Thursday, 29 September 2016

Spectrum

Matter as defined by physics is vibration of energy fields present everywhere. "All mass is interaction".
A quantum state of a particle is the probability of vibration of that energy field  , but that does not mean that other probability states of vibration in space are  not present , in fact they are. Could this suggest that these probability states exist in multiple parallel universes (everett many worlds). This implies that there is a spectrum of universes and that this spectrum is infinite.
At the microscopic state discrete opposite spins occur as in Quantum mechanics.The following are the four fundamental forces. Strong force weak force occur in the standard model of physics . Gravitational force i.e pulling together, electromagnetic force i.e spreading out of light and sound occur in the standard model of physics.
 In the macroscopic state the following occurs-Light and dark occur on a spectrum because darkness is the absence of light.
Take any physical property-Rough/soft, cold hot etc They are all on a spectrum with extreme ends.
Take any mental property-Happy/Sad. Content/discontent. Objective/participatory or subjective. Arts (Emotion) and Sciences (Reason.)
The fact that  a "spectrum" or "continuity" exists at the macroscopic level, with discrete dualities  and probabilities of these discrete dualities at the microscopic level suggests a unified ontology (existence) at the physical level. Why should a unified ontology exist at all at the physical level i.e why have a physical level and on top of that a unified ontology.
It comes from nature's need to express, to manifest to create the spectrum of diversity. The fact that the manifested ontology is diverse and is moving towards a unified non-diverse unmanifested state suggests of an underlying unmanifested state which is uniform and non-physical and at equilibrium.
In the Upanishads this uniform, at equilibrium, unmanifested state is called Brahman (since we humans like to name/label).
The priniciple is that from the non dual uniform, at equilibrium unmanifested state arises expression of multiple,diverse,manifested matter. The major evidence is the interconnected of the universe we perceive.
If there was no underlying unity there would exist no spectrum.
.

Monday, 26 September 2016

Emergence

Let us take the example of water.  At the microscopic level H2O molecules are randomnly bumping into each other. Fluidity of water -an emergent property- Macroscopic state. Emergence implies the sum of interactions of constituents is greater than their parts and produces an entity with macroscopic properties different from microscopic properties. 
But then is the above statement true. We feel water  to flow because when our touch receptors touch water, there is a feeling of continuity/flow. When we see water the resolution of our eye (human eye) sees a huge bunch of something transparent moving continuously. But an advanced camera (not yet developed)will see/observe a bunch of  molecules randomly being bonded or unbonded. 
So what we observe/see/feel/ the emergent property is the function of the resolution of the observer-not a fundamental property of what is being observed.
 Applying the same principle, mind is not an emergent property but is a product of what observes it -like a collapsable wave function.
 Depending on the resolution ultimately all the electrochemical activity in the brain is some sort of combination of entangled energy field. And thus the parallel universe /everett many worlds theory makes sense.
But then the individual brain is interacting at the macroscopic level with so many other aware beings and  non living things . 
So are  pansychism ( everywhereness), advaita (non dualness) vedanta, buddhism (nothingness)  talking about a unifying ontology. Is the unifying ontology described in these systems of thought, same epistemiologically as a unified field comprising of  entangled energy fields at rest or equilibrium, which when active or vibrates produces the phenomenal world. 
How can we know this ? Is it possible through advanced meditative techniques, in the  brain , arrangement of atoms is altered so that the wavefunction is no longer collapsed, there is  no observer (i.e.no selfhood, i cannot perceive myself), and there is resonance between entangled energy fields between multiple parallel universes to create a continuum of underlying energy fields. Under  these conditions the physical/phenomenal body no longer remains. In wisdom traditions they say the observer, the process of observation and the object of observation are unified.
In simple words  in advanced/deep meditators brain state is altered and mutiple parallel universes are observable because an altered state of brain produces altered sensory capabilities.



Sunday, 25 September 2016

altered states

What if the universe perceived through the human sensory system is just  a state. An altered brain gives altered senses and another state. What is normal/regular and what is not normal/regular ? just because we are not familiar with it does not mean it is not regular/normal.

Friday, 23 September 2016

Human endeavour

Is human endeavour a function of the human genetic system  ? If so can we go beyond this limitation ? If so how ? By enhanced cognition -developing new senses in addition to the ones we have.
Since all human endeavour is a function of the human sensory system, is the everettian many worlds theory the only way to overcome this limitation.

RP Feynman quote

What I cannot create-I do not understand.

magnetic fields of brain

is it possible that electrochemical activity in brains which occurs during mental processess produce magnetic fields which escape the skull ?

Thursday, 22 September 2016

Mind is an emergent property or mind influences brain

The test- if the mind is an emergent property then brain produces mind . If not, mind produces brain. To test these alternatives is extremely difficult. If mind emerges from a complex brain,then decrease in complexity of brain structure should, decrease complexity of mental properties. If this is not the case it should not.
If mind influences the brain it should be able to override/decrease the negative impact of  brain defects.
Whichever study has greater statistical power should be the case. 

Wednesday, 21 September 2016

shared versus different/unique

If you had to define my thoughts(thoughts because there a lot of things we do not know)-I am a naturalist i.e I perceive  the natural world. When I think of it images of plants animals and birds conjure up. I think natural selection is true.
 I am a professional biologist. 
The questions that occupy my thoughts are:
1. Does  the natural world comprise of  matter only with underlying energy fields ?
2. Is the human description of the natural world sufficient ?
3. Is the human description of the natural world a function of the human brain.
4. Consciousness is  defined as the state of being aware of and responsive to one's surroundings . 
 If so,  is this awareness in humans a product of the way our atoms in the brain are organized, or is there a state of awareness underlying matter and expresses itself depending on the mode or physical system of expression.
For example awareness manifested through a magnet attracts iron filings. Awareness manifested through a cat sees the world in shades of grey and shapes and the cat may be attracted to the shape of the object and not its shade of grey (its boring) and awareness manifested through a human sees color and shape, and the human  appreciates and is attracted to the  object becuuse of both color and shape.
5. I do not subsbscribe to vitalism, mind-body dualism (descartes) theories. I think they are false.
6.I think  mind to be  vibrating energy fields which expresses itself through various brains. I believe that the electrochemical brain activity is the mind functioning through a brain. I support investigation in this area.
7. This portion comprises of statements with supporting arguments.
 When the body dies, the brain dies. Does the mind remain or dies with the brain ? Since I think that the mind is not a product of brain activity but expresses itself through the brain (mind =memory+thoughts+perception and other mental activities) it does not die with the brain. 
If the difference between a dead body and a live body is rearrangement of atoms, then the mind needs a particular arrangement of atoms to express itself, and cannot express itself through a dead brain/body. 
So what is the evidence for this thinking.As  humans we have common thoughts and practices. If each brain were a unique arrangement of atoms then there would be no commonality. 
Then the question arises, we share some regions of our brain structures not others and that could be the reason for shared commonality.. If so all races would be sharing more commonalities and different races would be completely different. Differences would be greater than commonalities.
The fact that we  are on social media and connected around the world points to commonality. 
For example i as a person born in a bengali family in India in the early 1970's can pick up languages indigenous to the region/country  where i was born , as well of different cultures. I speak bengali. hindi, english. I understand a bit of german and sanskrit. i am fluent in english. 
I had a pet dog. I could know when it was sad or happy through observing its inclination to catch a ball when i would throw a ball at it.  When my dog was happy it would be playful towards me. If i feel empathy for another species -i hate it when pain is caused to an animal -then it suggests of some sort of universal mind expressing through different genetic systems and unable to express itself through a non-living system.I have so many acquaintances from varied ethnicities and races-its the commonality that struck me.
The argument against the above will always be commonality is due to shared genes. My argument is then my dog should also feel empathy towards me. Does it ?

Reason for this blog

I start this blog by saying its about cogitation. Cogitate means think deeply about something.
My cogitation is based on rational and intuitive thinking.
I subscribe to rational thinking because it helps to deconstruct complexity. For example if i want to go from point A to B, depending on the reason I choose, i will take a path. If I just want to reach point B , I will take the shortest possible route. If I want to enjoy the wayside scenery too, i may choose other routes
I subscribe to intuitive thinking because there are a lot of things we do not know about  nature, universe and how the world functions. So I may be going along with my experience of the world, news items from the internet , tv and newspapers.
This blog will only have written material unlike my previous blog which was more like random musings, and internet selections based on interest.
I subscribe to the thinking that with new knowledge my conclusions can change.

water

Water-Statistical mechanics