis of the B-Z automaton over a period of apprx. 500 iterations. The bright spots are the stable centers of the spirals, the large cell walls are regions of high activity and are responsible for the global Goldstone mode. The rotating spirals are contained within the cell walls.
As a realistic model of the hydro-ionic wave (ref. research by Vera Maura Fernandes de Lima, Alfredo Pereira Junior), it shows non-trivial, stable charges in a highly complex bio-chemical environment (cortex), which tentatively could be thought of nuclei of consciousness. The Goldstone mode, in a partially conductive medium, could together with the extra-cellular action potentials account for the actual brain waves.
Obviously, relative to the present image, the original B-Z state shows the integrative case. Hence in physics terms, the nuclei constitute least-action attractors, accounting for the non-local functionality of the network, which in turn controls the homeostasis. It forms an integral, action-centered equilibrium with (especially biologically speaking) teleonomic and symbiotic trends.
The Goldstone mode proves the symmetry breaking, or, for viable systems, the bifurcative self-interaction.
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
It's only due to the cessation of mind that one can perceive the notion of consciousness being fundamental. It is therefore the opposite of idealism. Moreover, it is not the intellect's business - it has nothing say here, nothing to suggest and nothing to venture. It can only say: "I don't know", and make inferences about the existence of consciousness' creative potentialities based on what it does know, but which is always incomplete.
Logical self-reference, (a → x, b → y, c → z) is therefore inadequate and unrelatable. Instead, material self-reference means inferred (a, b, c) known ((a, b, c), y, z). This can be formalized as a dimensionless bifurcation, which directly translates into a QFT theorem for viable systems.
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
“Is it possible that consciousness may exist by itself, even in the absence of matter? I would say no but not for the materialistic idea that it emerges from matter but for the reverse idea that all living and all form of matter is being created by consciousness which include biological bodies. So since it is by nature creating, it is always with a particular body it is creating. It is never by itself and thus doing nothing."
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
One possible way to explain consciousness is through the formation of non-trivial charge-concentrations, such as in the BZ state, referred to by Erkki J. Brändas if I'm correct as "nuclei of consciousness".
I.e. a charge concentration, and more specifically, a scalar potential well obeying an inverse square law, is formed (spontaneously?) through a non-classical process characterized if you wish by teleonomical and symbiotic principles.
It is in line with the idea that consciousness is not at all non-physical, and I'd say by definition has an energy component. We could think of so called "dark matter", if only as a metaphor, and perhaps that original "dark matter" has found it's way down to crude matter and is what brings it alive.
I'm also recalling my proposal that the de facto bifurcative ("binary tree") dimensional indexing in general relativity could be highly non-trivial in certain situations, as well as the effortless transitioning of dimensional isomorphisms through scales.
The latter means that an atom, and a cell, and a spiral galaxy ("sambhuti's") each on their own part, constitute (a way to formalize) spacetime as their private cognitive metric. In other words, the metric itself is the isomorphism, and the viable structure is the intermediary that made it so. (This is also the reason why I don't favor introducing bio-chemistry as something unique - it obscures the underlying action, and apologizes not even looking for it: still caught in the trap of dialectical materialism.)
This phenomenon (which is quite Noether-like), is not yet "Maya" - the latter entails the extension of noumenal or local, topological space-time to an idealized (Euclidian, Hilbert) framework extending infinitely in all directions. It means that the senses have overtaken the mind, and as a result we perceive scale differences which appear absolute and quite perplexing indeed. Then duality is complete.
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
Averaging a BZA over sufficient (plm. 200) iterations brings up a set of stable spiral centers or BZ nuclei. Further analysis shows that the distances between the centers are grouped in relative distances around Golden Ratio (1.618). After a run-up of plm. 70 iterations, a stable equilibrium forms consisting solely of expanding Archimedean spirals (both left and right handed) confined in cells. Where they overlap, the spiral arms mutually annihilate.
In any cross-section, a BZA spiral consists of 2 waves radiating out from the center. The latter forms a standing wave node where the phases cancel out. At the same time, cycling the center at any given radius equally constitutes a wave at the same angular rate.
It is hypothesized that the Golden Ratio spaced distances between the nodes forms a long-range network of non-linearly interacting standing waves - that is, each time two waves in opposite direction. At the nodes, the phases undergo a unitary transform (Fourier) into the linear regime. This activates the spiral waves.
Furthermore, integrating / averaging the BZA over its physical dimensions generates a Goldstone mode. The reason is easily seen in the fact that the bulk of the adjacent, expanding spirals surprisingly overlap and thus annihilate simultaneously, causing a global effect. This effect is thought to be optimized by the Golden Ratio space nodal network.
The radiating as well as circular waves are boson type phenomena. We cannot say with absolute certainty which one is original in a physical sense, and which one is a phase wave or gauge effect. The synthesis lies in recognizing a state where the waves are indistinguishable, and one where they can be distinguished. The distinguishable or final state topologically forms a Gaussian surface, i.e. a 2-sphere, and physically constitutes a charge field (of the stable spiral centre) obeying the inverse square law. The indistinguishable case is the formal, non-local ground state. The Gaussian surface bifurcates the principal cycle and both combine into fermionic spin. This represents self-localization, the signature characteristic of consciousness.
This approach to brain based consciousness differs from other models in that it is non-generalized - instead it is a geometrized approach. The symmetry breaking in this case is a discrete, finite bifurcation formed by the Fourier transform between the non-linear and linear regimes, applied to viable systems. The geometrization cancels the (need for) physical dimensions in the hidden ground state, which is an inexorable requirement for consciousness. Dimensions are created as isomorphism of the apparently transformed ground state, and are thought to effortlessly transition cross scales.
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
The most unintelligible thing ever cooked up since ape became man is strangely congruent with the most revolutionary and most contemporary idea in physics - that physical reality is a momentary, 3D holographic projection on a 2D surface (it has something to do with black hole entropy, topology, independent degrees of freedom, etc..). Of course that doesn't justify a flat Earth, because it is still floating around (how??) in a 3D universe. So, busted. But, in a bout of compassion, one could argue in favor of Flat Earthers, that there might be some deeply buried, archaic sentiment in the collective subconscious, that reality itself is essentially (topologically) flat - not the ancestral idea of Earth, and also not the same as General Relativity "flatness" - which they then naively project on the one, seemingly fixed part of the universe they know and walk around on - the Earth. Perhaps that the state of mind native to flat Earth belief presupposes a sort of mental blankness or vacuity, where such ephemeral, subliminal perceptions are reflected, undistorted by the brain activity common to the thinking part of humanity. In short, Flat Earth theory could be a - seriously distorted - artifact of the holographic universe. Perhaps there is a spark of hope on the horizon for genuine Flat Earthers around the world, that they are the unwitting harbingers of a great secret they completely fail to understand.
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
Ouroboros in Action
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
Bifurcative self-interaction, i.e. symmetry breaking in viable systems, transitions effortlessly through scales. On the quantum, molecular and neurobiological level it functions as the "one ring to rule them all":
  1. natively characteristic for consciousness: acausal, self-referent, self-localizing,
  2. natively geometric, i.e. free from physical units or dimensions,
  3. natively trans-disciplinary.
Thus it is the operative principle that conveys the "non-uniqueness of the ground state" (Goldstone), and thus the non-local functionality characteristic for sentiency.
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
In this model the action (-principle) is centered in the tripartite synapse.
The (biological existence of) neurons and astrocytes breaks, or rather bifurcates the symmetry.
The "non-uniqueness" of the simultaneous or invariant ground state (Goldstone) is evidenced by a sequential B-Z mode (insert) and detectible as a potential wave.
The 3 aspects of the action are represented by three (chemical) components constituting the B-Z mode.
Thus the invariant, non-local functionality of the ground state is conveyed to the detectible or dialectical regime, through the astro-neural bifurcation axis.
Knowing and feeling are related through a dual-aspected wave function.
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
neuroscience causal framework, simple
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
When it comes to the creation of life, the quantum field and spacetime are one and the same thing, and are involved in one and the same thing. The reason we see it differently is because our way of doing physics is based on the energy-centric, generalistic, dialectical paradigm. As a result we have lost sight of the underlying, non-dual, non-local functionality of reality. Physics is not at all completely wrong, but physics mistakes generalization for abstract synthesis. If instead of formulating laws that could create anything we desire, we look closely at how nature creates it's own actual, signature shapes, a different paradigm emerges. Here the symmetry of the primordial reality is not broken, but instead, far more naturally, bifurcates - nothing is broken. This principle only bears the hallmark of consciousness, as a part and parcel of physical reality, and not in an absolute sense different from it. Bifurcation in the most general sense follows from recognizing that the visible "creation" is though different from an unknown invisible "creator", yet this perception cannot be the fundamental case. The latter however is imperceptible and can only be inferred. In a somewhat dualistic approach we could leave it at that, and cannot else but say that the fundamental nature of reality is self-referent: the creation is not in the absolute sense different from the creator. The conundrum is solved axiomatically, by differentiating a state where the difference between "creator" and "created" is altogether undetermined (rather than unknown), and a state where it can be known: this is true abstract synthesis. Instead of "creator" and "created" we use resp. the terms "sentient" and "static" principle, plus the "mutative" or resonant principle inbetween. The bifurcation then is the sum total of all combinations (resp. permutations) of the three principles acting either extroversively or introversively, so that there are 23 = 8 different actions. If the permutations are grouped, 4 actions or rather Faculties remain: this is the causal framework as per the Aristotelian (associative) resp. Sarkar (abstract) doctrine. So in short, bifurcation formalizes the self-referent nature of reality in the form of an integrative causal doctrine.
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
The problem is that wrt. non-local functionality you can't see charges as a static property of elementary particles. Instead it is a quality of the field, that is, an effect of the field's self-interaction.
The statistical distribution in e.g. an Na+ OH- solution is trivial, as it is in the case of a static charge on an insulator, such as a plastic rod.
A non-trivial case is the non-homogenous distribution of charge in a complex, dynamical medium for a non-trivial amount of time, or in short, non-trivial charge distribution amounts to life force. The dynamics of increase and decrease of life force in turn amounts to feeling, that is at first, before there is cognition, preconscious experientiality. Thus, feeling conveys non-local functionality (and in that capacity it is the driving force of evolution).
Examples are charge on a cell-membrane, and specifically, neurobiological homeostasis. In the quantized case such as an electron shell, the charge distribution is also non-trivial (due to energy-centrism i.e. the dialectical, generalizing paradigm - even de Broglie was not entirely free from it).
In short, non-trivial charge (potential) is the starting point of sentiency and sensitivity. I have shown that in this case, the field's self-interaction is bifurcative, or more precisely, that the bifurcation implicit in the standard symmetry breaking theorem becomes functional. The same is expected in the case of neuro-biological homeostasis, made very plausible if the latter has Belousov-Zhabotinsky (-like) characteristics, due to the proven Nambu-Goldstone mode.
It is hypothesized that rudimentary, random charge waves or -wave fronts are already non-trivial wrt. non-local functionality, whereas it makes complete sense that through cognitive (i.e. neuronal) feedback a Nambu-Goldstone mode is induced, accounting for a B-Z (-like) distribution and dynamics. This would obviously be typical for the neo-cortex.
Meanwhile the idea is not that the charge- or hydro-ionic phenomenon alone is responsible for sentiency - it is the sum total underlying neuro-biological apparatus. But the hydro-ionic wave brings it quite literally to the surface, and moreover in integrative form.
An actual quantum-bio transition is optional, possibly accounting for more exalted states of consciousness. At the same time it is the shared non-local functionality, captured and conveyed through non-trivial charge distribution, suggesting that such a connection is in fact quite natural.
Update: to the question, "how representative is the B-Z reaction or -mode for actual cortical Ca2+ "waves" Vera Maura Fernandes de Lima replied: "Both are electrochemical systems with emergent properties, their behavior in many experimental contexts we (me and Wolfgang Hanke ) was strictly parallel."
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
In terms of systems thinking, there is no "inside" or "outside" in the absolute sense. You either need to be willing to compromise in terms of dualism, or to be explicit about the self-reference. In the latter case, the operative principles are either:
  • original but indistinguishable (trifarious), or
  • distinguishable but not original (trilateral)
Underlying all that, the operative principles don't even act as triplets, rather form any polygons (Sarkar) i.e N-gons, or appx. your N-dimensions. This is the state of homomorphic evolution. The final case is always "3-gons", that is, the trifarious action. The matterwave, as the only principle leading into dimensionality (externalization) is always the result of the 3 principles distinctly acting together, i.e. triangularly.
The causal framework (Aristotle, Sarkar) is formed by trifarious combinations and trilateral permutations. This imo is the more practical model, which solves the above dilemma through the bifurcation - i.e. the self-reference has become formalized.
Applied in neuroscience, the sum total, unarticulated polarized medium signifies the ground state. Once B-Z (like) patterning turns up, this proves that "the ground state is not unique" (Goldstone). I.e. exactly the same principles and laws are at work, yet something distinct was created. This defines symmetry breaking. The broken symmetry as a whole, and with it the non-local functionality, then is represented through a Nambu-Goldstone mode, which I have proven for the B-Z CA. Symmetry breaking becomes bifurcation if a viable structure is formed, it should be said, as always in nature. The latter has been neglected in physics in favor of the energy-centric, generalistic approach (see my 2020 paper).
By showing how a Nambu-Goldstone mode supports a matterwave bifurcatively, I've shown, using your phrase, fundamental reality operating within the "organism", in this case the atom.
QUESTION: how representative is the B-Z reaction or -mode for actual cortical Ca2+ "waves".
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
The tetrahedral model is optional but useful as it articulates the action / energy asymmetry and easily links to the bifurcation diagram.
The 4 causes / faculties / nodes are each by definition "tripartite", as well as abstract (Sarkar), except the negentropic faculty which is directly associated with the physical tripartite synapse.
The interactions are classified as either part of the action or energy cycle, and then as either somatic, synaptic or intracellular, making 6 total.
The classical energy process or cycle is associated with the neurons and action potentials. The integrative action, introducing non-local functionality, is in principle associated with the entire chemical equilibrium, with the astrocytes being the Ca2+ regulator as placeholder.
The synaptic modes must meet at one point, which is proposed the neg-entropic cause, and the somatic modes obviously are not directly related. This defines the causal framework.
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
Here's one inconspicuous but perhaps important result. The graphic plots the global average of a Belousov-Zhabotinsky Cellular Automaton (B-Z CA), per each iteration. You see a small (approximate) sine wave (modulation) superposed on a base line.
At least for theoretical / mathematical research this is significant, because it is virtually identical to the averaged non-linear / bifurcative self-interaction that is the basis of my Hydrogen model. As you know the Hydrogen atom is nothing but the most rudimentary (therefore didactical) example of the theorem. In the latter case, in QFT terms, the superposed fluctuation identifies a Nambu-Goldstone mode, imparting mass to particles.
An interesting footnote here is that this only happens when the bifurcation is Golden Ratio, similar to what you see e.g. in the Mandelbrot fractal, etc.. For physicists: the averaging of course is the integration in space of the composite wave, for each time interval.
Applied to hydro-ionic "wave" regulated by astrocytes, if we accept that the B-Z reaction resp. simulation is (indeed) highly representative for the phenomenon, it means we have moved much closer to identifying a matter-wave like feature in the brain's homeostasis.
This in turn gives great scope for setting up the proper axiomatic / causal framework of the homeostasis, which is highly non-trivial wrt. sentience resp. conscious functionality. E.g. we could hypothesize that the homeostasis fundamentally entails the formation and perpetuation of such Nambu-Goldstone modes, and not at all any (relatively trivial) metabolic etc... equilibrium per sé.
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
An initial attempt to place the neuro-astro sentience process in the Aristotelian (+ Sarkar) causal doctrine. Please comment / improve / expand.
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
This means that the dielectric constant (in part) depends on the frequency (ω). This in turn means that the medium is non-linear, and therefore bifurcative (self-interative).
Colloquially this means that when such a medium is inundated with an EM white noise spectrum from the action potentials, the latter will be actively processed. In Alfredo Pereira Junior 's vocabulary this would mean decoherence / recoherence, I would speak of bifurcation / fusion.
Moreover, the neuropil is constantly reshaping itself, so that the processing takes on different qualities.
In other words, the idea that the hydro-ionic "wave" itself does the "re-coherence" is confused - rather it forms a malleable vessel for the latter. The filmed hydro-ionic (Ca2+) "wave" is only the "shaping wave" which has an abominable slow rate, with period times in the dozens of seconds.
I believe this process is highly non-trivial wrt. (preconscious) experientiality. Also it could quite conveniently lock into the quantum realm, but this may not even be necessary.
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
(updated)
The idea of the neuropil literally functioning as a hydro-ionic wave must probably be abandoned, replaced with a (very slowly, somewhat wave-like) malleable polarized substance functioning as a wave guide or "resonance chamber" for the non-destructive fusion of action potential spectra. Physically the fusion creates spin and stable magnetic moment, and psychologically preconscious experientialities.
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
It occurs to me that the idea of "hydro-ionic wave" points in the right direction but is also a bit misleading. As discussed it has several issues:
  • the spiral form was only tested in the retina, and only incited by pathogenic triggers (this was addressed though by Dahlem & Müller);
  • it's a very monolithical, slow feature;
  • any non-trivial magnetic effect would be annihilated by even a weak external magnetic influence.
The spiral hydro-ionic feature instead functioning as a wave guide, rather than as a wave itself, has the following advantages:
  • it would be better represented by the Belousov-Zhabotinsky reaction or simulation;
  • the slowness doesn't matter, it might just as well be static;
  • purely mathematically, a log spiral r=f(eα) could excellently represent bifurcation, resp. the opposite, fusion. As there is no physical field effect such as α = eiωt, another non-linear coupling could be in place, which is toroidal. This not only models a magnetic field, but also intrinsic spin;
  • a hydro-ionic wave guide could process a wide spectrum of high EM frequencies such as the action potential;
  • the magnetic moment would be robust against an external field (only not radiation such a wifi) and therefore physically viable;
  • it could represent a matter wave;
  • it could in principle easily tune in with the quantum level.
Colloquially, a hydro-ionic wave guide could harmonically fuse a sea of action potentials into a stable magnetic domain. This highly physical state would account for "preconscious experienceability". By analogy, it is like how the air pressed through the voice box resonates in the mouth etc. cavity, subsequently cognized as vowels. It could also form the underlying neuronal mechanism of color perception.
Some older articles on the latter:
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
"the generation of feelings as an allostatic process" (suggested by Alfredo Pereira Junior)
Yes, that properly builds the causal framework:
- Homestasis ~ Energy / also knowing principe (~Noether, Sarkar)
- Rheostasis ~ physical interactions, waves ~ entropy
- Allostasis ~ feelings, propensities ~ negentropy
H+R+A = thermodynamic cycle. ALL are controlled by the action principle (S). But only action-energy is currently employed in physics, such as E=hf.
H+R+A+S = causal framework (Aristotle, Sarkar), e.g. visualized as a tetrahedron.
There is a fair understanding of the neurobiological process, but it is so complex that the full causal framework cannot be seen. It needs a premeditated theory.
"this [new attractor] is the bifurcation point, in which the feeling/sensation is generated"
Yes, noting that the bifurcation point itself is not the feeling. The bifurcation involves the whole system. Both in QFT and GRT bifurcation are obscured by the (imo inadmissible) generalization, through Langrangian dynamics resp. differential geometry. Remarkably though, GRT has a rather explicit bifurcative substructure (Levi-Civita connection with Christoffel symbols). In QFT the bifurcation is still more obscured, this is what my 2020 paper is about.
It is hypothesized that an explicitly bifurcative theory favors a mathematical model of consciousness.
The attached graphic shows the QFT-neuro-GRT signature natural structures and their bifurcative foundation.
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
The white dots show consistent charge domains maintained in a self-organizing, dynamical open system resp. excitable medium.
Charge domains in a static medium would obviously be trivial. In a biological scenario, the charge dots likely indicate the negentropic principle conserving the homeostasis.
The physical localization of charge could possibly already account for (preconscious) experientiality, i.e. without an active quantum-classical interface.
However if charge itself on the quantum level is viewed as an effect of the quantum field's coherent self-interaction or bifurcation (worked out in atoms), the hydro-ionic wave could actually be resonant with the latter.
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
The symmetry breaking theorem (such as in QFT) may seem somewhat confusing in that in fact symmetries are created (a constraint on the ground state). These symmetries allow ascertaining gauge-invariances (Noether, Yang, Mills) denoting real particles or waves. It is exactly these gauge invariances that are highlighted (by masking) in the Lechleiter simulation (video).
The parallel however runs deeper, as the 3 so-called Goldstone bosons in QFT, conveying the ground state's self-interaction (i.e. prior to symmetry breaking), appear to be represented by the 3 components of the Belousov-Zhabotinsky cellular automaton.
The 4th. image shows the timeseries registration of the 3 individual B-Z components (one of which is plotted in the matrix) of any given cell: as expected each having the same angular rate / phase cycle, with a 2π/3 shift (note: the colors are unrelated to the colors in the matrix). The wavenumbers ("space frequency") are not yet known. Insert: B-Z simulation with prominent spirals, unknown parameters.
Here it should get interesting for real mathematical neuroscientists as the B-Z reaction I must assume represents the underlying molecular interactions, the homeostasis, etc.. As an undulary model there is no need for variational calculus so the math can be quite simple and straightforward.
Still unclear is a convincing, non-trivial physical macro effect associated with the (symmetry-broken) hydro-ionic ground state. The latter is required for a meaningful notion of spin, as well as wrt. any claims of (preconscious) experientiality. I.e. the homeostasis, even in a symmetry breaking scenario, alone is insufficient. One could however hypothesize a magnetic and a mass effect.
(YouTube) Lechleiters registration + simulation with gauge invariances:
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
Hydro-ionic waves in an excitable medium self-organize into expanding Archimedean spirals, showing properties similar to a de Broglie matter wave. The video first shows an actual registration (Lechleiter).The wave is then simulated whereby matter wave-like features are highlighted.
Self-organizing hydro-ionic waves are thought to have an important role in conscious perception (de Lima et al.)
References: Molecular Mechanisms of Intracellular Calcium Excitability in X. laevis Oocytes James D. Lechleiter and David E. Clapham Publication: Cell, Vol. 69, 263-294, April 17, 1992, - The Spreading Depression Propagation: How Electrochemical Patterns Distort or Create Perception de Lima, Vera Maura Fernandes; Junior, Alfredo Pereira; de Oliveira, Guilherme Lima Publication: Open Journal of Biophysics, vol. 11, issue 02, pp. 133-146 Pub Date: 2021 DOI: 10.4236/ojbiphy.2021.112003 Bibcode: 2021OJBp...11..133D
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
At the very basis of the modern conception of scientific knowledge lies the separation between the domain of the knowledge acquired through the scientific method and those that pertain to metaphysical conceptions: the rise of a scientific community capable of developing theories independently from any metaphysical backgrounds marks the transition from natural philosophy to science. The demarcation between science and metaphysics proposed by Karl Popper based on the criterion of the refutability, or falsifiability, of a theoretical system. A system is considered scientific – according to Popper – if it makes assertions that may conflict with observations. Since concepts like GOD,OTHER DIVINITIES, HUMAN SOUL, CONSCIOUSNESS or AFTERLIFE are not observable – that is, they cannot be analyzed empirically – it derives that they belong to metaphysics, not to science. However, in the last decades the “demarcation problem” assumed new relevance in the debate within the philosophy of science . The development of contemporary theoretical physics, with assertions that often go beyond the empirical investigation regime, forced theorists to question the role of falsification as a criterion of demarcation . This has led to the development of new approaches to rethink the border between science and pseudoscience, in a debate that seems to have entered today in its critical phase.
Contemporary theoretical physics makes a real trespassing of science in the field of metaphysics, assuming a realm of abstraction as an object of investigation. These are the hypothesis of biocentrism proposed by Robert Lanza, a biotechnologist, together with Bob Berman, an astronomer, and the Omega Point theory proposed by the theoretical physicist Frank Tipler. The choice of studying these two proposals instead of others coming from the vast plethora of conjectures on the reconciliation between science and metaphysical conceptions of afterlife depends on two factors: these are proposals promoted by personalities belonging to the scientific community, well rooted in the academic establishment and not outsiders; these proposals are based on a careful evaluation of the concepts of contemporary theoretical physics and they propose assertions that can be refuted through empirical observations.
Tipler’s Omega Point Theory is inscribed in Western thought and avoids influences of some sort from quantum mysticism. The explicit inspiration of Tipler’s theory comes from Pierre Teilhard de Chardin (1881-1955), a paleontologist, evolutionist and Jesuit theologian, who had some clashes with the Church for his heterodox views. In his book Le Phénomène Humain (1955), Teilhard proposed the Omega Point as the peak of complexity and intelligence, a transcendence (or singularity) being endowed with the same qualities attributed to God and toward which human beings naturally tends. For Teilhard, evolution is not a random process, but a development aimed at increasing complexity and intelligence until the full universe will become filled with intelligence (noosphere), so as to merge with the One. „Fine tuning” implies the existence of a „fine tuner.
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
I can't see interesting physics in a plain (linearly or radially) expanding hydro-ionic wave front, like a "Tsunami" wave. There is NO "vortex"!
However...
If the wave is expanding in a spiral fashion, then there is an effective (albeit not physical ions) TANGENTIAL current, which would generate non-trivial magnetic effects.
The radial retinal excitation does not show, but the above OOcyte "recordings" do. But are they real recordings or not?
One could thus hypothesize the cortex "trying" to form spiral ionic waves, as the ONLY solution in order to generate a magnetic field which it otherwise can't (because there is no ion circuit like electrons). Iow. spirals are the solution to do the "impossible".
Such a spiral wave or (loosely) vortex would account for feelings.
The attached video allegedly shows an OOcyte recording, but at the time of writing it is not clear whether it is a real recording or a simulation (ref.'ed by Vera Maura Fernandes de Lima).
Also attached a similarly looking self-programmed BelousovZhabotinsky simulation.
UPDATE: the Lechleiter video is indeed an original recording, from spiral waves of intracellular Ca2+ release in Xenopus ooctyes. See attached 1992 paper.
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
The existence of "cosmic" or "universal" consciousness (not necessarily the same as in cultural traditions) is plausible due to General Relativity / Gravitational Theory.
Somewhat simplified: the 4 dimensions of spacetime cannot be realized, neither by adding up nor by multiplying (well defined and consistent) 2D physical theory (i.e. the minimal case). Adding up does not yield the required 64 Christoffel symbols connecting curved spacetime with a chosen coordinate system. Multiplying does not yield an unambiguous time dimension or -index.
In standard GRT This problem is evaded by presuming the existence of absolute, idealized 4D spacetime. This is however not proven.
The ONLY way to consistently generate 4D spacetime based on real physical principles, is through a self-referent action of 2D spacetime. More precisely, a realistic action is defined, consistent with the Levi-Civita connection, which both has a trivial and non-trivial case or interpretation. The trivial case is degenerate, the non-trivial case is self-referent.
In other words, idealized 4D (resp. its perceived degrees of freedom) can be realized based on a non-causal, self-referent paradigm. The natural and final implication of a 4D spacetime frame is self-localization. This triad of attributional principles constitutes the characteristic bearing of consciousness, as per the meticulously formulated terminology in the appropriate literature.
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
Of course the (Hydrogen) atom is not "conscious" or "sentient" in any practical sense. It can be shown however to consist, in lay terms, of "elementary wave forms" (synchronized quantum field self-interaction)1,2. The term "self-interaction" has a very specific meaning in quantum physics, which means that the field creates a cascade of different wavelengths. It is also a bifurcative principle ("one becoming many"). The latter is normally inundated by the background noise. A special case is when the ensemble gets synchronized. Then the bifurcation becomes explicit and functional, and a viable structure such as the Hydrogen atom emerges. You can compare it quite well with how in the human voice, a vowel emerges out of the random noise of the voice box3. A prospectively related concept is the geometric origin of primary colors, suggesting that the human perception has eigenstates rooted in quantum physics4.
Secondly, as a model for consciousness it is based on the notion that time and space (spacetime), resp. the 4 dimensions are not fundamental, but constitute an idealized, in a sense fabricated framework5 for knowing stuff (also Farhad Ghaboussi). The "Hydrogen" (mind the quotes) model demonstrates how spacetime itself is an isomorphism of the underlying wave fabric of the quantum field. In other words, the atom is not created in spacetime, but of spacetime, and emerges as a result of the isomorphism. It is therefore causeless, but leads into causality.
Thirdly, the (creation) principle is self-referential because we generically can and must distinguish between the mechanism-in-principle, and the mechanism-in-fact6. It is a sophisticated approach, which was captured by the very specific phrase "the characteristic bearing of consciousness"7. This can thus be extended into "self-reference is the characteristic bearing of consciousness"6.
The phrase "characteristics" here is well chosen7, because consciousness itself has no (physical or other) properties - it is unqualified. More in detail, we can speak of a (latent or expressed) triple-attributional principle or "force" (also: trifarious action) of consciousness, consisting of acausality, self-reference and self-localization, as per the present discussion. The perpetual actualization of this triple-attributional force is the "characteristic bearing of consciousness".
Consciousness is therefore fundamental. All phenomena exist within consciousness, nothing is outside. The complex, biological appearance (in and of fabricated, idealized spacetime) obvious entails senso-motoric faculties, emotionality and cognition. As mentioned, this comes about not through a "hard" quantum-biochemistry interaction, but in a fluid, natural and sovereign setting with complementary teleological and symbiotic trends, favored by the universe at large. What fundamentally distinguishes biological from non-living matter is propensities, i.e. mental tendencies. This is the inner driving force of evolution, not automatic self-organisation.
7. Sarkar, P.R.; 1961; Ananda Sutram.
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
Narasim Ramesh quoted: "Ed Fredkin, a former MIT professor and a friend of Shannon, believes that the laws of nature at its most fundamental level result from a sort of digital information processing--what he calls "digital mechanics," a substrate for quantum mechanics." Excellent quote here to which I can 100% subscribe, based on my own research, many talks with your fellow country man G. Srinivasan (he was 93 then, 5 years ago..), and none other than Louis De Broglie, as well as P.R. Sarkar. Instead of "digital" (which sound computational), we think of a counting principle (note: "Sankhya" = "counting", which G.S. took to another, more fundamental level). De Broglie was a life long advocate for a more central and comprehensive role of the Action Principle of physics (instead of an energy-centric approach, which is externally oriented, i.e. on cognition, gauge theory, Lagrangian dynamics). In his later work he said basically: S/h = -Entropy. In other words, the mere counting of Planck constants in an action is ("sort of..") neg entropic. This is exactly what I argued e.g. in my "Hydrogen" paper, still without being aware of de Broglie's later idea, however in part inspired by Sarkar's mentioning of "bifurcation" at a very fundamental level, and QFT's quantum field self-interaction. The latter in fact is bifurcative under the hood, which was never emphasized but can easily be demonstrated. The bifurcation becomes non-trivial when the self-interaction gets synchronized (as explained). This could be thought of as a modest re-interpretation of the Higgs mechanism, somewhat analogous to the axiom of choice in set-theory. The synchronization brings out a hidden quality which then has a neg-entropic, i.e. organizing effect on otherwise blind matter and energy. Giving mass to particles in only its crudest effect. This bifurcation can indeed be viewed as a counting mechanism. This means that at a very fundamental level, quantum interactions are discrete, that is rather, it shows that fundamental interactions are non-trivial right because they are quantized, instead of quantization implying probability. As for Freeman Dyson's concern: there's no fear of digitizing consciousness. It is a natural, quite physical phenomenon, it is not computational in any way. It's interesting to note here that Sankhya philosophy is considered somewhat materialistic (Sarkar), and therefore they invented a rather abstract, uninvolved concept of Purusa, called "Janya Iishvara", a sort of philosophical catalysts to make the philosophy humanly relatable. It might be the first historic instance of introducing a "Ghost in the Machine" to remedy a good but imperfect philosophical idea.
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
R. Poznanski
" Experts will know how to differentiate between the two concepts "
It's very good to distinguish between the two, but they cannot be separated. Unlike consciousness, biology is emergent, so fundamentally there is no such thing as "quantum-biology" - it introduces no novelty of synthesis.
Of the many quantum principles and phenomena, many you have loosely floated, except the one that could, and in my conviction does intrinsically provide what you are looking for, because it is fundamentally different than all the others, you have not considered.
A common misconception is that "quantum" is identical to "small" - it is not, it means unitary, and the only quantum that exists is the quantum of action (not trivial action, but the physics principle as in the Principle of Least Action). Photons, that is, energy, is not truly quantized - they constitute a mix of action and a continuous frequency.
The difference with biology is that at the quantum level, the noumenal principle becomes discernible because of the relative simplicity. On the complex biological scale, the latter is concealed, and the degree to which it is nevertheless inferred, as you hinted, as a result of teleology, we call "consciousness".
That is not to say that the action (-principle) is noumenal per sé - it is not, because it is commonly not associated with all the aspects of thermodynamics that concern life, only with energy, and only for mathematical convenience. The entropic and neg-entropic aspects which account for the objective manifestation of energy and action are not accounted for.
I propose a triple-aspected action principle, whereby the action is the unique and comprehensive controlling faculty and normative principle of all the three aspects of thermodynamics. For the sake of argument, this "trivarious action" could be thought of as the container encircling or inferring pure, that is, unconditional consciousness. On the level of relatively simple sub-atomic physics, the same is clearly discernible as detailed in my "Hydrogen" paper.
One might add here that in his later and lesser known work, Louis de Broglie proposed a straightforward relation between action and neg-entropy, effectively reducing the phenomenon to a pure counting principle. In other words, there is no speculative Lagrangian dynamics or Yang Mills framework here, which belong to the world of cognition and therefore conceal the noumenal case.
My paper shows in great detail how exactly such a "counting principle" is actualized through a bifurcative self-interation of the quantum field, directly producing highly non-trivial quantum automorphisms constituting the Hydrogen atom.
In other words, if we have a mathematical model of the Hydrogen atom based on what could loosely be called a neg-entopic gauge theory, we effectively have a mathematical model of consciousness. The biological, that is, conditional form is realized through ever evolving senso-motoric coordination, creating "consciousness" as an experiential state, however in a fundamental sense the latter is trivial.
Indeed I insist that biological consciousness is essentially trivial - it is the non-experiential, noumenal state as it has been seized by the "retrospective and possessive I" or intellect, the continuous effort of immobilizing consciousness for the sole purpose of self-perpetuation. Loose the "I", and you loose what we commonly consider "consciousness".
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
Consciousness in the original sense such as suggested on the level of "raw feeling" (R. R. Poznansky ) is still non-dual. Cognition entails an incremental, purpose oriented, localizing "distortion" of that underlying potential. The latter is fundamentally characterized by self-localization (Kastrup, Sarkar) and entails the assumption of (3+1) infinitely extended, physically independent dimensions. It is arguably a somewhat forged, unnatural state but it is effectively self-consistent. That self-consistency is most concisely ascertained and defined by Noether's theorem. Yet it is also shown to be the cause of some fundamental inconsistencies in Quantum Field Theory (Farhad Ghaboussi).
The cognitive "distortion" or conditioning of the non-dual state (of consciousness) evolves gradually, parallel to the mental propensities associated by the individualizing sensory domains, ranging from smell (matter based), to sound (space based). For example, protozoa interacting with food molecules and disposing of waste products have a smell (and perhaps taste) perception, but this can barely considered conscious. Insects and reptiles have subsequent sensory and motor organs, and possess instinctual propensities related to survival and reproduction, but their senses are still not individually operative. Mammals such as cows or monkeys have social feelings, and certainly have an associated cognitive faculty, giving them individual characteristics. Humans finally have full control over sound, through speech, and have abstract propensities such as aesthetical feelings.
It could be argued that with the introduction of speech, self-localization and individuation has reached its apex.
Curiously, the evolution of quantum physics shows a parallel pattern, from the discovery of the Planck Constant as the fundamental physical quantum, to Yang Mills theory as the conceptual framework of (3+1)D field theory.
So therefore, consciousness is not the same as cognition, but is expressed individually only through the evolving cognitive faculty. It could thus be argued that in a general, integrative approach, cognition is a part of consciousness but the latter is definitely not defined by cognition. That explains why computers can beat humans in cognitive tasks, while having no consciousness whatsoever.
Also logically, a primitive or noumenal state of consciousness must exist, because the biological organism as we know it externally, personally, and anatomically is itself a cognizance. Without cognition, the body and any observable states for that matter remain potentialities. Denying the existence of consciousness prior to and independent of the biological phenomenon would be dualistic and must lead to circular and regressive reasoning. Therefore also, although consciousness is not cognition, the latter nevertheless results from an action within and out of consciousness itself - it cannot be attributed to something external, because in the absolute sense there is nothing external.
Yet, rather than suggesting a concept of "pure consciousness", which might be difficult to comprehend, the more tangible approach is to propose that on a fundamental level, matter and consciousness are one and the same. This is fully consistent with modern eastern insights (Sarkar).
The native, internal operative principle of consciousness is triple-attributional: besides self-localization, it is characterized by self-reference and noncausality. This triplet of fundamental characteristics constitutes the comprehensive invariant in a physical paradigm that includes living matter. The triple-attributional matrix and consciousness are only distinguishable for the sake of argument, and retrospectively, from a (more or less) dualistic viewpoint.
The initial creation entails the still non-local macrocosmic elements (material potential, which can roughly be identified by the Gibbs matter phases - actual matter is a cognized phenomenon). Out of that, the individual mind evolves and only then there is a perception of body, brain and senses, in a congenial environment.
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
For second quantization this is the more useful wiki entry:
Especially the part on " Real scalar field " discusses the same as my "Hydrogen" paper. See how the action integral S(ϕ) is based on the Lagrangian ℒ (ϕ). The latter in fact implies a classical free field. The Lagrangian's potential term V(φ) is inconspicuously described as "often taken to be a polynomial or monomial of degree 3".
This is where it becomes fishy, in simplest terms, because it implies a far greater dimensional freedom than is warranted by the actual physics.
Why is this relevant for consciousness research?
Because this is in fact applied gauge theory, and this is practically equivalent to cognition. This was nailed by Emmy Noether, but also by Sarkar.
So here you see that standard model QFT entirely favors cognition, that is, the cognitive gauge.
QFT COULD have solved it when the search for mass acquisition was on. But it didn't, because the required self-interaction term, which is literally added to the free field by sleigh of hand, is ALSO based on the same gauge theory:
See the quartic interaction term λ ϕ4 / 4! .
So in summary, in Standard Model QFT the whole theory, containing the free field and an added quartic term, is lop-sided toward the cognitive paradigm.
This is what I have challenged in my Hydrogen paper. The field I propose is very similar, however is not based on Lagrangian physics, but on quantized (bifurcative) action directly. In other words, it is not derived, which could raise objections, but that's how it is (for physicists: the theory is integrable without need for renormalization).
The Hydrogen atom plus its very accurate mass factorization is shown as an instantaneous isomorphism to prove the existence of the bifurcative field.
Wrt. to consciousness, I propose that the non-Lagrangian (i.e. non- force based) self-interaction accounts for "raw feeling".
Evidence for the latter could come from applying the same principles in neuro science, noting that the transition from quantum to neuro is noumenal.
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
The free field is quantitative and detectable. The bifurcative action implied by the self-interaction is qualitative and hidden, but can become articulated if predicated not solely by a mass term but by an integrative approach or model.
This leads to the rudimentary phenomenal state comprised of 23 = 8 detectable eigenstates.
Vice versa, based on the latter, a highly non-trivial, hidden, qualitative action can be inferred.
However if the approach is overgeneralized by assuming a prefixed mass or momentum, real, underlying actional discipline is indiscernible, and the physics remains business as usual.
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
"The laws of movement and of rest deduced from this principle being precisely the same as those observed in nature, we can admire the application of it to all phenomena. The movement of animals, the vegetative growth of plants... are only its consequences; and the spectacle of the universe becomes so much the grander, so much more beautiful, the worthier of its Author, when one knows that a small number of laws, most wisely established, suffice for all movements."
Pierre Louis Maupertuis (thanks to Irina Mikhailovna Pechonkina for sharing)
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
Since the discovery of Planck's Constant, Quantum Physics has not fundamentally developed further - it only has been more and more molded to the framework of cognition, that is, the spacetime continuum that was borne out of a demand for permanence.
Another route could have been taken, a route not that of knowing, but of feeling. It is telling in that regard that Planck's approach was in the beginning completely heuristical - trying to describe the spectrum of black body radiation by whatever would fit the curve. This ultimately led to the discovery of the smallest unit of action - Planck's Constant, the invariant in all of early Quantum Mechanics (Planck's formula, de Broglie relation, Heisenberg uncertainty).
In modern Quantum Field Theory, the Planck Constant is not that at all prevalent, on the contrary, QFT is based on (3+1)D Lagrangian dynamics, on which the action integral is applied, from which then the field's motions can ideally be calculated.
The latter is however rife with controversy, because the quantization does not at all follow as naturally as one would expect. Strictly speaking there is no such thing as "QFT" without the ungainly proces of renormalization - obviously, of that which was "abnormalized" in the first place. As in QFT, that is practically Yang Mills' spin-inclusive gauge theory, particles can't have mass right because of symmetry requirements, the possibility of symmetry breaking was introduced, based on the quantum field's self-interaction (complementary to the free field), which led to the Higgs mechanism.
As particle masses are part and parcel of the original, "pure" Quantum Mechanics, one could argue that the circle is round after all, now that those masses are actually being accounted for. However this is not the case, and the reason is that the self-interaction was also set up in 4D Lagrangian-aligned style. This is the so called quartic interaction.
This summarizes the theoretical state of affairs of Quantum Physics since about half a century. Since the formulation of the Higgs mechanism in the 1960's (confirmed in 2012), there have been no theoretical breakthroughs anymore.
A different method of mass generation is proposed, not based on (3+1)D Lagrangian dynamics, but on the Planck Constant directly, and on an - arguably - more natural self-interaction which harmonizes directly with early Quantum Mechanics. This is the synchronized bifurcative self-interaction. The approach is demonstrated to predict Hydrogen stability based on integrated mass factorization, without the need to invoke an additional quartic interaction term.
The function of the action in this case is enhanced from a mere mathematical alternative to energy based calculation, to a comprehensive invariant of nature and integrative normative factor or attractor, specifically also controlling a proposed neg-entropic aspect. The latter must be present, as the action-centric system is net non-dissipative.
The neg-entropic aspect is hypothesized to have a "feeling" quality, as in living organisms, in the (Hydrogen) atom obviously rudimentary. The latter however is hypothesized to form a (holarchic) prototype or blueprint for a similar process in more developed structures, eventually also evolving senso-motoric and cognitive capabilities.
Published paper: Article The Hydrogen Atom as an Integrative Eigenstate of the Bifurc...
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
On the question: " But waves are not cognitions. Right? " Waves necessarily imply time, space and causality, that's the domain of cognition.
On a more technical note I might add that the 3+1 dimensions of spacetime are commonly considered to imply 3+1 independent physical degrees of freedom. Moreover, the Langrangian formalisms both in GR and QFT show that time and space are considered on equal footing.
This is very questionable, as is shown in great detail (e.g.) by Farhad Ghaboussi. Physics demonstrably only has 2 independent degrees of freedom (2DF). This is the (main) cause of (generally accepted) controversy (at least) in QFT. I myself found the same, albeit from a different angle.
So in that sense I fully agree with Farhad, only we differ(ed) on the significance of the (3+1)D format, which is real in our everyday interactions. From a rigorous mathematical + physical point of view, Farhad dismisses the latter as a completely unfounded "cinematic projection".
My view is that (3+1)D is in itself consistent for what it is. The latter goes back to your question, namely, what we call "cognition" is consciousness' native capacity to make sense of 2DF physics, in terms of a (3+1)D framework. This is the "Knowing Principle" ("Jina Purusa") identified by Sarkar, as well as the gist of Noether's Theorem, as well as of gauge theory.
Therefore, in summary we could say that the miscalculation of modern physics is to consider the cognitive format as ontological.
In my "Hydrogen" paper I show how the other aspect of consciousness, the Action Principle, is the real integrative invariant or comprehensive normative faculty. It's all in great detail on my RG project page and in the paper. "Hydrogen" here is merely a relatable placeholder for the rudimentary, stable manifestation of quantum field's self-interaction.
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
I've plotted the (latest) "GeoColor" RGB gamut (or -space) in the CIA diagram, so you can see that it nicely corresponds with the modern, wide RGB color space (Rec. 2020, dating from 2012).
So what's the point wrt. consciousness?
The (relative) angles, if the RGB / CMY wavelengths are proportionally plotted against an angular sweep of 180°, accurately correspond to cardinal platonic angles (P1 -- P2, etc.. in the graphic).
The latter register the proposed gauge symmetries for the "feeling" and "cognitive" aspects of consciousness. The latter is not speculative at all, this is basic gauge theory. The "feeling gauge" is proposed to be associated with neg-entropy.
So here we have direct visible evidence of a mathematical / physics model of consciousness.
Moreover, the same symmetries are also prevalent in my quantum-realistic Hydrogen model. In terms of quantum physics, the geometric angles correspond to the action as momentum over an angular displacement, of electrons (i.e. matter waves) changing energy levels.
It suggests that the visual cortex, resp. it's related structures for integrative conscious perception, reproduce this same phenomenon.
See also the (non-academic) demo: http://science.trigunamedia.com/rainbow-weaver/
ps. the CIA diagram suggests that the wider the RGB gamut (triangle) the more saturated CMY colors can be generated.
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
Honestly I never thought that the uncertainty principle was a measurement (technological precision) or observer (principal) effect.
E.g. wiki: "Thus, the uncertainty principle actually states a fundamental property of quantum systems and is not a statement about the observational success of current technology ".
Rather, it simply states that action (as in the Principle of Least Action) is a more fundamental invariant in nature than energy: ΔE Δt = ħ / 2. Also this formulation is a rudimentary form of the action Lagrangian, similarly to E = h·f i.e. h = E / f = E·tP. I.e. the 2 are virtually identical.
You can test Heisenberg uncertainty at home with a laser pen + slit made from 2 razor blades - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQJm-U16-Jg
Controversy started with Schrödinger and later with Yang Mills theory, because they both impose that the (3+1)D causal gauge is ontological (YM theory is essentially QED also including intrinsic spin). This caused resp. mystification (probability) and plain inconsistencies (renormalization penalty) in quantum physics.
A consistently 2DF (Planck) action-centric approach doesn't have these issues, and moreover, if it includes the phenomenon of life at a fundamental level (quantum neg-entropy), it practically is a mathematical / physical model of consciousness.
Btw. with a little imagination one could say that the hard problem of consciousness and the Schrödinger / Yang Mills controversy are both rooted in the same fundamental misconception: considering cognition as ontological. In this same vein R. R. Poznansky correctly insists that consciousness ≠ cognition. The latter would be a good lesson for quantum physicists as well.
Psychologically, nót considering cognition as ontological comes down to recognizing a noumenal, non- or pre-experiential (quantum) state, which is the driving force of experientiality ("raw feelings" - Yogic science, Poznanski) resp. actual experience (when cognition kicks in).
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
Well known features of Penrose tiling are it's dual ("fat and skinny diamonds") components, it's pentagonal seed form, and it's aperiodicity, making it a quasi crystal.
A lesser known property concerns the spacing of the tiles, revealing a hidden order referred to as quasi-periodicity, found by Robert Ammann. This pattern of "Ammann lines" forms a so called Rabbit Sequence. There are 5 such sequences found in the (Penrose) pentagonal grid.
This led Steinhard and Levine, who developed a computer model of 3D quasi crystals, to understand the tenet of it's (computed) diffraction pattern: periodicity is not needed to form regular, distinct diffraction dots.
How is this relevant wrt. the quantum field's self-interaction, at least as a metaphor or visualization?
It was found by myself that the common QFT "bulk" self-interaction (i.e. non-linear synthesis) contains at least one highly non-trivial harmonic or synchronized subset, combining a number of features that allow it to manifest itself in the form of a perpetual, (3+1)D resonance, that is, a localized matter wave (in additive synthesis). In other words, the integrative matter wave is but an isomorphism of the quantum field's ground state itself.
The apparent transformation that brings up the isomorphism is a Fourier transform. The latter is not "done by" some little calculating devil, it is implied in and part of the isomorphism. Now, the spectrum series produced by the Fourier is a Rabbit Sequence, that is, exactly the same pattern as found in the Penrose spacing. This obviously makes Penrose tiling an adequate analogy of the proposed quantum field's synchronized (bifurcative) self-interaction.
Furthermore, the diffraction pattern, integrating the 3D quasi-crystal, found by Steinhard and Levine illustrates the Hydrogen atom implied by the localized matter wave.
Lastly, or better, in the first place, the surfaces of the "fat" and "skinny" Penrose tiles are in Golden Ratio proportion, which is exactly the bifurcation ratio that produces the synchronization.
ref.'s
"The Infinite Pattern That Never Repeats" by YouTuber Veritasium (2020) - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=48sCx-wBs34&t=2s
"Impossible Crystals - Quasi crystals started out as a game. But one day the game became real" by Hans C. von Baeyer (1990) - http://www.physics.rutgers.edu/~morozov/406/Handout1.pdf
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
physically:
  • energy and action as fundamental invariants in nature, as final resp. formal normative principles guiding
  • a (rudimentary or complex) entropic + neg-entropic (and therefore net non-dissipative) process, with
  • an advanced, central role of the action principle, and a relatively secondary role of energy, based on
  • 2DF bifurcative self-interaction (harmonic subset of standard self-interaction), rather than on standard (3+1)D Lagrangian dynamics, enabling
  • discrete (3+1)D dimensional isomorphisms,
physically / philosophically:
  • Goldstone's as well as the Vedic (etc..) argument: "The ground state is not unique",
philosophically / psychologically:
  • a distinction between an unconditional or noumenal state, and a conditional or phenomenal state, while the latter constitutes
  • a physical potential and an experiential potential, together constituting
  • conscious experience as the reflection of the noumenal in a limited sphere.
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
Main stream physicists, typically lacking the creativity to think constructively about paradigm shifting concepts and theories, are also typically the first to play the evidence card when such theories surface.
Ironically, that same main stream physics established that ultimately evidence breaks down. We're not talking about probability, as famously illustrated by Schrödinger's cat, which is still controversial, but about Heisenberg uncertainty. There's nothing controversial about the latter - it can be demonstrated with household equipment (done by myself: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQJm-U16-Jg).
Heisenberg showed that at fundamental scales, the principles that constitute objective reality break down. It's formulation is utterly simple: ∆ x ∆ p = ћ / 2. In other words, there exists no such thing as a particle at a specific point in time and space.
What's however remarkable about uncertainty, is that the Action Principle (as in the Principle of Least Action) remains unaffected. In other words, at scales where everyday reality breaks down, the action prevails.
So therefore it makes a lot of sense that a more complete theory of physical reality should be fundamentally based on action, and not on time, space and causality, that is, the jurisdiction of energy.
Cynically, as correctly remarked by mainstream scientist Wolfgang Konle, "most people cannot include the rather abstract concept of action in their terminology". In other words, it is very difficult to convince non-physicists, let alone the general audience, that the fundamental limitation of physics lies not in physics per sé, but in the prevailing paradigm, giving the mainstream an unfair advantage.
This situation has been practically the status quo since the days of the Copenhagen Interpretation (1920's), which by convention established that quantum physics is probabilistic, and that there is no underlying, deterministic reality.
Because of this, and its sheep-like temple servants, we're stuck with an unsatisfactory and ultimately unsuccessful paradigm, "describing things that are real, in terms of things that are not real" (G. 't Hooft - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r0tMVN_9-x4&t=5s).
As one can surmise from merely the formulation of Heisenberg uncertainty, but also from the consistent recurrence of the action, that is, it's unit the Planck Constant, in all the early, non-controversial principles of Quantum Physics (e.g. p = h / λ ; E = h.f ) progress can only be made through an action-centric approach. This was noted already by de Broglie in his Nobel winning 1924 paper: “Nevertheless, action is a very abstract notion, and as a consequence of much reflection on light quanta and the photoelectric effect, we have returned to statements on energy as fundamental, and ceased to question why action plays a large role in so many issues”.
A more contemporary proponent of the action principle in physics and other sciences was the Indian philosopher P.R. Sarkar, who, in the somewhat didactic form of "microvita theory", in an auspicious series of 40 discourses, outlined in great detail a vastly broader application of the Action Principle, especially to include life.
Therefore, a mathematical model of consciousness, as well as it's physics implications, cannot else but be based on a much more central role and broadest application of the Action Principle. This alone has the potential to push physics, and all of science, beyond the Copenhagen dogma that has dominated thinking about reality for just about a century.
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
Standard QM:
  • Red: de Broglie phase wave p = h / λ
  • Violet: particle phenomenon E = hf
Self-interaction:
  • Blue: "sync wave" - "k=0" zero wave number, infinite wavelength issued by the quantum field's (Golden Ratio) synchronized bifurcative self-interaction; represents the noumenal- or ground state.
Rudimentary perception:
  • The external mode is self-evidently cognitive, as it is associated with free photons, i.e. the EM gauge (Noether)
  • The internal mode is associated with raw feeling / proto-propensities as it represents the noumenal- or ground state.
Evolved perception:
  • The external mode is associated with complex, integrative senso-motoric interaction
  • Sub-molecular, sub-cellular, cellular, organic etc.. structure evolves in such a way that the noumenal state is integrally preserved - this is a tautology
  • Experience or experientiality is therefore the reflection of the unchanging, noumenal state, in the ever changing material world (different from holistic causation).
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
The role of raw feelings ("Raw feelings=/=> physiological feelings/ emotions" - R. R. Poznansky ) is an interesting point and may help a lot to clarify at least biological / individual consciousness.
Just for the record, I used the term "proto-propensities" which are dormant in matter but not necessarily "crude" like physiological feelings / emotions such as in reptiles.
One question is, do cognitive and emotional capabilities evolve hand-in-hand?
Considering my approach to the hard problem (the noumenal state is the comprehensive invariant in a physical universe that includes life, is tautologically experiential and can mathematically be modeled), the function of "raw feelings" resp. "proto-propensities" here psychologically identifies the point or boundary condition where neg-entropy (i.e. life) is introduced as a quintessential factor.
From this point on, one could say that the hard "problem" itself has evolved to its current, human form.
I'm still wondering though how one would estimate the role of evolved cognition in the hard problem. Obviously without it, the hard problem could not be formulated. Yet, from a purely mathematical / physics viewpoint it can very well be identified on a fundamental (proto-) level. This is what my "Hydrogen" paper is all about (btw. have you read it?).
In other words, perhaps the classical hard problem simply describes the experiential form of the noumenal state (as described above), which mathematically can rather easily be described on the level of proto-propensities.
" But it will surely need some more steps to substantiate this statement scientifically".
Specifically this would involve how to go from a relatively easy "proto-hard-problem" to the hard, evolved, classical hard problem. No need to mention that my "Hydrogen" paper doesn't cover that, although it makes some allusions by means of P.R. Sarkar's microvita theory in the discussion part.
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
Radin's experiment, although we assume that technically it is performed correctly, and also he makes no actual claims re. any magical "mechanism" at work, still suffers from a number of interpretational biases. Some are related to the so called "observer effect" as discussed.
But also the nature of the non-classical state, i.e. the probabilistic wave function is but an interpretation, albeit a stubborn one, presented by Radin as a fait accompli. Fact is that self-interference, irrespective of the double slits, can only happen if there is directional ambiguity, due to the photon source, perhaps due to Heisenberg uncertainty. At the same time, the impact on the photo screen is nevertheless classical.
What the non-classical case or phase really shows, is that the directional discrepancy is truly a superposition of all possible directions (at least in that general direction, or even spherically). This of course is captured by the Feynman path integral. Wrt. to Radin's experiment, it means that a hypothesized "observer effect" not necessarily collapses the wave function per sé, but actually solves the path integral.
This is significant, because the process of the latter involves a number of operations (Delta Function normalization, non-linearity, integration) which are also found in the brain. Popularly hypothesized, the brain is an active, concentrated, explicit "Path Integral Solver".
To ask "what ultimately causes the Path Integral to be solved" is not a good question - it is not "caused", it is merely the flip side of the unconditional state that constitutes the conditional state. The nice thing about a quantum experiment is that we can see an afterglow of the "flipping moment", such as the interference pattern of a double slit experiment.
We can however ask, if there is no cause, then "what universally and invariantly characterizes the potential of the unconditional to become conditional?". This is: a-causality, self-reference and self-localization. This is what occurs explicitly during a tightly controlled quantum experiment, and quite surreptitiously all the time, and this we call the characteristic bearing of, and which is consciousness.
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
Consciousness only facilitates its immanent Operative Principle. It is the latter that makes everything happen in the world of time, place and causality.
For example, "I see a rose". "I" is reflective, "see" is interactive, and "a rose" is substantiative. Now, if the rose withers, does consciousness do that? No the Operative Principle does it: "I see a withered rose". "I" is reflective, "see" is interactive, and "a withered rose" is substantiative. Consciousness is the invariant amidst the operative triangle.
Instinct and intellect are therefore biochemical automatisms. This does however not mean that consciousness is useless, on the contrary. Through consciousness, a simple creature has simple feelings of pain and pleasure, and evolves accordingly in a style of sub-ordinate co-operation with it's surroundings. Pleasure (i.e. not indulgence) means greater proximity to consciousness. One could think of it as the hidden or internal aspect of Darwinism.
In humans, the same (ideally) evolves towards a feeling of morality. Therefore, morality (wrt. self and others) is the basic requirement of evolution in a style of co-ordinate co-operation. One could say it is an expression of pinnacled intellect. Without moral sensibility, the mind remains locked up in endless cycles of cause and effect, that is, in the clutch of the operative forces.
So consciousness does not imply that we have free will in the world of cause and effect, but that we can choose to move beyond it. Our evolved intellect then has control over relatively simpler processes, but that itself is not free will, it is the result of past choices.
And so, the fact that living beings have consciousness is a tautology, for it was through consciousness that they came into existence in the first place.
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
It is true that there's no creation and perception without duality, but duality itself belongs to the world of effects - it is not a primary causal factor.
Here lies a crucial difference between the more static Chinese Cosmology, and the more advanced, dynamic Vedic concept. The latter may seem to be based on duality, such as Purusa / Prakriti, or in terms of psycho-spiritual tokens, Shiva vs. Shakti, but they are nót polar opposites. For example:
  • Shakti is the force of Shiva, so Shiva can exist without Shakti, but not vice versa;
  • Brahma is the composite of Shiva and Shakti. Brahma is Consciousness, but Shiva is also Consciousness. So this is a profound self-referential idea;
  • Prakriti is the efficient cause, but Purusa is both the material and the efficient cause
So all these examples are not polar opposites, like Yin vs. Yang. It is not the duality, but the broken symmetry that forms the bridge to science as we know it. This was most concisely captured by Jeffrey Goldstone by his easily overlooked phrase: "The ground state is not unique". One could add, somewhat superfluously, "... yet it is still the ground state".
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
A comment by Eugene Veniaminovich Lutsenko (sept. 12, 2020)
In the era of the mechanistic worldview, it was thought that consciousness is something like a complex clockwork mechanism and is fully described by the laws of mechanics. Only the gears in the human body are smaller in size than in a watch and there are more of them than in a watch. In the era of the chemical worldview, it was thought that consciousness was explained by chemical processes. We studied brain chemistry and thought it would explain everything. In the era of the dominance of the biological worldview, it was thought that consciousness is explained by biological processes. We studied organic chemistry of the body and brain and thought that this would explain everything. In the era of great discoveries related to electric fields, they began to study the electrical and brain signals (electroencephalograms - EEG) and began to think that this would explain everything. Then came information theory and computer technology, as well as artificial intelligence systems. This led to the study of information processes in the human body. It was hoped that the human body and brain are arranged roughly like a computer and this will explain consciousness. Then began the era of quantum physics with its wave functions, entangled States, the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paradox (EPR), and this gave rise to a whole wave of research on the quantum nature of consciousness. This gave rise to hopes that consciousness has a quantum nature and this will explain the phenomenon of consciousness. But these are all false hopes. The boys are hopeful.
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
Atoms are hypothesized to maintain inner equilibium in a way which is not (only) based on classical / conventional energy-centric principlies (as in standard quantum mechanics), but on a much broader interpretation / application of the action principle.
The latter is proposed as providing a quantum-realistic solution for Hydrogen stability.
It's not a great step then, that photon exchange is non-trivial beyond standard physics, however to compare that with "information exchange" in developed entities seems a bit exaggerated.
"Rehabilitation" and a much broader use of the action principle was promoted and life long searched for by Louis de Broglie. He was not alone in his quest. E.g. physicist Jennifer Coopersmith wrote the book "The Lazy Universe" dedicated to the action principle. P.R. Sarkar introduced "microvita" as the smallest instances of action in the vastly bigger context of life, psychology and evolution, with keen and detailed attention to mathematical and physics aspects.
In summary, (Hydrogen) atoms are proposed to have subtler qualities than meets the eye, which may account for, and in fact be pivotal for the formation of complexity. To that extend Javad Fardaei's general intuition regarding (Hydrogen) atoms is very well taken, however to say that they are "smart" is fairy-tale.
Propensities are the non-trivial presence of underlying quantum reality in matter, starting with raw feelings (~R. R. Poznansky). Developed individual awareness or conscious perception then is the reflection of propensities in a fabricated (3+1)D continuum (~Farhad Ghaboussi ).
Intellect is by definition sub-ordinate to consciousness and quantum reality. Therefore intellectual discussions about the latter, without regard for the active engagement as cultivated in the expert consciousness traditions, is a waste of time - like a monkey trying to learn mathematics by hoarding banana's.
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
The brain is a biological machine and is just an idea or potentiality in and of consciousness.
The formation of conditional states is characterized by a-causality, self-reference and self-localisation.
Specifically associated with a biological machine, conditional states are also experiential states.
(note: association with the brain is not observation of the brain - the latter is anatomy class)
In other words, experientiality, or simply mind, is the (non-trivial) association of conditional consciousness with the brain, but is not caused by, or emerging from the brain.
It is hypothesized that this association in physics terms is the (neuro-scientific correlate of a) matter wave - it is a form of (non-commutative, isomorphic) resonance.
ps. It looks like Michelangelo had some idea about the (wave) geometry that synchronizes the quantum field's self-interaction. Note that Albert van der Schoot in his PhD thesis proved that Golden Ratio as an aesthetic principle was an invention of the Romantic Era, not of ancient times.
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
In a personal conversation with Farhad Ghaboussi (who currently can't do much online), Farhad summarized the issues with traditional (3+1)D physics, he's been working on for a long time. The following essential elements are logically and mathematically unsubstantiated:
  1. localization
  2. straightness / flatness
  3. absolute rest frame or -principle
  4. infinity
  5. 0-dimensionality ("point-ness")
So the question is, if there is no logical and mathematical foundation for these components that make up our idea of (3+1)D reality, than what is the latter? This question was never addressed, let alone answered in science. It's existence and consistency is simply assumed.
Here we have a nice learning moment for those who pride themselves in marginalizing or even ridiculing what I summarize here as "Vedic science and tradition": it turns out that the latter cultivates our intuitional understanding of that which underlies (3+1)D reality, exactly on the points where science fails.
With Farhad's above summary, we can be accurate: (as it seems) apart from (2) "straightness" and (5) "0-dimensionality", the other components are precisely identified and amply contextualized as characteristics or aspects of (unconditional resp. conditional) consciousness.
Skipping the original Sanskrit terminology and aphorisms, let's just say that (1) (self-) localization is identified as a special instance of (4) infinity through a process of self-reference, constituting the (3) rest frame condition, and this process itself is, and is the characteristic bearing of consciousness.
This "phenomenon", and it's precise, logical nature, are unknown in science. No need to say that this has nothing whatsoever to do with "Hindu belief" but is an advanced science, albeit of a different - more intuitional and less (externally) empirical nature than we are accustomed to.
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
My 2016 video shows a rough approach to Hydrogen stability based on the ("my") TAM (Triple Attributional Matrix, which is philosophically identical to consciousness - see links below).
The TAM here is represented through the QFT groundstate, and the Hydrogen eigenstates are its (mathematically) transformed state. The term "isomorphism" is not used here.
My earliest explicit and topical mentioning of the term "isomorphism" in my consciousness project is in the update from March 09, 2020: "This is the 4C / TAM model (Four Causes / Triple Attributional Matrix). It not only seemlessly includes QFT, from where particles and atoms can be modeled (through known matrix-spinor isomorphisms - this is the QFT model of synchronized bifurcative symmetry breaking)".
However it's not the use of the word which is important, it is the concept. As hinted already in above quote, the use is essentially the same as in quantum physics. Since then I've used the term / concept at least 7 times more, that is, in this project.
If the intimate relation between consciousness and isomorphism is not already obvious from the context, more specifically I'm showing how the characteristics of consciousness (a-causality, self-reference, self-localisation), are mathematically represented through resp. unitariness (Plancherel), resonance (revised matter wave) and finite volumetrization (2DF/(3+1)D transform). The latter 3 as a whole, centered on the matter wave, is an isomorphism of the quantum field's bifurcative self-interaction.
As shown, the latter was roughly explored in the 2016 video, and has been worked out in great detail in my recently published paper.
"Hydrogen subspace interactions" (2016) - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0AzU8v0eLLM
"TAM = Consciousness" - (quote): "As long as the primordial triangle remains balanced, non-attributional consciousness remains its original identity"
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
My fellow country man and physics Nobelist Gerard 't Hooft said: "Quantum Physics describes things that are real in terms of things that are not real. A theory that describes things as they really are is more likely to be true and successful. We cannot say that Quantum Physics is wrong, but our interpretation is unsatisfactory".
So, how can the wave equation be correct, and our interpretation of it is not?
Louis de Broglie gave a very clear hint in his famous 1924 paper (in short): "due to so much focus on energy effects, we have forgotten about the importance of the action principle". I'm reminding that the Planck Constant h has the unit of action (Js or kg m2 /s), and thus the "ultimate unit or quantum", is the quantum of action.
The wave equation however is a Hamiltonian, and therefore an energy phenomenon. This is problematic because we think of the wave equation as an ontological state, whereas the point of de Broglie is that energy states are not ontological.
Now the point is not that the action principle is ontological all on its own, this is a bit inaccurate ("ontology" / "epistemology" don't entirely apply here), but that the action has a far greater say in things than suggested by the wave equation. We could call this, moving from an energy-centric bias in Quantum Physics, toward an action-centric approach.
The practical consequence is that (over) generalizations are abandoned, which obscure hidden potentialities of the quantum field. For example, in the de Broglie relation we decompose the momentum (which is energy-centric), and in QFT we abandon the quartic interaction, which is also energy-centric.
This can be done without fundamentally changing QM resp. QFT, but in the latter case it requires quite a bit of rehashing of the field's self-interaction. Exactly the latter is the basis of the action-centric Hydrogen model in my recently published paper.
In terms of the Copenhagen Interpretation, it means that an observer state is no longer isolated from the quantum phenomenon's (more or less) ontological state. They keep forming a harmonically resonant unity which among others has qualities that are associated with neg-entropic process, that is, with life and conscious perception. Roman Poznanski for example suggests that this harmonic resonance is the nature and essence of teleonomy. It applies to quantum systems as fundamental as the matter wave itself.
-
The Flaws of Quantum Mechanics | Full Interview | Gerard 't Hooft https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r0tMVN_9-x4&t=5s
The Hydrogen Atom as an Integrative Eigenstate of the Bifurcating Quantum Field pc/laptop: https://www.thegms.co/publications/archives/mobile: http://science.trigunamedia.com/microvit-ra-20080202.pdf
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
This peer reviewed paper was recently published by open access journal The Gazette of Medical Sciences.
Citing from the paper:
  • The present paper proposes an interpretation of quantum mechanics whereby the matter wave and its eigenstates are formed through an underlying, bifurcative self-interaction of the quantum field.
  • Subsequently it will be shown that based on the latter the proton-to-electron mass ratio can accurately be calculated.
  • The aim of the present work is to introduce an approach to Hydrogen stability with a decisively more central role for the dimension of action.
  • Especially the widespread fractal attractor Golden Ratio (closely related to the Fibonacci numbers) turns out to elicit a number of unique and potentially significant features in the bifurcating quantum field
  • The proton-to-electron mass ratio thus captures and validates the complexity of the bifurcative self-interaction or -wave function in a single quantum mechanical number.
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
Reply to Javad Fardaei
" To my understanding definition of infinity is relative "
This is actually a good point. I guess a mathematician has his own ideas, here we're interested in how absolute or relative is conscious perception. It also very closely relates to Farhad Ghaboussi's thesis about independent dimensions or degrees of freedom.
For example we see an apple. Some time later, somewhere else, we see a banana. So each instance of perception by definition comes with its own time and space, and also by definition this is finite.
What happens next, is that we ourselves, in our mind, place the apple and the banana in one single, overarching (3+1)D continuum. That's where things get tricky. The reason why we do that, is perhaps some survivalist coping mechanism, giving a sense of control. The universe has no idea about it, and does not entertain and not need such a continuum at all.
It gets still more tricky when Euclid formalized our (3+1)D habit. And finally, it got most tricky - and that's also your point - when we extrapolated our continuum into the infinite.
So why is this tricky? Let's first ascertain that (3+1)D is not some drug-induced hallucination. Although it is logically, mathematically and physically unfounded (Farhad), it is functional - it allows us to work, travel and communicate. Let's call it trans-finite reality, in between the logically and physically well-founded finite states, and the completely abstract, infinite extrapolation. That's why I kept insisting that Farhad does not promote his 2DF thesis on the back of marginalizing human experience - then it simply becomes too alienating to relate to.
(3+1)D also allows us to do science, but only up until the point where the Universe connects the apple and the banana in its own way. And that's quantum mechanics. There things went from merely tricky to plain wrong. Because it doesn't work. It literally de-normalizes nature. Where Euclid merely cemented our (3+1)D survilalist (and teleological - R. R. Poznansky) habit into a static dimensional gridwork, it was my brilliant fellow country man Gerard 't Hooft who cemented it down to the quantum level, not by solving it, but by proving that quantum physics (i.e. Yang Mills theory) can be re-normalized. In other words, 't Hooft showed us how to pay for our sin of super-imposing our village strategy on the universe and thus robbing it of its own way of putting things together. For that he was rewarded with the 1999 Nobel price.
Farhad suggests that we strictly adhere to 2DF physics, as the way how nature really works. It is hypothesized that any (simple or complex) 2DF structure is therefore an (apparent) transformation or isomorphism of underlying quantum reality, and therefore effectively a mathematical model of consciousness.
The simplest of such a structure is the Hydrogen atom. To Javad: this does NOT show that atoms are "smart", but it DOES show why you think they are smart: because they can be understood as directly representing the quantum reality of the universe, uncontaminated (not de-normalized) by over-zealous, over-generalized modern physics.
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
This is a very rudimentary evaluation / application of the quantum field's bifurcative self-interaction, showing a potential well and spin-orbital states evolving from an apprx. base ϕ phase cycle bifurcation. Not shown are the volumetric expansion, the eigenstates and the actual spin-orbital coupling models (spinors).
So what's the deal with "bifurcative self-interaction" and what does it have to do with a mathematical model of consciousness?
Normally, if you do a spectrum analysis it shows you which frequencies (or wave numbers) added up to form the composite signal. If, however you do a spectrum analysis on a self-interaction, that is, non-linearly interacting waves, you don't see the original frequencies. That is a different spectrum, because it is a different medium. Now, if the wave packet is such that it can form non-trivial, that is, stable and thus perpetual volumetric automorphisms, we say it is synchronized. In that case, the (linear and non-linear) media are implied in the waves or resonance. Also in that case, the (anyway) bifurcative character of the transformation is most visible and highly non-trivial. The Hydrogen atom is proposed to constitute exactly such wave system - it is a stable, perpetual, self-interactive state or resonance in and of the quantum field, whereby the field does not even change in the absolute sense. This is in agreement with Goldstone’s argument that "the ground state is not unique". In other words, the quantum field generates Hydrogen atoms "at no cost" and "out of nothing". Therefore we say, with respect to physics, that the Hydrogen atom represents the quantum field's characteristics of a-causality (unitaryness), self-reference (resonance) and self-localisation (quantization). As we learn from 2DF physics, it comes itself with finite locality - it is not a manifestation in a pre-existing (3+1)D cosmic theatre - the latter is just a cognitive convenience. These same characteristics are also proposed as the characteristic bearing of consciousness - it's the same principle, once in a more psychological, once in a more physical context.
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
You can take Einstein's relativistic energy-momentum equation and substitute wave function operators for the resp. physical terms. Then you get the correct relativistic wave equation, called the Klein-Gordon equation. Only it contains no spin. Paul Dirac also took Einstein's equation* but rewrote it a bit, somehow hoping to get to a relativistic theory of the (moving) electron, including spin. He started by splitting up the momentum term into 3 different, independent dimensions. This at first gave him 4 terms - 3 momentum (x,y,z) and 1 mass. For simple algebraic reasons it needed to be squared, giving not less than 16 (cross) product terms. How to solve this? This was Dirac's brilliant mathematical move: he realized that if each term represents a (2x2) matrix, then all the 12 cross-terms would cancel out. Those matrices were actually Pauli matrices, signifying: spin! Thus what seemed a bug turned out to be a feature: it means that spin is an intrinsic requirement of the relativistic theory of the electron. What came out of this is the famous Dirac equation, which accurately predicts Hydrogen states including the elusive fine structure. The problem was, what Dirac in fact has done is demonstrating how you can mathematically distribute spin, which by itself is correctly represented as a Pauli matrix, over 3 (+1) independent physical dimensions. In physics terms this is a wrong kind of thinking. The two degrees of freedom of spin, plus the 2 degrees of freedom of the Einstein equation, together do NOT miraculously add up to produce 3+1 independent physical degrees of freedom. Therefore Dirac's purely mathematical, 3+1 D relativistic electron theory, resp. it's bi-spinor isomosphism, does not represent a physical reality. A spinor that correctly represents 2 degrees of freedom, and 2 + 2 components, is a dual spinor, not a bi-spinor. Note that the spinor is a 3D model - the 3rd. axis does not imply an extra independent degree of freedom - it is just a visualization. The dual-spinor relativistic electron is mathematically described through a bifurcative transform, which is a purely abstract (geometrical) representation of the quantum field's synchronized (Higgs-like) self-interaction. Therefore the bifurcative self-interaction of the quantum field is a realistic approach to a relativistic theory of the electron.
* The derivation of the Dirac equation is obviously simplified here
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
Consciousness and spirituality are inherently experiential processes*. The definition of “spirituality” ranges from (1) personal opinions regarding the meaning of life and being part of something greater, through (2) experiences of transcendental states and oneness, to (3) beliefs regarding the existence of spirit, life after death, reincarnation, angels and guides, and some sort of omnipresent infinite intelligence and power. Academic psychology has typically taken a materialistic view toward consciousness and spirituality; both are interpreted as neurobiological processes shaped by genetics and developmental and cultural factors.
Contemporary consciousness research provides emerging proof-of-concept evidence suggesting that (1) mind is separate from brain, (2) spirit and soul are comparable to energy and information that persist in the vacuum of space*, (3) people can receive intuitive information that is accurate and useful in their individual and collective lives, and (4) physical and psychological health can be fostered by active loving spiritual processes. The evidence points toward the emergence of a postmaterialist paradigm in psychology and science in general.
-
Note:
  • "Consciousness and spirituality are inherently experiential processes ", and
  • "spirit and soul are comparable to energy and information that persist in the vacuum of space "
seems somewhat contradictory.
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
The matter wave constitutes the resonant state mixing action and energy. It consists of an intrinsic and an orbital spin component, resonant in a potential well.
In the unitary or prototype Hydrogen picture, used to calculate the sum total mass synthesis, we consider
  • 2 electrons (spin up and down) = full s sub-shell, and
  • 3 (x,y,z) orbitals constituting the full p sub-shell as a placeholder for the dimensionalization (azimuthal principle).
Each of the 3 (rate 1) spins resonates non-linearly with the (rate 2) quadratic potential well, analogous to calculating the surface of a torus. It is a physical-, rather than a self-interaction. This creates resp. sum (rate 3) and difference (0) Fourier- (or bifurcation) terms.
The rate 3 Fourier term forms the contributing mass factor for that matter wave's spin component. With a total of 3 spin components and 3 orbitals in the full p-shell, the sum total mass contribution of the resonance is 3 (3 + 3 + 3) = 33.
In the unitary model there is no physical nucleus, only a potential- or nuclear well. Hence the integral resonance is essentially a 3D isomorphism of the bifurcation itself. In standard QM, the 33 resonant mass factor is effectively attributed to the nucleus.
In that case, the QFT electroweak interaction can be taken into account. The resonance can itself be modeled explicitly as a base-V3 bifurcation, obviously also yielding the rate 3 term. Base V3 bifurcation has been shown to relate closely to the electroweak (W, Z, H) masses and coupling factors.
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
The colloquial "quantum number" is actually a set of quantum numbers defining the sum total state of a quantum system. It is best known for its first use to describe the orbiting electron or matter wave. The electron quantum number consists of:
  1. Principal QN = shell nr. or energy level n = 1.. 8
  2. Azimuthal QN = subshell n,p,d,f... typically p = x,y, z orientations
  3. Magnetic QN = "fine structure" - subtle differences in energies
  4. Spin QN = intrinsic spin up or down
QN(1) is described by the de Broglie relation (trad. matter wave). QN(1..3) by the Schrödinger wave equation, and QN(1..4) by the relativistic Dirac equation. QN (1) and (2) we learn in high school chemistry.
This is almost "classical" Quantum Mechanics. Quantum Field Theory generalizes QM with electrodynamics in the Yang Mills symmetry framework, (arguably) culminating in the Higgs mechanism, giving mass to particles.
If one slams all piano keys at once, it could be argued that this also includes many hidden harmonies. This is what the standard Higgs mechanism is like. Likewise it is hypothesized that a (synchronized) bifurcative self-interaction (i.e. non-linear) lies hidden in the Higgs mechanism. This not only gives mass to particles, but also facilitates quantum structure. The question what actually brings it out is somewhat like the "Axiom of Choice" in set theory. The "selection mechanism" in this case is symmetry, and the structure created by symmetry is the Hydrogen energy levels or eigenstates, and on a more basic level the matter wave to begin with.
As shown before, it is hypothesized that the proton-electron mass ratio can be predicted based on the proposed bifurcative prototype Hydrogen (sub) structure. The distinction between resp. the Action- and Energy (centric) bifurcations, each having a space / geometric and a time / cyclic aspect, yields 4 bifurcation "chambers" which can non-trivially be mapped with the Aristotelian 4 Causes.
Furthermore, pertaining to the current subject, the resp. reduction- and synthesis phases among the 4 Causes can be non-trivially mapped with the 4 Quantum Numbers, which turns out to be useful to (further) validate and refine the bifurcative mass theorem:
  1. Principal QN (1) => Energy Synthesis/bifurcation i.e. 23 = 8 eigenstates = Volumetric (counting shells)
  2. Azimuthal QN (2) => Energy Reduction = 1 eigenstate (p-subshell counting x, y, z)
  3. Magnetic QN (3) => Action Syntesis/bifurcation = Phi3 = primary mass factor (Higgs-like)
  4. Spin QN (4) => Action Reduction = (counting) 2 spins
Whereas the mass factors associated with the synthesis / bifurcation phases are quite straightforward, that is resp. Phi3 and 23, the mass factor associated with the reduction phases, 33, can be justified as consisting of 1 (particular) eigenstate, with 2 spins, in 3 dimensions. Mathematically it can be equally viewed as an integral dimensionalization 33, or as a more distinct additive synthesis of 3 spherical surface expansions:
33 = 3 (32 + 32 + 32) where each of the bases 3 = additive synthesis of 1 eigenstate + 1 spin + 1 spin, and the main factor 3 = "p-subshell" counting x, y, z. The latter viewpoint is preferred. In summary 33 identifies a single, dimensionalized full p=sub-shell and integral bifurcative reduction of a particular eigenstate. Obviously the reduction phase mixes a generative and a counting principle.
This yields an integral bifurcative mass theorem, with the value Phi3 x 23 x 33 = (6Phi)3 ~ 915. This involves 2 electrons. For 1 electron the proton / electron mass ratio is 2 x 915 ~ 1830. Compare with literature 1836.15. Refining by substituting 2 with the electron spin g-factor yields ~ 1836.35, apprx. 1 part in 10.000 accurate.
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
This prototype Hydrogen model is equally a mathematical model of consciousness, with the characteristics of a-causality, self-reference and self-localization.
The proposed (Higgs, Yukawa - like) self-interactive mass generation and multiplication gives the correct proton-electron mass ratio, which cannot be calculated in quantum mechanics. The model is further evidenced by generating the correct positions of the primary colors, and modeling Pauli Exclusion as well as the 720° Dirac spinor symmetry.
Not shown in this overview are the detailed formation of the dimensional, resonant (proto matter wave) and nuclear levels, out of the complementary action- and energy bifurcations.
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
The masses of the proton and the electron, and thus their ratio (μ) are very accurately known, but the reason for their mass ratio (μ = mp/me ~ 1836 : 1) is an enigma.
Moreover, the internal quark-gluon state of the proton (Quantum Chromo Dynamics) cannot be solved, only numerically be simulated.
A unitary, bifurcative self-interaction of the quantum field has been proposed which has the characteristics of a-causality, self-reference and self-localization, and which is only a modest departure from the standard QFT theorem.
Through the bifurcation, QFT (wave physics) and pure geometry become practically interchangeable, which implies a purely abstract formalism inferred by, and superior to its (physical, experiential) effects.
The Formal portion of the bifurcation is action-centered, optimized by Phi (Golden Ratio, 1.618...), and associated with mass generation. The Final portion is energy-centered, optimized by scaling ratio 2, and associated with Hydrogen eigenstates.
In a QM approach, the Formal and Final states are interlocked through their spinor isomorphisms (~toruses), that is resp. a proposed 3/2 spinor for the complete nucleus (proton), and the 1/2 spinor for the electron.
The integrative model represents (a holistic approach of) the Hydrogen atom (in its ground state). Due to the non-linear self-interaction, the Formal and Final bifurcations and the intermediate state naturally multiply. For the minimal recursion depth of 3, the integral action thus becomes (Phi x 3 x 2)3 ~ 914.99.
This number could be interpreted as the ratio between the unitary actions of 2 matter waves (with opposite spins) and the nucleus. For a single electron, the ratio then is twice the value, i.e. 1829.981366. Compare to the literature value of mu: μ = mp/me = 1836.152673.
If instead of the bifurcation ratio 2, the electron spin g-factor, ge ~ 2.002319 is used, the result is: μbif = mp,bif/me,bif = 1836.355177. The difference with the established value is about 1 part in 10.000.
Interpretation / discussion:
The energy / mass generation by the bifurcative self-interaction is very similar to the Higgs mechanism resp. Yukawa interaction, e.g. it is not a Planck-Einstein interaction. Therefore the mass amplification (33 x 23 = 63x) can simply be counted by the number of Fourier terms in the integral bifurcation spectrum. "Phi" is the primordial- or seed factor (ratio) of the Formal bifurcation. The Final bifurcation 23 translates the ordinal into cardinal values, and thus actualizing - and indeed "incubating" - the self-reference. It is clear that in a bifurcative scenario, the Hydrogen atom is considered a Holarchy, whereas especially its nucleus represents much more than a merely passive, charged particle (in the vein of Javad Fardaei's "intelligent atom"). There is no absolute difference between the nucleus and its matter wave - the latter are gauge effects, or better, in current terms, constitute the self-localization. The existing concept of the electron spin g-factor also implies a more intricate proton-electron interaction. The proton-electron mass ratio captures and validates the complexity of the bifurcative self-interaction in a single (quantum mechanical) number. In view of the purely abstract, geometrical nature of the physical atom, bifurcative self-interaction could technically be considered supportive of Roman Poznanski's Panexperiential Materialism, with the subtle but crucial caveat that pure consciousness is conceivable apart from physical form, and superior to it.
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
The 2016 video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0AzU8v0eLLM) shows how the matter waves are configured and stabilized by the TAM (~ consciousness in the homeomorphic phase), implied by the bifurcating field. In this video, the eigenstate stabilization is attributed to the pulsative resonance directly.
In the 2019 video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bpIlBmqudz4 ), the stabilization is attributed to both the bifurcation (Formal) and the dimensionalization / self-localization (Final). The pulsation still occurs, but is not shown as the primary characteristic of the synchronization / stabilization, rather you might say it characterizes the Intermediate state.
In the 2016 video the dimensionalization / self-localization was not fully crystallized out, but alluded to as "surface compression rate".
In the most recent 2020 screen capture video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BWGJr2Cq6t8 ), the vortex projects the bifurcation directly in a 3D Unitary Atom picture. The "Unitary Atom" is an initial, Action-centered model anticipating the de Broglie form. The dimensionalization / self-localization is present but less explicit. The 2016 video already implied the unitary- or action model, as it assumes the simultaneous eigenstates, which do not appear in the Final, de Broglie stage.
So in short, the model of how the matter waves are facilitated and stabilized, essentially by the TAM, has evolved from a pulsative resonant principle (2016) to a more inclusive, bifurcative + self-localization principle, with the resonant stage still implied (2019), to a bifurcation vortex / Unitary Atom model (2020).
You could indeed say that the standard de Broglie picture / Hydrogen eigenstates really show and prove the bifurcation, only it gets under water both in the noisy Higgs mechanism of QFT and in the probability doctrine of QM. Synchronized bifurcative symmetry breaking clears the waters to reveil the TAM (~ consciousness) as the unchanging, underlying quantum reality.
Thus the TAM / consciousness has no reality in the absolute sense, but is superior to its effects (in this case, the Hydrogen eigenstates) and inferred by them. The attached screen shot shows the principle.
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
The underlying idea is that Consciousness creates without actually changing. Therefore we cannot in an absolute sense discern what state is unconditional or Formal, and what state is conditional or Final. This is solved by discerning a state where Formal and Final are indistinguishable, and consider that Formal, and a state where they are conditional, and consider that Final. The self-reference is evident. To call this something else such as "all-reference" is perhaps not wrong, but it is not a known mathematical / logical concept and therefore just introduces noise and distraction. So, self-reference is not just some ad hoc fancy idea, but a foundational aspect of a theory of consciousness. To give an example: The terms "sattva" (pure) vs. "tamas" (static) are well known concepts in the Vedic & Yogic literature. For example, if certain food is healthy and good for the mind, we consider it "sattvic", etc.. etc.. Everything consists of these 2 plus "rajas" (mutative), in some combination. These are the 3 Operative Principles of Consciousness (Triple Attributional Matrix). At the same time "food" being material substance, is "tamasic", relative to Consciousness, being "sattvic". It's a different angle, so evidently things could become hopelessly complicated and end in endless philosophical regression. Therefore instead, we recognize a Formal state or homeomorphic phase where the 3 Principles are indistinguishable (chancing one into the other all the time), and consider that, by proxy, "pure consciousness", while in the Final, created world the 3 Principles are actually distinguishable. This way the (chance of) philosophical regression has been solved and formalized, and this formalized regression has become the self-referential characteristic of consciousness. This is almost like a philosophical coup, beyond the scope of Monism, and in fairness, beyond any -ism - it is an existential, not an intellectual proposition. Moreover, in the homeomorphic phase, the Triple Attributional Matrix and Consciousness are only different for the sake of argument - in fact Consciousness is the matrix ("The worm is the spice, the spice is the worm" - Paul Artreides in Dune). Furthermore, because physical creation is (necessarily) an inalienable aspect of Consciousness, we don't speak of "non-local" being a fundamental characteristic, but of "self-localization". So in summary, both terms "self-reference" and "self-localization" are extremely accurate and not subject to popular interpretation or fanciful alteration. The Vedic terms. resp. are "svabhava" (self-flow) and "Purusottama" (cosmic nucleus). Both are intimately related aspects of the same a-causal, creative yet unchanging state (or Entity) called Consciousness.
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
"Universal Consciousness" in a scientific sense is simply the unconditional state or bearing of physical objects that are so fundamental, and therefore simple, that it can be described mathematically. The unconditional state of macroscopic objects (animate or inanimate) cannot be described, but may be intuited, or simply believed. In that case, the meaning of "Universal Consciousness" is more a matter of personal realization or faith or culture, and scientifically less useful.
For example, we could think of the Schrödinger Wave Equation as an attempt to describe a more or less unconditional state. This works reasonably well for a single Hydrogen atom resp. its eigenstates. But for something still as simple as a Helium atom, the Wave Equation already can't be solved anymore. So they "intuit" or "believe" more or less that the Wave Equation is universally applicable, but it is not actually proven.
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
The Unitary- or Action Atom is an initial or principal form of the Hydrogen atom.
The particle phenomenon and the phase- or matter wave are the same as in the de Broglie atom, but the wavelengths and speeds are unitary ("1"). The eigenstates comprise a formal action counting sequence, identified by the principal quantum number.
In the standard de Broglie atom, the action is incremental, constituting 8 final, energy based eigenstates. The latter imply a spherical geometry, confirming the bifurcative nature of the Unitary Atom through 3 dimensions.
The hidden, formal aspect of the bifurcation is action-centered and manifests as a vortex. The vortex represents the non-linear self-interaction of the underlying quantum field, stabilizing the Hydrogen eigenstates.
The vortex is self-congruent if the self-interaction is synchronized through Golden Ratio. This is the bifurcation- or action vortex, a new concept in quantum physics.
The bifurcation vortex stabilizes the energy levels through phase lock. The helical phase node corresponds to the "k=0" ("zero wave number") of the bifurcative action.
In the de Broglie atom, the bifurcation vortex is obscured. But since the interpretation of the matter wave capitulated to the probability doctrine, the bifurcation vortex is not trivial and is proposed to hint at a non-probabilistic quantum reality.
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
De Broglie's hypothesis provides an elegant and compelling solution for the integer number of wavelengths in a given electron orbit or energy level. The discrete energy levels themselves, indicated by the primary quantum number, follow from a volumetric principle and are not proven by de Broglie. Schödinger's wave equation is used to solve this, however only up to a single orbit or Hydrogen eigenstate at a time, whereas the probabilistic interpretation is a cause of great dissatisfaction.
As shown, the Formal stage of the bifurcative self-interaction (as per the 4C/TAM/QFT model), when synchronized, facilitates dimensionalization or self-localisation. The latter in this case is however still somewhat theoretical. The self-localized state is characterized by self-reference, that is, the principal bifurcation and the physical bifurcation have become the same, but only so far in principle. The self-reference, when taken as an actual bifurcation, constitutes the Final stage.
Thus the Final stage constitutes the actualized self-reference, whereby the final bifurcation pattern confirms that the synchronized bifurcation is indeed self-referent. This confirmational pattern of the Final stage is the Hydrogen eigenstates.
In terms of a spherical potential well, the Hydrogen eigenstates constitute a self-consistent volumetric, surface and radial bifurcation. In terms of TAM, the Triple Attributional Matrix, the eigenstates represent the TAM permutations.
A more generalized approach of 4C/TAM/QFT follows from the assumption that time and space are not fundamental. The field's bifurcative action is geometric in nature, and so there exist no a priori physical (wave) media. Instead, the scaling ratio of the geometrized self-interaction can vary and this accounts for the formation of conformational patterns. In other words the medium is implied in the geometry of the interaction, the interaction is not defined by any pre-existing medium.
The 2 main scaling ratio's are those which create the confirmational patterns of the Formal and Final stages. The Formal stage is fractal, optimized by scaling ratio Phi (Golden ratio, 1.618), the Final stage is arithmetic, optimized by scaling ratio 2. Also, the Formal stage is confined, the Final stage is de-confined.
It should be noted that the self-consistency of the Final Stage is rather satisfactory, suggesting that physics is complete. Technically speaking, it provides no incentive to look for a Formal Stage resp. - Cause. The only incentive is the dissatisfaction with the probabilistic interpretation, as a dubious placeholder for real quantum determinism. This self-consistency however is deceptive, because it silently presumes that time and space are fundamental. Without the latter, there is an instantaneous need for a Formal principle to make physics complete. Here it is shown how the fractally scaled Formal aspect and the arithmetic Final aspect constitute the mutually concommitted confirmational patterns of physical media.
A third important bifurcative scaling ratio is proposed (sqr(3)), associated with the electroweak interaction in QFT, that is, the Intermediary stage.
All 3 functional scaling ratio's are directly visible in the Quantum Geometry of Color. That is, the human visual spectrum spans and truly identifies the spectrum of creation at a fundamental level.
Conclusion: Hydrogen eigenstates are the confirmational pattern of the self-reference of the quantum field's synchronized self-interaction.
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
It is proposed that quantum field bifurcation could in fact be the principle that orchestrates "re-coherence" such as proposed by Alfredo Pereira Junior.
More precisely, one would think in terms of a subtle, edge-of-equilibrium resonance between coherence and decoherence.
Almost the same concept in a very closely adjacent field was worked out in great detail by G. Srinivasan, which was a great input for 4C/TAM/QFT.
One other aspect is the scaling between quantum and neuro i.e. hydro-ionic wave. This could in fact also be carried out by the bifurcation. In other words, the bifurcation and the scaling are one and the same thing - whereas bifurcation was meant to be a scaling function to begin with.
In case bifurcation sounds alien, I'm reposting the, presumably functional, identical morphology of the dendritic tree. Without prior knowledge one would suspect that the cascading branches represent standing wavelengths or etc..
The dendritic tree would constantly establish and orchestrate the Triple Attributional Matrix of consciousness - in the brain.
In the artsy pic, imagine the outer bubble the hydro-ionic medium, and the "person" in the middle is consciousness.
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
Definitions
  • 4C = The Aristotelian 4 Causes, used as a conceptual framework
  • TAM = Triple Attributional Matrix, the underlying abstract axiom
  • QFT = Quantum Field Theory, the physical implementation
Main ideas
  • Consciousness in the universal sense is abstract and not itself "conscious", and (in 4C/TAM/QFT) free from cultural etc. associations.
  • Phenomenal consciousness in (evolved) organisms is not in an absolute sense different from universal consciousness.
  • The (physical) process of consciousness exists within, is part of, and essentially is consciousness itself.
  • Phenomenal consciousness has cognitive and sensual aspects resp. subjectivities.
  • The (physical) process of the cognitive aspect is controlled by Energy as integrative principle.
  • The (physical) process of the sensual aspect is controlled by the Action Principle of physics, as integrative principle.
  • The Energy process has entropic/thermodynamic and neg-entropic/synergetic objective aspects. It's fundamental form is the matter wave.
  • The Action process controls the whole Energy process, that is, the matter wave.
4 Causes framework - 4C
  • The 4 Causes framework is the (mathematical) model of phenomenal consciousness. The cognitive and sensual subjects and objects together can be placed in the 4C framework, which may be modeled as a diagram or tetrahedron.
Triple Attributional Matrix - TAM
  • TAM is the axiomatic precursor of 4C and represents the fundamental characteristics of consciousness: a-causality, self-reference and self-localization.
  • 4C evolves from TAM as 4 permutation groups of the 3 characteristics during extroversial and introversial action.
  • Self-reference is implied as the Formal and Final stages are not absolutely distinguishable, where the latter (the indistinguishable state) itself is considered Formal, and so forth...
Quantum Field Theory
  • 4C and TAM are abstract and therefore have no physical quantities or units, and are therefore geometrical in nature
  • The 4C/TAM geometry becomes physical through its QFT wave matrix implementation, in the form of a bifurcative self-interaction of the quantum field.
  • The latter is analogous and very similar to the Higgs mechanism in QFT.
  • If the bifurcation is synchronized, the principal resp. physical form can (but must not) be dimensionalized. This is the final, self-localized stage of phenomenal consciousness.
  • Elementary particles are isomorphisms of the synchronized quantum wave matrix.
The three fundamental characteristics in 4C/TAM/QFT
  • A-causality = unitary (Fourier / Plancherel) transform = Formal stage
  • Self-reference = bifurcation = Intermediary
  • Self-localization = dimensionalization = Final stage (if the bifurcation is synchronized)
The Quantum Geometry of Color
  • The set of primary colors (that is, their wave lengths), evidently represent the wave matrix geometry of 4C / TAM / QFT (with reference to the de Broglie picture). Also the retinal peak sensitivity can accurately be predicted, providing additional evidence.
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
The phenomenal is the a-causal, homeomorphic resp. isomorphic transformation of the Noumenal. It's the Noumenal apparently manifesting in time-space-causality form. It's (therefore) the qualified or conditional state. It is also the self-localized state.
In 4C / TAM (/QFT) it is the dimensionalization of pure ratio (of the bifurcation) - that is, the bifurcation itself becomes dimensional without actually changing because of that. This can (but must not) happen when the bifurcation is synchronized (optimized by Golden Ratio). It's the apparent creation of the world out of that-which-is-not-nothing.
It is somewhat symbolically shown in the picture: if the radial expansion bifurcates (1:2), the surface area bifurcates 4x and the volume 8x. Bifurcation = Dimensionalization, Dimensionalization = Bifurcation (or: "The spice is the worm, the worm is the spice" Paul Atreides in Dune).
In retrospect you could say this is how the brain very quickly constructs reality out of the abstract, and colors it with feeling. But it's not really the brain doing it, the brain itself is also but a phenomenal state, built upon the abstract. This is the end of all tail-chasing philosophy.
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
One primary color is highlighted.
The Energy and Action components as known in physics are indicated (boxed) as well as the resp. objective counterparts, that is, the wave and its perceived color.
The reduction and synthesis phases or -interactions are indicated with the arrows forming the (simultaneous) cycle.
The actual primary color-angles (log spiral segments) are accurately predicted by the underlying 3D geometrized QFT symmetry breaking. This is not shown here, but the angles can be memorized through the geometric icons.
This way the characteristics of consciousness are implied: a-causality, self-reference, self-localization.
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
A model centered on (quantum) thermodynamics () has the benefit - and obvious purpose - of virtually guaranteeing that magic, mysticism, idealism and (other) ghosts-in-a-box are ruled out. But still neg-entropy resp. synergy needs to be realised. The scalar field, as it occurs in nature, is proposed to fulfill that role.
Scalar vs. vector
For those unfamiliar with the concept: a scalar field is to a vector field what a high (or low) pressure area is to wind. This analogy however does not do full justice to the scalar field, because it obscures the scalar field's most interesting aspect, that of non-linear self-interaction. The latter does not follow from scalar field equations as such, but from the empirical definition of the field as it acts in nature, that is, the Higgs field.
Non-linear vs. linear
Non-linear (self-) interaction is important in quantum physics because it is essentially a creative state: waves interacting create new waves with different (sum and difference) frequencies. In rudimental form it is shown e.g. as sin(2x) = 1/2(1+sin^2(x)). The square here indicates a multiplication, that is, the non-linear interaction. The slide shows the same for different waves.
The scalar field's (confirmed) non-linear self-interaction is the reason why a completely abstract / geometrical model of consciousness as discussed before can directly be translated into QFT. The latter requires only some mild modification, or perhaps only re-interpretation of the standard theorem.
Life on the silver lining
The analogy can be drawn a bit further quite meaningfully, if we consider the formation of a hurricane. A vortex in several ways represents the phenomenon of life emerging on the silver lining of non-linear and linear interactions. In the broadest sense, this interactive regime in quantum physics is QED.
Self-localization
This so far involves the standard symmetry breaking theorem. The 4C / TAM / QFT model of consciousness is different in that the former employs a general, physical potential well, and the latter implies an harmonic potential well. Another crucial difference is that in the standard model time and space are absolute, whereas in the consciousness model they are effects from the abstract, geometric interactions.
In terms of the weather analogy, both models could predict a hurricane. Moreover, using the Action Principle, the hurricane / vortex could in principle be predicted on a very abstract level, but time and space would still be absolute - that is, the stage on which it happens. In the 4C / TAM model a "quantum vortex" (spinor) is created along with time and space, that is, the "stage" itself emerges. This is self-localisation, the main characteristic of consciousness.
The synergetic scalar field
The neg-entropy of 4C / TAM / QFT is implied in the "harmonic" (or synchronous) cue, which makes the self-localizing vortex possible. More precisely, a non-trivial, hidden physical domain is created (the synchronized non-linear scalar self-interaction), in which energy is functionally cancelled out, and this makes the self-interaction effectively neg-entropic, that is, synergetic.
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
"Self-localization" is no doubt a central principle in (a mathematical model of) consciousness. The term was coined in a modern setting by Kastrup, but the principle is ancient, and was also contemporarily revisited as "Cosmic Nucleus". The latter indicates that self-localization is not only a human phenomenon, but appears with every natural entity non-trivially composed of all the 5 physical elements. Thus a piece of rock, or any man-made object falls outside the category, but an atom, a cell, or even a living planet or star has and aspect of Cosmic Nucleus, that is, self-localization. Thus, self-localization is not exactly the same as (apparently) phenomenal consciousness, but the characteristic bearing of the latter. Also, self-localization is analogous, or perhaps virtually identical to the so called "confined state" in QFT. The latter, in turn, is similar to, but not the same as (2nd.) quantization, as it does not apply to particles, but still constitutes a (highly condensed) field-like state. In QFT, the confined state currently cannot definitely be calculated (it is approximated through lattice simulation).
In an abstract approach, self-localization cannot be seen independently from a-causality and self-reference. Together they form the triplet of the integral, substantiating principle that makes a natural process self-aware. Because the term self-reference was historically used in a somewhat different way, the better term here is "self-localizing self-reference" (SLSR). As self-localization / SLSR is a-causal, it means that the non-local becomes local ánd global (!) without external causes - as for consciousness there is nothing external. In other word, self-localization is entirely autonomous, and entails the very manifestation of time-space-causality itself, from instance to instance.
The mathematical principle must be introduced, but at this place only concisely. Because at the fundamental level there are by definition no physical quantities and units, the model must be abstract, which is shown in geometrical form. The latter can also directly be represented as, or be converted into non-linear plus linear wave interactions. The two are equivalent, but the latter obviously relates directly to QFT.
The three characteristics (i.e. a-causality, self-reference, self-localization), are unified in the single, overarching principle of bifurcation (phil. "one becoming many"). Again, the approach is purely abstract but can directly be implemented in waves, that is, in terms of quantum field self-interaction.
1. The a-causality lies in the fact that the bifurcation always both has a principal scaling factor (obviously, 2 = "bi..") as well as a variable geometric scaling factor (Rs). They are like the 2 sides of a paper - the principal expresses the geometric aspect, the geometric gives existence to the principal. This is why the bifurcation as a whole is a-causal - it is a singular, integrative state or Holarchy. In terms of wave physics, the a-causality is implicated by the unitarity of the Fourier transform (Plancherel theorem). Topologically, the bifurcation is homeomorphic and algebraically isomorphic.
2. The self-reference is obvious in the bifurcation, as 1-->2, 2-->4, etc. like a branching tree or fern. In terms of wave physics, the geometric scaling aspect is also obvious in the Fourier series. In the integral picture, the self-reference gets a deeper dimension.
3. The self-localization is arguably the more difficult characteristic and will be discussed briefly. Under specific, harmonic conditions, the bifurcation implicates the formation of physical dimensions. Now, the geometric portion not only has bifurcated in principle, but in actuality. This is the conditional or attributional state, where the bifurcating field is self-actualized in dimensional form. In other words, at this point the bifurcation and the dimensionalization are one and the same. The special condition is that the bifurcation is synchronized, which is shown to occur when the geometric scaling ratio Rs approaches Phi, the Golden Ratio. In QFT this is referred to as Synchronized Bifurcative Symmetry Breaking, and is very similar to the Higgs mechanism.
With this, the self-localization is complete: this is the Final stage, where the noumenal has become phenomenal without changing in the absolute sense.
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
The primary colors are plotted as log spiral arcs, whereby the angle corresponds to the resp. known wavelengths.
The geometrical icons here mainly serve as a mnemonic to indicate the angle (tan (alpha)=y/x).
At the same time, the spiral trajectory could be seen as an electron changing energy levels (in the de Broglie picture), while continuing its orbit. Quantum mechanically, the action remains stationary (momentum by angular displacement = Planck Constant h), so that indeed the angle is proportional to the wavelength of the emitted (or absorbed) photon. [attn. R. R. Poznansky]
This would still be somewhat trivial, however the geometric angles were also found to be cardinal for geometric (scalar / vector) alignments of QFT geometrized symmetry breaking (not shown here).
This way, the distinct set of primary colors could form a bridge between the hidden world of quantum mechanics and actual human perception.
An additional feature is that the resp. non-linear and linear interactions of the involved scalar and vector fields correspond to the non-linear and linear Fechner transductions of human perception.
Yet another specialty is that the retinal peak sensitivity (@555 nm) is precisely predicted by the same geometrized interactions. [attn. Vera Maura Fernandes de Lima?]
Vice versa, the concept of quantum-geometrical alignments (perceptually verified), could greatly contribute to a much needed deterministic re-interpretation of quantum mechanics.
Lastly, as energy is cancelled out, the quantum geometry of color strongly suggests that action is the main integrator in the process of (human) perception, like energy is the integrator in thermodynamics. [attn. Alfredo Pereira Junior]
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
There are information aspects in the basic energy integration level, in each integration level, and among the levels?
Taking the de Broglie matter- or phase wave at the basis, this implies the information on the energy integration level or in the Final state (the base in the tetrahedal model):
  1. Energy <--> Entropy (thermodynamics) = (A) synthesis
  2. Energy <--> "Neg-entropy" or better: Synergy = (A) reduction
  3. Entropy <--> Synergy = (AB) lateral objective
It gets information "from above", from the Action (Formal state and cause), resp.:
  1. Action <--> Energy = (AB) lateral subjective (century old physics)
  2. Action <--> Entropy = (B) reduction (little explored in physics)
  3. Action <--> Synergy = (B) synthesis (new in physics, prime in consciousness research)
So, 4 Causes, 6 information legs.
This is all still the integral, substantiated process in the Four Causes framework. If you go (back) from 4C to TAM - Triple Attributional Matrix, you get the self-reference and a-causality. The latter, as just discussed, are 1:1 realized in (abstract) wave physics, while it is shown how this could be worked out in QFT.
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
Attached is a textbook simulation of the de Broglie phase- or matter wave.
Standard:
Red = particle wave (energy E = h.f)
Dark blue = phase wave (momentum p = h / lambda)
New:
What could be called the sync wave (light blue), which has an infinite phase wavelength and expands and contracts with the phase. This is very analogous to the Higgs mechanism imparting mass to particles, with one difference that we propose a synchronized Higgs field. The latter is not shown, but the sync wave is one of its Fourier coefficients, and it is infinite because of the synchronization. This part is essentially QFT.
What has this to do with a mathematical model of consciousness?
  1. The synchronization implies / requires self-reference (here: bifurcation)
  2. The synchronized bifurcation implies self-localization (here: confinement)
  3. The Fourier / Plancherel transform / integration is unitary and a-causal.
So here all 3 proposed substantiation steps are applied to a physical process, the matter wave. This is proposed as the basis of an abstract, "consciousness-based" and therefore non-circular and non-magical model of matter waves and matter in general.
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
Trying to develop a model of consciousness based on neuro-science has all the odds of being a dog chasing it's own tail: it's the brain talking about the brain which only exist in it's own imagination. In who's imagination ultimately is a question of consciousness. This is nicely illustrated in the video "How we live in our perceptions" (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZROOz-OKbe0).
A model of consciousness which avoids endless philosophical regression is abstract, but not necessarily because of that un-physical or anti-materialistic. Namely, the physical basis (typically the brain, at least as placeholder), itself can be described in abstract terms (e.g. R. R. Poznansky's panexperiential materialism). This is quantum physics.
The specialty introduced (e.g. through quantum physics) is non-locality. That is, the non-local manifesting locally is viewed as the essence of consciousness. The concept has been known in advanced intuitional / philosophical / cultural form since ancient times. A modern day somewhat more psychological take on the same is Bernardo Kastrup's "self-locazation". Max Velman's "reflexive monism" arguably implicates self-localization but does not actually evolve the concept.
It's important to know that the (apparent) transformation is NOT: "global --> local", but "non-local --> local and thus at the same time also global" (i.e. no locality without globality). In a model of consciousness time and space are not fundamental.
Therefore the question is: how is self-localization described in a necessarily abstract model of consciousness?
Conceptually, in the 4C/ TAM model, a noumenal state transforms into discrete, phenomenal time and space aspects. Together the latter not only constitute a state of partial knowledge, but, as it is a self-consistent state, also self-knowledge. Without self-consistency, the phenomenal state would be random, disconnected and hallucinatory. That is clearly not what is meant with self-localization.
Also, necessarily the partial knowledge is part of, and not opposite to the self-knowledge, without actually changing the latter at all. This obvious asymmetry sets the stage for "self-localizing self-reference", and constitutes a quite different type of non-duality than non-duality which is merely defined in terms of the duality-that-it-is-not (like for example Yin and Yang).
Mathematically, 4C / TAM self-localizing self-reference is modeled as synchronized bifurcation (conceptually speaking, of the noumenal state). It is an a-causal, unitary transformation (Fourier/ Laplace), and thus it is not a real transformation in the absolute sense. Hence: "Phenomenal consciousness essentially does not exist" (R. R. Poznansky).
The time- and space aspects of the self-localization are obviously interwoven, accounting for a complete and self-consistent phenomenal state. The space-time self-consistent binding principle lies in the creation of physical dimensions, which at this stage is entirely conceptual. Starting from the Formal cause, a noumenal time-like scalar bifurcates creating spin, which can be modeled as a so called "spinor" (torus isomorphic) in 3D. The latter is, purely numerically, spherically and volumetrically resonant with the bifurcating space-like scalars. Thus, geometry is not generated out of dimensions, but dimensions, that is the local / global state are generated or projected out of geometry. As there are no physical quantities or units involved, the model is indeed entirely abstract.
The model thus far discussed conceptually is mathematically worked out in a QFT context, constituting synchronized bifurcative symmetry breaking. The synchronization is precisely defined.
In other words, self-referent self-localization and QFT symmetry breaking are proposed to be essentially one and the same thing, provided with the characteristics as discussed. It is the latter which are hypothesized to make the process conscious at some level of complexity.
QFT model in poster format:
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
The name "Spot" is of course inspired by Kastrup's (and other's) principle of self-localization.
Spot has a main frame consisting of a head, mid and tail section and four legs to get it going.
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
Human knowledge even if partial, is self-consistent. Self-consistency does not derive from partial knowledge, but from self-knowledge. This is not apparent in Velman's reflexive Monism, but it is in Kastrup's self-localization (ignoring the "mental" cue..). Hence the self-reference implied in self-consistent partial knowledge can be termed "self-localizing self-reference".
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
The poster shows the 4C / TAM centered on self reference (the "/" in 4C / TAM...).
The self-localization rediscovered (but not fully explained) by Kastrup as well as the non-linear / linear (Fechner transduction or QFT) regimes are not explicit in this poster. These are fully worked out in the C4 / TAM QFT model (see project page).
Self-localization in literature:
"Paramashivah Purusottama Visvashya Kendram". Or, "Purusottama" is [the name for] Universal Consciousness [acting or apparently manifesting] as the nucleus of the Universe. (P.R. Sarkar, 1961, as well as ancient sources). In other words, self-localization is the characteristic bearing of consciousness, it is not a priori a mental process.
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
In the epic saga Dune (1984), protagonist Paul Atreides (played by Kyle McLachlan), after having gone through the death defying tribulations of his initiation in the desert, reaches a state of enlightenment were he realizes: "The worm ís the spice, and the spice ís the worm". For those unfamiliar with the story: "spice" or "spice melange" is a highly valued drug and commodity, harvested from the sands of desert planet Arrakis, which gives its user Psi (paranormal) powers. It is also used by Guild Navigators, for safe and accurate interstellar travel. Sandworms are huge (that is, skyscraper huge) half plant, half animal creatures roaming the desert sands of Arrakis, mostly underground, to massively and violently surface in response to any hapless rhythmic pulsations at the surface. As they emerge, towering high above the sand and surrounded by bolts of lightning, they open their immense, three-fold beaks, making up for the iconic Dune photography. No need to say that the worms pose a formidable threat to the spice mining operations. It is in this mesmerizing backdrop, forming the epicenter of a galactic feud, that Paul Atreides comes to the realization that the worms and the spice are not at all antagonistic, but two sides of one and the same mystery that Arrakis is. No need to mention that writer Frank Herbert has skillfully woven a plethora of cultural and metaphysical associations into the story and its actors. Thus we may see "spice" as symbolizing spirit, or consciousness, and its associated higher powers, navigating our mind beyond the stars. The awe-imposing, easily triggered sandworms down in the desert represent the wave-nature of the operative force or principle, it's three aspects the three segments of its mouth. As opposed as the two may seem, Paul realized that in the greater scheme of things the worms and the spice cannot be separated - where there is spice, there are worms, where there are worms, there is spice. This is Arrakis, the planet of Dune, where now Paul rides the sandworms, while his mind remains fully ensconced in spirit.
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
A useful model of consciousness may have a range of uniquely verifiable and falsifiable specialties, but, unlike most theories in the natural sciences, its core value does not depend on verifiability and falsifiability any more than does a piece of Mozart. Rhythm, melody and harmony make a lot of sense once you hear the music, but neither attempt to prove its existence, nor try to quantify it. Likewise, a "musical theory" of consciousness does not aim to prove or quantify consciousness, but to map out the rhythms, melodies and harmonies of its biological orchestration.
nlike for example mechanics or chemistry, quantum physics, at least in principle, takes us from the world of effects to some form of underlying reality, inferred by those effects. That is, by the same analogy, from the world of sounds to the world of music. Quantum mechanics (incl. quantum chemstry) as well as QFT have a lot of issues of their own, but the greatest obstacle for their use in a model of consciousness is that time and space are considered absolute. Consciousness is a-causal, so therefore any model of consciousness must also be a-causal - consciousness can be inferred by its effects in time and space, but remains a-causal, in other words abstract, outside time and space.
R. R. Poznansky was right to say that "phenomenal consciousness essentially does not exist". This also means that we don't have experiences in the absolute sense - what we call "experience" is in reality nothing but a perpetual flow of retrospection, a fact which by definition can only be realized intuitionally - it is not something that can be intellectualized: that's the dog chasing its own tail. This, once more, is the "musical value" which cannot be quantified through measurement.
A quantum model of consciousness must therefore be a model which, although it is quantum, at the same time is also completely abstract, which means, solely based on numbers, ratio and geometry and with no physical quantities. Exactly the same as in music, where rhythm, pitch, melody and harmony are all about ratio. This is most certainly impossible with quantum mechanics, but it can be done with QFT, even without any major modification.
Such a "Quantum Geometry" model of consciousness exists on the boundary between matter and abstract. It has the characteristics of a-causality, self-reference and quantization resp. confinement. This is the 4C / TAM model (Four Causes / Triple Attributional Matrix). It not only seemlessly includes QFT, from where particles and atoms can be modeled (through known matrix-spinor isomorphisms - this is the QFT model of synchronized bifurcative symmetry breaking), but also includes for example the non-linear and linear regimes of neuronal transduction found by Fechner. The latter, when synchronized and geometrized, predict the exact frequencies of the primary colors. These are some of the specialties of the model which can readily be verified and falsified.
Philosophically speaking, 4C / TAM is essentially a geometrical and functional representation of Advaita Vedanta. Incorrectly labeled as "Indian philosophy", it is a universal approach to a non-dual, underlying reality.
The research challenge is how to implement this is the next level, that is neuroscience.
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
The 4C / TAM process levels or operative principles are hypothesized to be involved in protein folding.
Through the associated resp. substantiations (acausality - self-reference - quantization / confinement), the process is non-local and therefore, as proposed essentially conscious.
The localized 4C / TAM process could be seen as a "density matrix" (term coined in this context by R. R. Poznansky), emphasizing that the synergetic (hypothesized sensual quality) is introduced through the masses of the involved hydrophobic aminoacids. This concept is particularly of interest in Bohmian QM solutions.
The confinement due to the hydrophobic action is highly non-trivial. A conceptual parallel is drawn with confinement in QFT, as shown in the recent paper
The QFT model realizes the 3 process- or operative levels (energy - action - consciousness as a process) plus the 3 corresponding substantiative actions mentioned above.
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
  1. "We have qualia": WRONG. It is always retrospective.
  2. "Qualia are subjective": WRONG. Qualia are subjective and objective, and only retrospectively.
  3. "Qualia are local": WRONG. Locality itself is what would retrospectively be called a quale.
The "Hard Problem" should therefore be redefined: obviously the brain is constantly time slicing consciousness, and then retrofitting the bits and pieces into a hopefully consistent whole. Then why does it feel as if we have distinct experiences? Answer: it doesn't.
There is only one single, undifferentiated "master quale" (the time slicing itself) which indeed we feel, the rest is cognitive.
This is easily proven by synesthesie: the master quale is there, it's cognition is delightfully mixed up. Another example: when the Europeans sailed to the America's, the locals reportedly didn't see their ships. No cognition, no experience.
And there's another clue through what one might call "Fechner Maxima". In brief, it can be shown that the primary colors can be geometrized, and the distinct vowels (formant pairs) can be represented toroidally (both highly non-trivially). Mathematically and in QFT, geometry and toruses (resp. spinors) are isomorphisms - i.e. two representations of the same. The mathematics of synesthesie?
You can - theoretically - have it the way you want. Practically, there must be broader consensus so that things are a bit orderly. In that consensus you are raised, otherwise you could perhaps hear colors and see soundscapes. Obviously certain illegal substances disrupt that program (and that's why they are illegal in the first place).
 
Frank van den Bovenkamp
added an update
A known principle in physics which perhaps most closely illustrates what the brain is actually doing, is the Feynman path integral. It essentially states that all possible quantum paths are actually being executed.
The integral is solved by first normalizing (not: renormalizing..!) it, and this can be done by multiplying all paths with Dirac Delta function pulse trains. This is called time slicing.
Now, the integral has not been solved yet, but it can. This is done by actually integrating (that is, adding up) all the time-sliced paths. The final result is a single, discrete physical event in space-time, in the form of a wave function.
This of course also perfectly corresponds to the non-linear and linear Fechner transductions: non-linear means multiplying wave amplitudes, linear means adding up. The Dirac Delta function can be modeled as a dispersed wave.
This suggests that the entire electro chemistry of the brain constantly "solves" or "filters" sustainable, harmonic patterns out of a perturbative ground state (which obviously account for conscious episodes).