Brain Physiology, Cognition and Consciousness group: topic
This is a public discussion board
Reflection & Resonance
Philip Benjamin
Wednesday, 24 June 2009 15:00 UTC
Suppose the mirror image of ‘me’ recognizes me, or is conscious!
Suppose? It does everything I do! Why reckon that it doesn’t think?
In a pan-psychic universe mirror images do think! If not, why not?
This reflection resonates ‘me’ warts, moles and all; incredulous?
More real is a bio dark-matter axion-like ‘Invisible Homo sapiens’
Of three different spin-axions akin to the ordinary fermions
With differential taxonomic distributions in plants, animals, humans
Dark Chemistries and differential taxonomic emission of bio-photons
Philip Benjamin
medinuclear@hotmail.com
-
Replies
Jump to resultsResults
-
That if you’re a poet, but I have always thought that the mirror is like a black hole emitting photon.Te swallows in the story of “Alice in Wonderland” and you can browse and learn in parallel universes the matriuskas. Best,
-
Dear Philip,
as I am advocating a mirror analogy of consciousness, let me give a few comments.
The difference between a regular mirror and the mirror of consciousness inside a human being is this: a regular mirror just reflects. Continuously the images shift and completely disappear. Our mirror of consciousness also resonates and most importantly is sentient.
That means, when something happens in “reach” of it, we know that.
Sentience is the hard problem if you will.
Yours friendly
Hans -
Alejandro Correa wrote:
“That if you’re a poet, but I have always thought that the mirror is like a black hole emitting photon.Te swallows in the story of “Alice in Wonderland” and you can browse and learn in parallel universes the matriuskas. Best”,Philip Benjamin’s reply:
Black Hole? If it it is physical it must be psychic, say the ordinary materialists! They have no choice, if ordinary matter is all that they have.
However, they have a better choice if extraodinary matter is also included, Dark Matter for example. That is extraordinary materialism!
Philip Benjamin -
Hans Ricke wrote:
“..I am advocating a mirror analogy of consciousness, ..The difference between a regular mirror and the mirror of consciousness inside a human being is this: a regular mirror just reflects. Continuously the images shift and completely disappears. Our mirror of consciousness also resonates and most importantly is sentient. That means, when something happens in “reach” of it, we know that.Sentience is the hard problem if you will.”
Philip Benjamin’s reply:
What is this “mirror of consciousness” made of? an Axion-like dark body can give it substance. That involves dark-matter chemistry, perhaps axion-like bio dark-matter and monopoles instead of electric charges. There may be a differential distribution of these axions, since the bio-photon emission rates are conspicuously different in plants, animals and humans. I have derived a very simple equation to show that the biophoton emission plants will be 9 times greater in plants than in humans. The experimental value is about 10.
All the best
Philip Benjamin
-
Philip, what I mean by dark matter which has a composition unknown to physics. I’m no physics, but reflecting, perhaps this is the subject of which a large percent body mass of an organism is involved in a non-directional, going unnoticed in our eyes that our “mirrors outside-inside” are probably connected with the neuron to tell us "The true history. " Best,
-
Alejandro Correa wrote:
Philip, what I mean by dark matter..which a large percent body mass of an organism is involved in a non-directional, ..are probably connected with the neuron to tell us "The true history. " Best.
Philip Benjamin’s reply:
1. Dark matter was first proposed by Astrophysics to account for the 90+% missing mass of the universe.
2. Axion of zero electric charge and very low mass (about 500 hundred times less than that of electron)was later proposed by Particle Physics to plug a hole in Theoretical Physics.
3. Axions were further proposed as the missing Dark Matter.
4. One might ask: “Is there a bio dark-matter”?
5. Will this bio dark matter be made of axion-like particles?
6. Will these dark bio-particles come in three groups to
correspond to electrons, protons and neutrons?7. Will monopoles or something similar be the force-
particles for axions?8. Can these type of axions have spins similar to the
fermions?9. Will they result in Dark Matter Chemistries?
10.Will Dark Matter Chemistries lead to the " Invisible Homo
sapiens?"11.Will there be a differential distribution of these bio
dark-particles to account for the taxonomic differences?12.Will stabilities of dark taxonomic-bodies depend on the
number of the kinds of bio dark-particles?13.If plants have only one type, and animals two types and
humans three types then these stabilities will be in the
ratio 3^1:3^2: 3^3 (3:9:27) where the base 3 refer to the
number of fermion-types (electrons, protons, neutrons)
and the powers correspond to the number of the types of
bio dark-particles. Plants emit 9 times more than humans.14. These stabilities will be reflected in the biophoton
emission rates, if biophotons result by interraction
(dissociation) of bioaxion-fermion spin-bonds.15. The experimental values determined globally show that
plants emit about 10 times more biophotons than
humans in close agrrement with the predicted value.16. Decoupling of the ‘dark’ body from the ‘light’ body
will leave the ‘dark’ body at a relatively negative
energy state (-E=mc^2). It will require more than that
to ‘raise’ it to any operational level.17. Chaneling and similar paranormal phenomena may be
by ‘dark-matter beings’ already at a higher energy
state.GOOGLE: for MIND MATTER; THE INVISIBLE HOMO sAPIENS; EXTRAORDINARY MATERIALISM; DARK BIOLOGY; even DARK POLITICS!!
Philip Benjamin
-
Thanks Philip Benjamin, I learned more about dark matter, although I suffer from claustrophobia. Best,
-
Graeme Smith Friday, 12 June 2009 04:34 UTC in “How does memory work?” writes:
<<“A neuron is first of all a cell; it has to survive like other cells, by absorbing nutrients and getting rid of wastes. However at some point in the evolution of animals, neurons gave up some of their survival functions to a helper cell called a glial cell, and converted those functions over into mechanisms for transferring information between cells.”>>
He further mentions the following as the other “components” for memory:
(Neuron); synapses; glial cells; gyruses; bushy or mossy dendrites; transport neurons; globular organs; shape; stimulus; 1st,2nd,3rd, 4th and 2/3rd layers; Martinotti cells; Allocortical tissue; Sulcys & Divides;
…Given a stimulus each pyramidal cell in layer 2/3 decides whether or not to fire, … tissue, that pushes the gyruses up away from the sulcys and divides,…
Qustions to Graeme Smith:
1.At what “point of evolution” are these components “different” in animals and humans, say in an orangutan and Graeme Smith?
2. Is there any of these components in humans missing in animals which are genetically/or evolutionaly close to humans?
3. If there is no difference “physically” are you suggesting that “informatioanlly” there is a different path of evolution in humans and animals?
4. At the fundamental level there is a constant flux of particles-electron, proton and neutron- in all these live “organic” components. How does information and memory remain “bound” retaining its constancy?
Hans Ricke wrote:
“..I am advocating a mirror analogy of consciousness, ..The difference between a regular mirror and the mirror of consciousness inside a human being is this: a regular mirror just reflects. Continuously the images shift and completely disappears. Our mirror of consciousness also resonates and most importantly is sentient. That means, when something happens in “reach” of it, we know that.Sentience is the hard problem if you will.”
What is this “mirror of consciousness” made of? Are these some UNCHANGING “mirror images”
[- optical isomers?-]of the ‘Graeme Smith components’ above?Philip Benjamin
-
Ok, Philip, first of all, is this on topic for this thread? I think that memory questions would be better on the Memory thread, and Reflection questions on the Reflection thread.
I must say before I try to answer the wealth of questions you have asked, that I agree on a reflective role for consciousness, however I think it comes in two layers a reflection of experience, and a reflection of experience that comes with a reflection of “Feelings” and Meta-cognitive signals.
I think it is one thing to recognize a tiger, and quite another to recognize that it was a huge scary tiger. In the first case, you might experience the recognition of the tiger with a sense of fear, but in the second place you would know that it was the tiger you were afraid of, not the big bushy leaves it was hiding behind.
I call the first reflective layer, Awareness, and the second reflective layer Consciousness. The primary difference in the example is the experience of fear, versus the experience of fear associated with the tiger. In other words consciousness is informed by awareness but not limited to it, it can gather a wealth of information to inform it about the experience that is not available to the awareness reflection.
Now I am going to answer Philips questions but suggest that he ask any further questions about memory on the Memory Thread.
Philip says: “At what point in evolution are these aspects different in animals and humans.” A very good question. Some of them aren’t, for instance even the lowly snail has neurons. Plants however do not. Others we have to grade with the sophistication of the animal, which supposedly has something to do with their evolution, although that is stretching evolution in a direction we shouldn’t expect to be able to go.
There is this idea of phylological levels out there, that suggests that evolution has trended in a direction that increases the sophistication and complexity of the mind. That is debateable, however it can be noted that the more sophisticated the mind, (and the less domesticated it is) the more complexity seems to be part of it.
My belief is that Awareness predates consciousness, and therefore while a reptile might be aware, mammals and birds can be conscious. Obviously I am not talking about the same level of consciousness as humans, I classify there being two levels of consciousness, Primary Consciousness and High-Level consciousness, of which humans are the only animals having that Higher level of consciousness as far as we know.
Most of the other details you mention are common for both humans and animals, the sophistication and complexity might not be there in an animal, but the bits an pieces are organized in much the same way. Of course comparative anatomy is not my strong point, so I could be completely wrong here.
Philip then goes on to ask “Are there any of these components that are available in humans and missing in animals?”
Only sophistication and complexity as far as we can tell. For instance the Human visual cortex has significantly more layers of neurons than the same cortex in a lower phylogenic profile. But they are still mostly pyramidal memory neurons in those layers.Philip then goes on to ask “If there is not difference physically, are you suggesting that there is a difference informationally”
Actually I have noted differences in complexity and sophistication, but putting those aside the main difference between humans and animals is how the mechanisms of processing are organized. In some manner we step beyond mere reflection and volition that we can see that animals have, to introspection and deliberation, which although animals have some of, does not reach the depth that humans achieve. To illustrate this let us look at our nearest cousins phylogenically speaking, We have for instance been able to teach chimps sign language. However they never reach the level of sophistication of a deaf person who also learns it. They can interpret simple sentences but long words, and complex syntax leave them dry. Now at certain stages in human development the same can be said of children. But very quickly they move beyond the limitations of the simian hand talkers.Having noted that there is a difference, can we call it informational? or is it some measure of sophistication? Perhaps humans have a more developed language center. However I have not seen the article that proves it. My belief is that we will eventually find that humans have a deeper level of processing, but I am not going to lose any sleep over it.
Philip then goes on to ask “At the fundamental level there is a constant flux of electron … How does the information and memory remain bound retaining its consistency.”
Have you ever heard of the second law of thermodynamics?
Change cannot happen if it requires less entropy unless energy is supplied.
Molecules are built out of atoms with all that flux going on in them, but they survive simply because to break them would cost more energy than is available in the ambient. Chemical systems take on an almost Newtonian physical nature, and so the flux of the underlying strata is not a factor in their survival. I maintain that within the limits of chemical flux, the survival of storage that is expressed via chemical systems is not affected by the flux. Now chemically we have to worry about the proteins being denatured by the digestive nature of the cellular fluid, but we don’t need to worry about the electron flux.
-
On the question of Dark Matter, I think that we have to look a little earlier in the scheme of things, to Dark Energy, in order to get the best ideal of what is possible. Like the amount of matter that seems to be missing, Scientists have studied the nature of the orbiting of stars around a galaxy and found that there is some aspect of energy that is not well understood, called dark energy, that makes the stars on the outer periphery of the galaxy move faster than expected.
There is some question as to whether this difference has to do with a positive force, or not. I am currently of the opinion that it does, and that force is actually the basis of the second law of thermodynamics, which although couched in newtonian terms can be, I think rewritten to be accurate in Quantum Dynamics, if we redefine the definition of equilibrium so that it less newtonian and more dynamically oriented.
Anyway the particular form of Dark Energy I believe in, religiously is a form called the Unit Field, which makes a mutual exclusion field the primitive of force. The interesting thing about this, is that with standard combinatory patterns we can easily see that the structure of the field is as important to the nature of matter, as the particulate structure of matter is.
We would not get Dark Matter, so much as matter with a dark component based on the fields it is combined with. Because this dark component would involve complex field structures even for simple matter elements, we could expect that the effect would look like missing mass. Now according to the math, it makes sense that a significant amount of the complexity of the Universe is take up with pure field effects, and what those field effects by themselves would mean, is something I would like to explore.
Results
-
