 |
| Pâ•qidꞋ Yi•rᵊmᵊyâhꞋ u |
Have you ever been at a loss to find a word? "You" … knew (!) … exactly … what you felt and wanted to communicate, but you couldn't find the right word to express it precisely. This is an example of pure thought divorced from physical language and the physical world. You—that is your non-physical self-awareness or ðÆôÆùÑ—are thinking the thought, but your brain hasn't converted the thought from the non-physical domain of your ðÆôÆùÑ, with its purely non-physical thought, to the physical world so that you can communicate it. It would appear that is at least one purpose of your brain: to convert the will and expressions of your ðÆôÆùÑ into your physical representation (i.e., your body – or perhaps more accurately, your "real-life" avatar).
The self-awareness of knowing what you think, apart from any physical expression or effect, demonstrates Plato's realization: νοησις νοησεως. Aristotle subsequently elaborated.
…whenever we perceive, we are conscious that we perceive, and whenever we think, we are conscious that we think, and to be conscious that we are perceiving or thinking is to be conscious that we exist… (Nicomachean Ethics, 1170a25 ff.)
Sloppy modern philosophers have misattributed this concept to Descartes as cogito ergo sum (I think. therefore I am) – itself a faux-quote that Descartes never wrote (though he wrote something similar, and in French, not Latin). Self-awareness implies that, though ordinarily associated with some physical expression, thinking, in essence (and its corollary "being"), are not necessarily dependent upon any physical connection (or resulting expression in the physical universe).
This exposes a major disconnect between the non-physical "you" being and the physical you human; a disconnect that is consistent with, instead of contradicting, the corresponding disconnect in the superset metagory between the non-physical and physical domains: "you" … know … what you're thinking… but, occasionally, your brain does not!
Ordinarily, the functioning of "you" and your brain is so seamless they seem identical. For the same reason, until recently light was thought to be instantaneous too. But, in fact, this one disconnect is sufficient to demonstrate that "you" and your physical brain are no more identical than you and your heart or kidney. "You," pure thought awareness – the ðÆôÆùÑ that is "you" – is more than a physical human animal and exist in a domain not constrained by the physical universe, while your brain is restricted to the physical universe. It is much as if "you" were sitting at some computer console outside the physical universe operating, and sensing everything solely from the six senses of, your physical body functioning as your avatar!
This may also allow that people whom we regard as senile, autistic or suffering from Alzheimer's because we cannot communicate with them may, instead, be reorienting to the eternal (non-physical) realm, increasingly unable to find words, and operate their body. We, therefore, increasingly see the physical shell from which the person is vacating or, perhaps recognizing the distinction between themselves and their physical representations, simply refuse to relate to and use. Typically, the physical body fails, forcing the self out. But the reverse may sometimes be true, where the self rejects the physical representation, perhaps perceiving what others cannot, and the body is left empty to die; or, sometimes, a change of mind in the self before the body becomes unresponsive and the person awakens from their coma.
It is popularly supposed that images of brain activity demonstrate a connection to thought. However, not only have scientists failed to demonstrate any connection whatsoever between brain and thought (no explanation whatsoever how, and succession alone doesn't demonstrate causation), they haven't yet even asked the question whether the brain activity is cause or effect relative to thought!!! Bizarrely, scientists have accidentally demonstrated that this question is core-essential. In 2007, Professor Emeritus of Psychology Daryl J. Bem of Cornell University completed a series of research experiments demonstrating that sometimes brain activity is the time-reversed, retroactive and precognitive effect of an impending, not-yet-happened cause—time-wise retro-causation! Unimaginably counter-intuitively, routinely–to all of us (though until the tests prove it to us most of us remain unaware of it and in denial), what will happen in the future has been demonstrated to cause thought in the now!?! (It must also be noted, however, that the measured retro-effect, though statistically significant, is small – around 1%; still, demonstrably above sheer chance.) Time is proving far more amorphous, relative to now, than has always been assumed.
A research team led by investigators at the Virginia Tech Carilion Research Institute has demonstrated the first rapid measurements of dopamine release in a human brain and provided preliminary evidence that the neurotransmitter can be tracked in its movement between brain cells while a subject expresses decision-making behavior…
"A startling discovery was that the dopamine signal appeared to be a very good indicator of the market value and in many instances a good predictor of future market changes," said Kenneth Kishida, a postdoctoral associate with the Human Neuroimaging Laboratory and the lead author on the report. Interestingly, the choice expressed by the subject did not always correspond with the prescient brain chemistry, he said…
The researchers report that they were surprised to observe that "the slope of the dopamine signal over a period five seconds prior to a market price update correlated with subsequent market returns…, demonstrating that it is a significant predictor of future market activity." …
"This exciting preliminary result requires replication, but it immediately sets the imagination in motion," said Kishida. "I often wonder whether there is a feeling associated with these dopamine fluctuations and whether there is any connection with that 'gut feeling' people sometimes ignore."
GPS satellites orbiting the earth confirm the amorphousness of time with a certainty we cannot ignore, and exactly as Einstein's Theory of Relativity predicted. Because of GPS satellites' greater speed relative to us on the surface of the earth (revolving with the earth's surface), the satellites' clocks run slower and we have to reset them periodically or our GPS systems would tell us we are where we are not and get us lost.
Unavoidably, time is no more than a human-defined variable, a concept, to calculate movement through the physical universe. Originally, time was defined, however inadvertently, by the rotation of the earth relative to the sun. Like thought (in fact, time, being a concept, is a subset of thought), time has meaning (i.e., it doesn't really "exist") only in the non-physical domain. Therefore, time is not constrained by the physical universe. Rather, it is an effect of the physical universe that we have found useful to serve as a measure. Now, we find it isn't an absolute standard for measurement.
This raises the question: how is pure thought, then, a function of E, m or c2? The perplexing answer is: there is no connection between thought (or concepts, which are thoughts) and E=mc2, i.e., the physical domain! Therefore, pure thought is not constrained by time! Pure thought, which necessarily includes time as a subset (a non-physical concept), exists outside the constraints of the physical universe. Therefore, as Prof. Bem's research bizarrely demonstrated, the time of a thought can be subsequent to the physical occurrence that caused the thought!?! Or, the physical occurrence caused by (resulting from) the thought can precede the thought!?! However, the physical brain, being a physical combination of mass and energy, is constrained by time. (What does that imply regarding the ðÆôÆùÑ in contrast to the brain and body?)
There is no scientific evidence supporting the quest for telekinesis. That is to say that, except for the mild electromagnetic fields resulting from the firing of the brain's synapses, there is no evidence of any connection between the activities of the brain as a direct cause or effect of anything outside of the body in the physical world.
There is no evidence of noise on the thought side. Might there be noise between the non-physical thought domain and the non-physical "you" when you think a thought but can't find the words for it? I propose that there is no noise on the non-physical side. What non-physical concept could cause such noise? How could it be demonstrated? However, the converse is clearly not true: drugs, disease and injury, inter alia, all introduce noise that degrades thought. On the brain side, any malfunction of the brain causes noise (at least) on the physical side. (Could that noise propagate into the non-physical domain? How? How could it be demonstrated? I propose that the non-physical ðÆôÆùÑ is able to recognize, filter and reject brain-induced noise. For those knowing enough to ask, this must be contrasted against propagating will- (ðÆôÆùÑ-) induced evil, generated by bodily (physical) sensory sensations, from brain to ðÆôÆùÑ.) It would appear that the non-physical domain interfaces directly with the brain and that there is no interference or noise on the non-physical side. All of the noise, a priori, must be on the physical side, in the physical domain.
Neuroscientific research (nature International weekly journal of science) further demonstrates that the brain is neuroplastic, adapting organically to carry out more efficiently a person's habits and will. This is intractably incompatible with the notion that the brain is the origin of thought and will. If the brain were self-contradicting without some external intelligent control it would quickly devolve into chaos. Even two rival lobes of the brain competing against each other cannot account for a brain's constant self-contradictory, yet goal-oriented, rewiring to optimize a person's habits and will, whereas an organic transceiver, functioning in compliance with the will of its non-physical awareness being, perfectly fits research findings. Moreover, the non-physical being's capacity to fine-tune the neuroplastic organic brain, its chemicals and connections, admits free will control, while an organic calculator implies an unchangeable predestined fate – as cited by homosexuals and others intent on avoiding personal responsibility for their behavior (which, in turn, is a major contributor to the deterioration of any society and, correspondingly, generates major drains on economic resources).
Reasoning processes, such as arithmetic and mathematical computation, can be analyzed similarly. There is no compelling evidence that any certain combination of firing synapses causes computation. While our brains work furiously at it, we're notoriously poor at it. Yet, as the Rain Man proved, there is a better way: "you" just "know" the answer! Perhaps, we're looking in the wrong direction how to evolve; the result being that many seem to be devolving.
Just as there is no evidence that the brain can effect any change in the physical world outside of the body (telekinesis), there is, likewise, no credible evidence that the brain can cause any effect in thoughts of another person (telepathy). Since there is no evidence the brain can generate (i.e., cause) any effect in the domain of pure thought or the physical world outside of the same body in which it exists, there is, conversely, no evidence in the other direction either: that the brain activity generates thought. Scientists recognize that succession does not demonstrate or imply causality. Yet, since there is no evidence that brain activity generates (i.e., causes) thought, then what and where is the origin of thought? And, since brain activity clearly seems to have some correspondence to thought, what, then, is the function of the brain. It appears reasonable to rule out coincidence that brain activity seems to correspond with thought processes. So, what is the brain doing that is related to thinking, and how is the brain related to thinking?
Physicists repeatedly confirm that the physical universe is nothing but a projection of forces that give us the illusion of mass (including dark matter, if it exists), energy and speed ; the physical universe – like the projection of a game on a computer screen! The chair you sit on: a combination of forces (quarks forming atoms) being projected into a 4-D (height, width, depth and time or velocity) void. The food you eat: a combination of forces being projected into a 4-D void. Your own body: a combination of forces being projected into a 4-D void. The body of the one you love: a combination of forces being projected into a 4-D void. The walls of your home and buildings around you forces being projected into a 4-D void. The entire physical universe: forces being projected into a 4-D void. Behind a computer screen is nothing more than pixels that light and dim according to binary bits (0 or 1, which equal true or false, respectively) according to a software program. It's an elaborate illusion. But if you get absorbed in the game, you identify with the avatar, just as your car seems to be an extension of your body when you drive. The scientific evidence is that "we" cannot interface with the physical world. Yet, of course, "we" do, inexplicably via our brain, interface with our physical body. There is no scientific reason to think that "we" (our non-physical awareness beings) aren't, in fact, existing–instead–beyond the physical universe (of forces being projected into a 4-D void) and merely interfacing with our body via the six senses our body (including the brain) is designed to convey to "us."
What evidence do you have that, contrary to these facts, "you" (in contrast to your brain and body) exist in this projection of forces into a void (the physical universe)? And though you exist beyond the domain of the physical universe, yet "you" are compartmentalized (so that, for example, either you cannot, or we haven't learned how to, communicate with other similar nәphâsh•otꞋ , what we would call clairvoyance) what does that imply relative to the Creator of the universe and religion?
All of this suggests that the brain functions not as a (physical) generator of (non-physical) thought, but rather as a transceiver, connected on one side to, and interfacing with, the non-physical world of thought and awareness in a way we do not understand, while the other side processes signals from, and activates responses by our physical body. Thus, I propose that the brain is neither a generator of thought nor the home of our awareness or "self"; but, rather, a transceiver connecting our physical body to our non-physical "self" of thought and awareness in the non-physical domain, not in our physical universe–closer to the framework described in the movie Matrix than most realize. (And I've been refining my theory for decades before The Matrix was ever dreamed up.)
This line of reasoning repeatedly leads me to question whether, although there is no evidence for any basis of telepathy, might there be a possibility of communicating non-physical to non-physical, i.e., ðÆôÆùÑ ìÀðÆôÆùÑ? It seems clear that such communication would necessarily be non-language (since language is the product of the physical world that is proposed to be on the physical,but not the non-physical domain). Learning such communication, and to interpret such communication, appears challenging (and also why such experiences, being fundamentally incapable of physical quantification and expression, are typically described as belief or faith).
Other by-products of this capability (if the Creator has provided for ðÆôÆùÑ ìÀðÆôÆùÑ communication) would include communications that have neither speed nor time constraints. Non-physical communication—the same kind we do with
 |
|
 |