I like this commentary. It might be because my background is in neuroscience, quantum mind theory, and human memory. I discovered a protein that breaks down with animal learning (tubulin, which is the basic component of microtubules). At around the same time as my discovery, Roger Penrose and Stuart Hameroff theorized that human consciou…
I like this commentary. It might be because my background is in neuroscience, quantum mind theory, and human memory. I discovered a protein that breaks down with animal learning (tubulin, which is the basic component of microtubules). At around the same time as my discovery, Roger Penrose and Stuart Hameroff theorized that human consciousness exists because of quantum entanglements among electrons buried in tubulin hydrophobic pockets. They contacted me because of the overlap. Bear in mind that microtubules aren't particularly special, but they form a material matrix over which patterns of quantum entanglements can be stored and accessed again at a future time (memory recall). I went further in my book: "Conscious Matrix: Our Portal to God" to suggest that the brain collects data, and that is not higher consciousness, awareness, or knowledge. Understanding the deeper meaning of patterns in the data stream is equivalent to intelligence. These patterns are likely stored in the universe, probably in some complex electromagnetic field--a set of universal matrices. This means no human being truly invents anything. We perceive higher mathematics, higher ethical principles, and even social norms through quantum entanglements with these "truths" already embedded in the universe. Energy is invisible to the human retina, but NOT to the human mind. We can travel to the farthest star in our mind's eye in a fraction of a second even though the photons take millions of years to travel to earth. Yes, much is possible. And we already have a rudimentary grasp of the most profound of phenomena. The common sense of mankind is powerful, as is the common good. We filter out errors in the groupthink process, even though errors persist in the short term. I believe better days are ahead.
Your take is, perhaps, not so far removed from mine... that humans are nothing more than bio-mechanical "self-learning" computers, contributing their irrelevant minutia of accumulated data to a massive "Universal" database.
This would render impossible any possibility of humans (or any "life") possessing a reality of "spiritual meaning", incarnation by choice, reincarnation, "spiritual" or learning/progressing from past incarnations, and, as we understand it, "consciousness" or a "stream of consciousness" or advancement of consciousness"...
Progress may appear to be occurring, individually and collectively... but this is only the logical result of decisions, activities and movements being based on accumulation of more data (experiences).
Actually, my take is different. But thank you for giving me an opportunity to explain. When I started writing my book, "Conscious Matrix, Our Portal to God," I DID have the same view as yours. But I changed my mind during writing. Here's how and why I flipped. I have expertise in biopsychology and perception. I was viewing "God" as a concept, our highest concept to be sure, but still only a creation of the human mind. I was going to argue to religious people that God was no less important and wonderful even if He were simply a concept in our own minds--the grandeur of the concept made up for that mundane aspect of description (mechanical = mundane; i.e., science not poetry). But then I flipped. It was my understanding of how the visual system works that flipped me. We perceive light reflected off of surfaces, but we are only sensitive to a very limited range of electromagnetic energy. The rods and cones photochemically transduce the incoming light (streams of photons). That light energy stops there. The retina absorbs it. That energy is, however, transduced into electrochemical membrane potentials and action potentials take messages (actually an entire screen of messages called the visual field) to ascending brain centers. But quantum mind theory suggests the electrochemical impulses are not conscious (good arguments can be made for this). Instead biophotons are released from highly metabolically active neurons--and the patterns might reach consciousness through quantum entanglements symbolic for the pattern. I was satisfied this made sense. And I was in awe that the system was so finely honed and tuned just so we could perceive simple things around us--like furniture or trees or a human face or the vastness of the sky. It simply occurred to me in a "flash instant" that the human does not waste time "perceiving" anything that isn't real. We accept that the "visual percept" of what we see is real. But it really isn't. There are objects around us. And those objects reflect light and we create a visual reality in our mind. So I changed my mind to God being a real entity that billions of people perceive as real. I believe that someday we will have a scientific description of God that remarkably fits with many of what might appear to be "zany" religious ideas. If I were to describe what I believe God is based on my background in quantum mind theory and neuroscience, these would be my guesses: (1) God is a lot like the internet or satellite communication, but rather than being a machine-based system--God is alive--not alive like a biological entity, but more like a "spiritual internet." Like the I-cloud, we upload pieces of our conscious thoughts to God-cloud and He stores them throughout eternity. God is free to combine our thoughts with those of other people, and He encourages cohesion. (2) When we die, pieces of us are already uploaded on the God-cloud. (3) The battles between good and evil are ongoing in the God-cloud. This may occur simultaneous with the battles on earth. What directs what? Not sure, but I suspect information travels in both directions. I apologize if any of this sounds ridiculous. Surprisingly, the AI crowd talks like this, but they view themselves as the inventors of human connectivity. No, humans have been connected since we first evolved.
A very good expansion of your original take... I still don't think we are much different in our impressions ("beliefs", as neither of us know what true "reality" is)... that said...
Where we differ... is that you fall into the "trap" of most religions (mythologies)... believing that "God" is a "being" of some sort... a "He" (mythological nonsense)... and is "alive"... yet you refer to "Him" more accurately, IMO, as a NOT a biological entity but like an "internet" or "God-cloud"... THAT I can run with... "He" does not store anything... "He" is not free to combine our thoughts (data)... "He" is not an "entity" separate from the rest of 'Universe".
I congratulate you on your achievement of understanding how humans learn, the physical action. However, I think on my lower level of IQ I question how many "proteins-->tubulin" I have left. I prefer to be humorous at this point and instead say my "Ram" is quite full and have started taking notes & making lists.
My daughter informed me the Ram is how much Memory a computer has so I use that word now. See ...humor. But I liked reading your post and knowing, Thank GOD, someone is able to explore that area of science.
great info! interesting last couple sentences and angle to come from to this conclusion! i in turn have all kinds of « knowings » yet i do not have the slightest idea why… frustrates the hell out of « my » mind :-)
I like this commentary. It might be because my background is in neuroscience, quantum mind theory, and human memory. I discovered a protein that breaks down with animal learning (tubulin, which is the basic component of microtubules). At around the same time as my discovery, Roger Penrose and Stuart Hameroff theorized that human consciousness exists because of quantum entanglements among electrons buried in tubulin hydrophobic pockets. They contacted me because of the overlap. Bear in mind that microtubules aren't particularly special, but they form a material matrix over which patterns of quantum entanglements can be stored and accessed again at a future time (memory recall). I went further in my book: "Conscious Matrix: Our Portal to God" to suggest that the brain collects data, and that is not higher consciousness, awareness, or knowledge. Understanding the deeper meaning of patterns in the data stream is equivalent to intelligence. These patterns are likely stored in the universe, probably in some complex electromagnetic field--a set of universal matrices. This means no human being truly invents anything. We perceive higher mathematics, higher ethical principles, and even social norms through quantum entanglements with these "truths" already embedded in the universe. Energy is invisible to the human retina, but NOT to the human mind. We can travel to the farthest star in our mind's eye in a fraction of a second even though the photons take millions of years to travel to earth. Yes, much is possible. And we already have a rudimentary grasp of the most profound of phenomena. The common sense of mankind is powerful, as is the common good. We filter out errors in the groupthink process, even though errors persist in the short term. I believe better days are ahead.
Your take is, perhaps, not so far removed from mine... that humans are nothing more than bio-mechanical "self-learning" computers, contributing their irrelevant minutia of accumulated data to a massive "Universal" database.
This would render impossible any possibility of humans (or any "life") possessing a reality of "spiritual meaning", incarnation by choice, reincarnation, "spiritual" or learning/progressing from past incarnations, and, as we understand it, "consciousness" or a "stream of consciousness" or advancement of consciousness"...
Progress may appear to be occurring, individually and collectively... but this is only the logical result of decisions, activities and movements being based on accumulation of more data (experiences).
Some might find this negative. I do not.
Actually, my take is different. But thank you for giving me an opportunity to explain. When I started writing my book, "Conscious Matrix, Our Portal to God," I DID have the same view as yours. But I changed my mind during writing. Here's how and why I flipped. I have expertise in biopsychology and perception. I was viewing "God" as a concept, our highest concept to be sure, but still only a creation of the human mind. I was going to argue to religious people that God was no less important and wonderful even if He were simply a concept in our own minds--the grandeur of the concept made up for that mundane aspect of description (mechanical = mundane; i.e., science not poetry). But then I flipped. It was my understanding of how the visual system works that flipped me. We perceive light reflected off of surfaces, but we are only sensitive to a very limited range of electromagnetic energy. The rods and cones photochemically transduce the incoming light (streams of photons). That light energy stops there. The retina absorbs it. That energy is, however, transduced into electrochemical membrane potentials and action potentials take messages (actually an entire screen of messages called the visual field) to ascending brain centers. But quantum mind theory suggests the electrochemical impulses are not conscious (good arguments can be made for this). Instead biophotons are released from highly metabolically active neurons--and the patterns might reach consciousness through quantum entanglements symbolic for the pattern. I was satisfied this made sense. And I was in awe that the system was so finely honed and tuned just so we could perceive simple things around us--like furniture or trees or a human face or the vastness of the sky. It simply occurred to me in a "flash instant" that the human does not waste time "perceiving" anything that isn't real. We accept that the "visual percept" of what we see is real. But it really isn't. There are objects around us. And those objects reflect light and we create a visual reality in our mind. So I changed my mind to God being a real entity that billions of people perceive as real. I believe that someday we will have a scientific description of God that remarkably fits with many of what might appear to be "zany" religious ideas. If I were to describe what I believe God is based on my background in quantum mind theory and neuroscience, these would be my guesses: (1) God is a lot like the internet or satellite communication, but rather than being a machine-based system--God is alive--not alive like a biological entity, but more like a "spiritual internet." Like the I-cloud, we upload pieces of our conscious thoughts to God-cloud and He stores them throughout eternity. God is free to combine our thoughts with those of other people, and He encourages cohesion. (2) When we die, pieces of us are already uploaded on the God-cloud. (3) The battles between good and evil are ongoing in the God-cloud. This may occur simultaneous with the battles on earth. What directs what? Not sure, but I suspect information travels in both directions. I apologize if any of this sounds ridiculous. Surprisingly, the AI crowd talks like this, but they view themselves as the inventors of human connectivity. No, humans have been connected since we first evolved.
A very good expansion of your original take... I still don't think we are much different in our impressions ("beliefs", as neither of us know what true "reality" is)... that said...
Where we differ... is that you fall into the "trap" of most religions (mythologies)... believing that "God" is a "being" of some sort... a "He" (mythological nonsense)... and is "alive"... yet you refer to "Him" more accurately, IMO, as a NOT a biological entity but like an "internet" or "God-cloud"... THAT I can run with... "He" does not store anything... "He" is not free to combine our thoughts (data)... "He" is not an "entity" separate from the rest of 'Universe".
JMHO... of course.
Thank you.
IF GOD is just a "concept" why do we have some people saying GOD/Jesus did this or that for me?
Coincidence or GOD/Jesus?
Testifying I think they call it.
I COULD give 3 incidences ...that looking back I REALLY don't think were Coincidences.
Great points. I agree with you. I changed my mind about my opinion, while writing my book.
I congratulate you on your achievement of understanding how humans learn, the physical action. However, I think on my lower level of IQ I question how many "proteins-->tubulin" I have left. I prefer to be humorous at this point and instead say my "Ram" is quite full and have started taking notes & making lists.
My daughter informed me the Ram is how much Memory a computer has so I use that word now. See ...humor. But I liked reading your post and knowing, Thank GOD, someone is able to explore that area of science.
great info! interesting last couple sentences and angle to come from to this conclusion! i in turn have all kinds of « knowings » yet i do not have the slightest idea why… frustrates the hell out of « my » mind :-)
It appears your last sentence got cut off . . .