Space?

[yppop]

Specifically, I was referring to your use of the word, “morphic.” However, you’ve opened up another item for questioning. But, this question can wait as it is not a question to be asked in order to receive an informational response, and you will probably cover it in one or other of your ensuing posts. As you can, keep them coming.

JD
Had a busy weekend; so here is a brief summary of the terminology I’ve dumped on you:

Infinite nothingness is the substance that can be referred to as the Mind of God

nomos is the infinite nothingness that is coterminous with the universe
bios is the particle of nomos that is *corpusculated *(enclosed) in a cell
nous is the particle of nomos that is corpusculated (enclosed) in the body (corpus) of an animal

holonomic describes the mechanism that creates the universe
cytonomic describes the *holonomic mechanism *that animates cells
morphonomic describes the *holonomic mechanism *that operates the body (corpus) of an animal

All three mechanisms consist of an initial configuration, information, and an impetus

the universe is a static configuration of s-points called the cosmic s-frame
the cell is a static configuration of s-points called the cellular s-frame
the corpus is a static configuration of s-points called the morphic s-frame

Unless you have questions there is no need to respond to this post. I will try to get the next post (animal behavior) out on Monday.

Yppop

 

[yppop]

JD

Now that we are dealing with explanations of subjects requiring a giant leap in complexity, the 26 pages of a rough draft I have written about animal behavior is more difficult to condense than I anticipated. Consequently, I am forced to describe animal behavior with two posts. This post will introduce the elements that we recognize at the explicate level. In my second post, I will relate how animal behavior might be explained at the implicate level, i.e., how God is involved.

I approach animal behavior analytically by comparing it to a computing process: (name removed by moderator)ut (sensations), a processor (the animal), and output (behavior).

(name removed by moderator)uts: sensations.
Sensations are (name removed by moderator)ut to the animal both internally and externally. Each source can be further classified as *passive sensations *or active sensations. The active sensations can be further classified as signals or symbols.

*Internal passive sensations *arise from the cells operating normally, which when not in need do not induce behavior.

Internal active sensations also arise from the cells, which when in need, signal the body with feelings of hunger, thirst, sexual desire, discomfort, pain, fatigue, etc. that induce behavior that satisfies those needs. The intensity of behavior depends on the intensity of the sensation.

External passive sensations are generally an optimum set of sensations that induce feelings of well-being, comfort, satisfaction, and safety that induce a range of passive activities of varying awareness such as: sleep, rest, play, learning, and vigilance.

External active sensations generally signal immediate action to fight, flee, hide, migrate, hunt, mate, nest, etc.

Some animals, in addition to responding to signals, also respond to sensations with specific meaning (symbols) such as bird calls, territorial markings, body movements, facial expressions, etc. However, compared to the use of symbols by the human animal, the use of symbols of the rest animal kingdom are inconsequential and hence will be discussed when I describe human behavior.

Processing the (name removed by moderator)uts:
How the animal processes (name removed by moderator)ut sensations (the nature of the beast) depends on three sets of factors: (1) whether the source of the processing is innate or learned; (2) how functional information is stored in material or perceptual memory, and (3) motivating factors induced by: identity, stimulation, and security.

1 - Animals process sensual (name removed by moderator)uts using innate pathways consisting of neurological circuits. The autonomic nervous system that controls the internal functioning of the body, for example, is innate. Most reactions that an animal exhibits as the result of external signals is innate and, in a sense, is cellular.

• Animal nature is also learned. The ratio of learned to innate nature depends on the species prototype; the ratio increases with the degree of cephalization.

2 - Material memory is that stored in neuronal circuits. It includes all of the innate sources of information, but in the more advances species includes information stored in neuronal circuits that is learned.

• Perceptual memory is information associated with recognition.

3 - An animal’s nature in reacting to the (name removed by moderator)ut of sensations, is also determined by the nature of its motivating factors. Motivating factors can be organized in three general groups; they are: identity, security, stimulation.

• Motivating factors derive from the three general property groups: corpusculation, metabolism, and reproduction. Identity is the motivating factor associated with a need to maintain corpusculation; security is the motivating factor associated with the need to maintain metabolism; and stimulation is the motivating factor associated with the need to reproduce.

Outputs - Behavior
Animals exhibit behavior that ranges from purely reflexive to perceptual. Reflexive behavior is that in which the action is induced directly by the sensation (name removed by moderator)ut through neuronal connections. It is generally precipitated by signals. All other behavior that is not reflexive is perceptual. More about which I will defer to subsequent posts.

I realize that what I have presented is almost incomprehensible without examples and even then much behavior is a complex combination of the factors discussed above. Consider this post a foundation for what comes next.

Yppop

 

[JDaniel]

JD

Now that we are dealing with explanations of subjects requiring a giant leap in complexity, the 26 pages of a rough draft I have written about animal behavior is more difficult to condense than I anticipated. Consequently, I am forced to describe animal behavior with two posts. This post will introduce the elements that we recognize at the explicate level. In my second post, I will relate how animal behavior might be explained at the implicate level, i.e., how God is involved.

I approach animal behavior analytically by comparing it to a computing process: (name removed by moderator)ut (sensations), a processor (the animal), and output (behavior).

(name removed by moderator)uts: sensations.
Sensations are (name removed by moderator)ut to the animal both internally and externally. Each source can be further classified as *passive sensations *or active sensations. The active sensations can be further classified as signals or symbols.

*Internal passive sensations *arise from the cells operating normally, which when not in need do not induce behavior.

Internal active sensations also arise from the cells, which when in need, signal the body with feelings of hunger, thirst, sexual desire, discomfort, pain, fatigue, etc. that induce behavior that satisfies those needs. The intensity of behavior depends on the intensity of the sensation.

External passive sensations are generally an optimum set of sensations that induce feelings of well-being, comfort, satisfaction, and safety that induce a range of passive activities of varying awareness such as: sleep, rest, play, learning, and vigilance.

External active sensations generally signal immediate action to fight, flee, hide, migrate, hunt, mate, nest, etc.

Some animals, in addition to responding to signals, also respond to sensations with specific meaning (symbols) such as bird calls, territorial markings, body movements, facial expressions, etc. However, compared to the use of symbols by the human animal, the use of symbols of the rest animal kingdom are inconsequential and hence will be discussed when I describe human behavior.

Processing the (name removed by moderator)uts:
How the animal processes (name removed by moderator)ut sensations (the nature of the beast) depends on three sets of factors: (1) whether the source of the processing is innate or learned; (2) how functional information is stored in material or perceptual memory, and (3) motivating factors induced by: identity, stimulation, and security.

1 - Animals process sensual (name removed by moderator)uts using innate pathways consisting of neurological circuits. The autonomic nervous system that controls the internal functioning of the body, for example, is innate. Most reactions that an animal exhibits as the result of external signals is innate and, in a sense, is cellular.

• Animal nature is also learned. The ratio of learned to innate nature depends on the species prototype; the ratio increases with the degree of cephalization.

2 - Material memory is that stored in neuronal circuits. It includes all of the innate sources of information, but in the more advances species includes information stored in neuronal circuits that is learned.

• Perceptual memory is information associated with recognition.

3 - An animal’s nature in reacting to the (name removed by moderator)ut of sensations, is also determined by the nature of its motivating factors. Motivating factors can be organized in three general groups; they are: identity, security, stimulation.

• Motivating factors derive from the three general property groups: corpusculation, metabolism, and reproduction. Identity is the motivating factor associated with a need to maintain corpusculation; security is the motivating factor associated with the need to maintain metabolism; and stimulation is the motivating factor associated with the need to reproduce.

Outputs - Behavior
Animals exhibit behavior that ranges from purely reflexive to perceptual. Reflexive behavior is that in which the action is induced directly by the sensation (name removed by moderator)ut through neuronal connections. It is generally precipitated by signals. All other behavior that is not reflexive is perceptual. More about which I will defer to subsequent posts.

I realize that what I have presented is almost incomprehensible without examples and even then much behavior is a complex combination of the factors discussed above. Consider this post a foundation for what comes next.

Yppop

That’s fine. You’ve packed a bunch of stuff in the above, but, I got it. I’m a naturalist by nature, so it wasn’t too daunting.

God bless,
jd

 

[Jaaanosik]

JD,

Objective reality: that which is external to all sentient beings, which in science’s explicate view consists primarily of four “physical” elements: space, matter, energy, and time. On the other hand, in an implicate view, objective reality consists solely of configurations of space which are manifested at the explicate level as matter, while the incremental change of such configurations is manifested at the explicate level as energy and time.

My contention that matter is a configuration of space is given credibility by: (1) string theory which contends that fermions (the basis for matter) and bosons (the basis for energy) are nothing more than vibrations of 11-dimensional space, and (2) that matter at its foundation is constructed from “point” particles (electrons and quarks) and is mostly space (a typical atom is 50,000 times the size of the nucleus).

I contend that space is the primary, physical element of the universe from which the other three physical elements are derived. The question then is: how are matter, energy, and time derived from space? My answer to that question involves analyzing space in such a way that duality (the presence of both material and spiritual components existing conterminously) is a plausible result. The duality derives from the presence of both continuous and discrete space each playing a different part if the formation of reality.

The analysis of space is at the heart of my thesis that (with your agreement) I will begin in my next post. This will require a brief discussion of the properties of infinity, a concept that I will argue is uniquely associated with the spiritual.

Yppop

Very nice thread. I am at page #2, so far so good and this is the first post that I would like to ask a question not knowing if it came up later. I am sorry for the repetition if it did.

How sure we are about 11 dimensions? It’s a theory, so more logical would be to assign it an unknown value. It could be more or less. I am inclined to believe the number is higher.

 

[Jaaanosik]

Hi JD
…

I think you have grasped the essentials and though you may have some hesitation about my brief description of matter as the absence of s-points I am going to plunge right into the mechanism that operates at the implicate level and appears at the explicate level as energy and time. I call it the holonomic mechanism**. Also to save typing I refer to the infinite nothingness that is coterminous with the universe as* nomos*.

…

Thank you for your interest.
Yppop

Hello Yppop,
Would this holonomic mechanism be applicable to other dimensions or it’s applicable only to our space and time?
Thanks,
Jano

 

[Jaaanosik]

JD,

Time is one of the physical elements of reality. Before the big bang there was no space, no matter, no energy, and no time. All were bundled in the infinitesimal object called the singularity. I contend that the singularity was composed of vast number of s-points; hence space is the primary element. Time and energy appeared with the first incrementation of a Now s-frame to the Next s-frame. Matter came later.

There is a tendency for some to raise an objection to using the phrase “before the big bang” pointing out that time did not exist until after the big bang. Just as there had to be space before the BB — in what else could the singularity been situated — there also had to be time. God thought and thoughts are a form of change; a sequence of thoughts necessarily exists in time. But not the time that we experience. There are two modalities of time: God’s time and the time we experience. God exists within ontological time; we exist within cosmological time. Just as discrete space is immersed in continuous space, cosmological time is embedded in ontological time. Ontological time fills the interval during the incrementation of a Now s-frame to the Next s-frame.

**Now I will make a statement that I don’t completely understand and don’t know how to explain without a drawing. Nevertheless, here it is: “Cosmological time is independent of ontological time and the interval of incrementation of a Now to a Next s-frame that we perceive is solely dependent on the change in relative positions of s-points.” In other words, cosmological time has a spatial character, thus the space-time continuum. (I think!) I need to do more thinking about it. However, the consequence of the time decoherence is that God can take all the time He wants between incrementation. **

What I have written so far in describing How God may be involved in reality, namely, the holonomic mechanism, need only be understood in facile manner to find it useful in explaining life, mind and soul. I consider the argument for the duality of space as a means to describe the “physical” manner in which the spiritual interacts with “matter” not only as a foundation for explaining life, mind, and soul, but also as a plausible and more understandable way to explain several phenomena that aren’t explained by science.

This forum is not the place to address the plausibility of the holonomic mechanism regarding physical phenomena such as the dual nature of light; I can only submit a broad outline of how such a mechanism ties a broad range of phenomena together. I am writing a book, however I am 78 years old and writing becomes more and more tiresome, so in case I never finish my book, I decided to present my thesis to this forum in order for anyone, that might find them believable, to use them. As Gregory Chaitin says:

Please feel free to ask questions, but if you are still keeping up, unless you do have questions, I will post an outline of where I could go from here.
Yppop

Yppop,
I am at post #40 and all I have to say is wow.
I am wowed and speechless because I would not believe that there would be somebody outside thinking like me and what you are describing here is very close to my understanding.

Having said that and because of that I’ll throw ‘a curve ball’ at you.

Why don’t we consider cosmological time just as a dimension?
So in our space time we have dimensions (x, y, z, t).
God can ‘play’ (apply the holonomic mechanism) in another dimensions (o, p, q, r, s), (a, b, c, d, g, h), …
Maybe God has a way of moving “things” (the Next s-frame) from one set of dimensions to another. Overlapping of dimensions, …
Would this work?

Thanks a lot,
Jano

 

[yppop]

Very nice thread. I am at page #2, so far so good and this is the first post that I would like to ask a question not knowing if it came up later. I am sorry for the repetition if it did.

How sure we are about 11 dimensions? It’s a theory, so more logical would be to assign it an unknown value. It could be more or less. I am inclined to believe the number is higher.

Hello Jaaanosik
The reason I used string theory to give credibility to my thesis, which is based on reality being constructed from nothing more than space - specifically discrete space - is that if the leading physicists can reduce all matter and energy to 11-dimensional space, then I feel just as comfortable in assuming the same thing, namely assuming that matter and energy are nothing more than configurations and incrementations of space. I merely take a simpler approach and contend that it is God that is the impetus of reality and not 11-dimensions of string theory. There is no observation that ever has or ever will verify that physical space has more than 3-dimensions. The 11-dimensions of string theory are purely mathematical.

Thank you for your response, I hope this answers your question.

Yppop

 

[yppop]

Hello Yppop,
Would this holonomic mechanism be applicable to other dimensions or it’s applicable only to our space and time?
Thanks,
Jano

Hello Jano
I developed my thesis on the basis that **God exists **and have devised a mechanism with which God could possibly have created and operates reality. God only needs three dimensions of space. However if He certainly could apply it to 11-dimensions.

Yppop

 

[yppop]

Yppop,
I am at post #40 and all I have to say is wow.
I am wowed and speechless because I would not believe that there would be somebody outside thinking like me and what you are describing here is very close to my understanding.

Having said that and because of that I’ll throw ‘a curve ball’ at you.

Why don’t we consider cosmological time just as a dimension?
So in our space time we have dimensions (x, y, z, t).
God can ‘play’ (apply the holonomic mechanism) in another dimensions (o, p, q, r, s), (a, b, c, d, g, h), …
Maybe God has a way of moving “things” (the Next s-frame) from one set of dimensions to another. Overlapping of dimensions, …
Would this work?

Thanks a lot,
Jano

Hello Jano,
My basic philosophical premise is that God creates at the implicate level of reality (the ground of reality) and science describes at the explicate level. God increments s-frames using algorithms; science observes and describes the result using a variety of mathematical equations while searching for a single Lagrangian (theory of everthing). Even when they find a Lagrangian that unites gravity with the other forces, they still will be no where near including other phenomena such as biological theories. I contend that the same holonomic mechanism could be used to explain all natural phenomena. The algorithms used in the holonomic mechanism will be written in the future that will describe reality more efficiently than developing a mathematical equation for each phenomenon. We are already training the algorithmists that will do it; they are currently doing very realistic computer simulations

The reason I have developed my thesis is to show how religion can rival science in the battle for the human mind. The reason I chose CAF to present it is to give those on the side of belief in God a plausible intellectual weapon with which to debate the materialist.

I am writing a book, and since I am 78-years old and a slow worker, I may never finish writing alone publishing it, So here is what I believe regarding ideas. It is a quote for Greory Chaitin’s book, *Meta Math, The Quest For Omega *

Fredkin told me that he spent years trying to make Feynman take digital physics seriously, and was very pleased to see his ideas reproduced in this passage in Feyman’s book ! For an idea to be successful, you have to give it away, you have to be willing to let other people think that it theirs! You can’t be possessive, you can’t be jealous… -

You are free to use anything I write in order to develop your own thoughts. And to answer your question about God shifting to another dimension, you have anticipated one of the ideas I developed based on an observation of modern science called the Many World Interpretation of the Scroedinger wave equation (parallel worlds theory). More on that in a future post.

It is nice that you think that there may be something in my posts that could have intellectual value. JD has been a great support in allowing me to present my thesis without turning this thread into a “discussion” in which the object is to debate each other’s propositions without a great effort to understand them.

Thank you for your comments.
Yppop

JD - I haven’t forgotten you; I am still working on the implicate view of animal behavior. Tommorrow perhaps.
Yppop

 

[JDaniel]

Hello Jano,
My basic philosophical premise is that God creates at the implicate level of reality (the ground of reality) and science describes at the explicate level. God increments s-frames using algorithms; science observes and describes the result using a variety of mathematical equations while searching for a single Lagrangian (theory of ever thing). Even when they find a Lagrangian that unites gravity with the other forces, they still will be no where near including other phenomena such as biological theories. I contend that the same holonomic mechanism could be used to explain all natural phenomena. The algorithms used in the holonomic mechanism will be written in the future that will describe reality more efficiently than developing a mathematical equation for each phenomenon. We are already training the algorithmists that will do it; they are currently doing very realistic computer simulations

The reason I have developed my thesis is to show how religion can rival science in the battle for the human mind. The reason I chose CAF to present it is to give those on the side of belief in God a plausible intellectual weapon with which to debate the materialist.

I am writing a book, and since I am 78-years old and a slow worker, I may never finish writing alone publishing it, So here is what I believe regarding ideas. It is a quote for Greory Chaitin’s book, *Meta Math, The Quest For Omega *

You are free to use anything I write in order to develop your own thoughts. And to answer your question about God shifting to another dimension, you have anticipated one of the ideas I developed based on an observation of modern science called the Many World Interpretation of the Scroedinger wave equation (parallel worlds theory). More on that in a future post.

It is nice that you think that there may be something in my posts that could have intellectual value. JD has been a great support in allowing me to present my thesis without turning this thread into a “discussion” in which the object is to debate each other’s propositions without a great effort to understand them.

Thank you for your comments.
Yppop

JD - I haven’t forgotten you; I am still working on the implicate view of animal behavior. Tommorrow perhaps.
Yppop

OK. I’m going to tie Jano’s hands to his chair! Just kidding, of course. I am glad that he is so keenly interested and asking questions. Anyway, I’ll leave you alone and look forward to tomorrow’s installment.

God bless,
jd

 

[Jaaanosik]

OK. I’m going to tie Jano’s hands to his chair! Just kidding, of course. I am glad that he is so keenly interested and asking questions. Anyway, I’ll leave you alone and look forward to tomorrow’s installment.

God bless,
jd

Now, having been informed what’s required, I’ll tie them myself.

 

[yppop]

JD, Jano
Just as nomos is the source of the holonomic mechanism that activates the cosmos and bios is the source of the cytonomic mechanism that animates the cell, nous is the source of the morphonomic mechanism that animates the animal. In other words, the behavior of an animal observed at the explicate level is simply the nous applying the cytonomic mechanism to the morphic s-frame (the body of the animal) at the implicate level. The nous is not just the element that increments the s-frame and thus to act, nous also is essential to the decision making as to how to act.

The element of the animal processor that determines when and how to act is memory. There are two types of memory: material and perceptual. Material memory is the structure of the neuronal circuits, in other words, how the nervous system is wired. At the lower end of the animal kingdom (insects) practically all behavior is based on material memory and practically no perceptual memory. Perceptual memory plays a larger part in higher forms of animals(mammals). It is observed that consciousness of animals is directly correlated to their degree of cephalization (concentration of the neuronal system in the head) and since the degree of cephalization is also directly correlated to the material complexity of the neuronal system, it can be argued that consciousness is correlated with complexity. The consciousness as a function of complexity plays out among the neurobiologist such as Nobel prize winner, G. Edelman, whose theory of consciousness is based on a complex arrangement of neuronal circuits that results in a process that he calls reentry. Let him tell it:

Reentry: The dynamic ongoing process of recursive signaling across massively parallel reciprocal fibers connecting maps. This process results in binding and is the basis for the emergence of consciousness through the workings of the dynamic core. Allows coherent and synchronous events to emerge in the brain; that is, it is the basis for spatiotemperal correlation. Gerald M. Edelman, Wider than the sky, pg.174

Reentry takes place in what Edelman calls the “reentrant dynamic core” as described in the following quote:

"The complexity of this core is enormous, but, as a result of dynamic reentry, certain of its metastable degenerate states can yield coherent outputs and the ability to distinguish various modal combinations in a high-dimensional qualia space."pg.115

And

"qualia are discriminations made possible by the activity of the reentrant dynamic core. pg.173

In spite of this verbal merry-go-around, the question of qualia is not answered. The main reason is that qualia are continuous and matter is discrete. All of this reentry stuff occurs in what I defined as the material memory. What he refers to as “qualia space”, I contend is the spiritual component of the animal’s neural system, the continuous nous of the perceptual memory. My model of dual reality, in which there are both modalities of space: discrete and continuous, is more conducive for describing the duality of mental states of animals. I believe science will never explain qualia until they recognize the existence of a spiritual component of reality.

At the implicate level, when animals corpusculate (sounds naughty but it ain’t) and captures a particle of nous, the spiritual substance associated with the mind of God, it acquires a dual nature in which the nous concentrates in the most complex part of the corpus, which in the higher end of the animal kingdom forms the brain. Consciousness is the manifestation of nous. Animals exhibit consciousness in direct proportion to the complexity of their neuronal system.

The nous that concentrates in the brain acts as a repository of the perceptual memory. The perceptual memory stores percepts and qualia. Percepts are selective images that generally have meaning to the particular animal. It allows the animal to know where he’s at, friend of foe, danger or safety, etc. Animals are without language, so must manipulate images as a lesser form of thought. I personally can’t think without words; and I have purposely tried to think by manipulating percepts without success. However I imagine that activities that require complete focus like gardening or hitting a baseball are examples of how the animal’s mental states work.

Qualia are the interpretation and direct experience of the sensations. Thus photons of a certain wavelength are experienced as “redness”; the touch of a hot metal is experienced as “pain”. In addition to the direct experience of sensations, qualia also includes feelings and emotions. Each species has its own set of qualia. The infomation (the algorithm) that drives the morphonomic mechanism is different for each species according to a prototype downloaded from the nomos. It is encoded in the animals DNA.

I contend that the entire spectrum of sensations is directly attributable to the spiritual component I call nous. It is God’s great gift to us: to see color, hear melody, smell a rose, taste a peanut, joy, comfort, and yes, even pain.

This all may be clearer when I begin my description of the human experience, the mind and soul, in my next post.

Thank you for your attention,

Yppop

 

[JDaniel]

JD, Jano
Just as nomos is the source of the holonomic mechanism that activates the cosmos and bios is the source of the cytonomic mechanism that animates the cell, nous is the source of the morphonomic mechanism that animates the animal. In other words, the behavior of an animal observed at the explicate level is simply the nous applying the cytonomic mechanism to the morphic s-frame (the body of the animal) at the implicate level. The nous is not just the element that increments the s-frame and thus to act, nous also is essential to the decision making as to how to act.

The element of the animal processor that determines when and how to act is memory. There are two types of memory: material and perceptual. Material memory is the structure of the neuronal circuits, in other words, how the nervous system is wired. At the lower end of the animal kingdom (insects) practically all behavior is based on material memory and practically no perceptual memory. Perceptual memory plays a larger part in higher forms of animals(mammals). It is observed that consciousness of animals is directly correlated to their degree of cephalization (concentration of the neuronal system in the head) and since the degree of cephalization is also directly correlated to the material complexity of the neuronal system, it can be argued that consciousness is correlated with complexity. The consciousness as a function of complexity plays out among the neurobiologist such as Nobel prize winner, G. Edelman, whose theory of consciousness is based on a complex arrangement of neuronal circuits that results in a process that he calls reentry. Let him tell it:

Reentry takes place in what Edelman calls the “reentrant dynamic core” as described in the following quote:

And

In spite of this verbal merry-go-around, the question of qualia is not answered. The main reason is that qualia are continuous and matter is discrete. All of this reentry stuff occurs in what I defined as the material memory. What he refers to as “qualia space”, I contend is the spiritual component of the animal’s neural system, the continuous nous of the perceptual memory. My model of dual reality, in which there are both modalities of space: discrete and continuous, is more conducive for describing the duality of mental states of animals. I believe science will never explain qualia until they recognize the existence of a spiritual component of reality.

At the implicate level, when animals corpusculate (sounds naughty but it ain’t) and captures a particle of nous, the spiritual substance associated with the mind of God, it acquires a dual nature in which the nous concentrates in the most complex part of the corpus, which in the higher end of the animal kingdom forms the brain. Consciousness is the manifestation of nous. Animals exhibit consciousness in direct proportion to the complexity of their neuronal system.

The nous that concentrates in the brain acts as a repository of the perceptual memory. The perceptual memory stores percepts and qualia. Percepts are selective images that generally have meaning to the particular animal. It allows the animal to know where he’s at, friend of foe, danger or safety, etc. Animals are without language, so must manipulate images as a lesser form of thought. I personally can’t think without words; and I have purposely tried to think by manipulating percepts without success. However I imagine that activities that require complete focus like gardening or hitting a baseball are examples of how the animal’s mental states work.

Qualia are the interpretation and direct experience of the sensations. Thus photons of a certain wavelength are experienced as “redness”; the touch of a hot metal is experienced as “pain”. In addition to the direct experience of sensations, qualia also includes feelings and emotions. Each species has its own set of qualia. The information (the algorithm) that drives the morphonomic mechanism is different for each species according to a prototype downloaded from the nomos. It is encoded in the animals DNA.

I contend that the entire spectrum of sensations is directly attributable to the spiritual component I call nous. It is God’s great gift to us: to see color, hear melody, smell a rose, taste a peanut, joy, comfort, and yes, even pain.

This all may be clearer when I begin my description of the human experience, the mind and soul, in my next post.

Thank you for your attention,

Yppop

Good. I have no questions for you at this time; although I can see some extrapolations and implications. They can wait.

God bless,
jd

 

[yppop]

Good. I have no questions for you at this time; although I can see some extrapolations and implications. They can wait.

God bless,
jd

We are animals. We are capable of animal behavior. We experience passive and active sensations. Our personalities derive from both innate and learned sources. Our bodies have acquired the same nous as have all the rest of the animal kingdom. We have both material and perceptual memories. We behave to fill the needs for identity, stimulation, and security. We act both reflexively and perceptually. Nevertheless, we possess a unique form of behavior that sets us many orders of magnitude above the rest of the animal kingdom; we are capable of rational behavior.

Rational behavior is predicated on thought. Thought can only occur with symbols. All symbols have form. Symbols, are discrete. In my model of dual reality. the brain and the rest of the nervous system are made of matter, which at the implicate level consists of specific configurations of s-points (discrete space). Therefore discrete symbols are stored in the discrete material memory.

The images that we picture “in our mind” are continuous. The spiritual component, nous, has the nature of continuous space and that is where the images (percepts) are stored; the perceptual memory resides in the nous.

Animals other than humans deal only with rudimentary symbols with low information content. Bird calls, scent markings, bodily postures are sensations that convey specific information on which the receiving animal will react perceptually i.e., with minimal reflection Such symbols induce mental states that are a form of pseudo thought. God gave humans the gift of language and, in fact, it is what defined the first man. Words have a high information content. Strictly speaking the mental states that we humans generate with words, thought, is orders of magnitude higher than any other species is capable of.

Words are stored in the material memory—the neuronal circuits of the brain; meanings and percepts are stored in the perceptual memory—the nous; Together they form the object that we call the mind. Only humans have minds. The mind allows us to transcend animal behavior and to act in a rational way. The mind is the moderator of the animal needs for identity, stimulation, and security.

However God chose to give humans free will, which simply means we are free to apply our rational capability to moderate or enhance the animal needs. Sin originates in the cells when the needs are enhanced rather than moderated. The choices one makes in life has an impact on the object we call the soul. A subject I will take up in my next post.

You may have realized that what I am talking about in this post is man’s moral state. There is much more that can be discussed regarding the mind: its other mental states such as creativity, reflection, contemplation, etc. and other forms of thought such as reverie, amusement, reason, learning, etc. and the whole business of qualia.

I will try to post tomorrow, thank you for your support in this endeavor.

Yppop

 

[JDaniel]

We are animals. We are capable of animal behavior. We experience passive and active sensations. Our personalities derive from both innate and learned sources. Our bodies have acquired the same nous as have all the rest of the animal kingdom. We have both material and perceptual memories. We behave to fill the needs for identity, stimulation, and security. We act both reflexively and perceptually. Nevertheless, we possess a unique form of behavior that sets us many orders of magnitude above the rest of the animal kingdom; we are capable of rational behavior.

Rational behavior is predicated on thought. Thought can only occur with symbols. All symbols have form. Symbols, are discrete. In my model of dual reality. the brain and the rest of the nervous system are made of matter, which at the implicate level consists of specific configurations of s-points (discrete space). Therefore discrete symbols are stored in the discrete material memory.

The images that we picture “in our mind” are continuous. The spiritual component, nous, has the nature of continuous space and that is where the images (percepts) are stored; the perceptual memory resides in the nous.

Animals other than humans deal only with rudimentary symbols with low information content. Bird calls, scent markings, bodily postures are sensations that convey specific information on which the receiving animal will react perceptually i.e., with minimal reflection Such symbols induce mental states that are a form of pseudo thought. God gave humans the gift of language and, in fact, it is what defined the first man. Words have a high information content. Strictly speaking the mental states that we humans generate with words, thought, is orders of magnitude higher than any other species is capable of.

Words are stored in the material memory—the neuronal circuits of the brain; meanings and percepts are stored in the perceptual memory—the nous; Together they form the object that we call the mind. Only humans have minds. The mind allows us to transcend animal behavior and to act in a rational way. The mind is the moderator of the animal needs for identity, stimulation, and security.

However God chose to give humans free will, which simply means we are free to apply our rational capability to moderate or enhance the animal needs. Sin originates in the cells when the needs are enhanced rather than moderated. The choices one makes in life has an impact on the object we call the soul. A subject I will take up in my next post.

You may have realized that what I am talking about in this post is man’s moral state. There is much more that can be discussed regarding the mind: its other mental states such as creativity, reflection, contemplation, etc. and other forms of thought such as reverie, amusement, reason, learning, etc. and the whole business of qualia.

I will try to post tomorrow, thank you for your support in this endeavor.

Yppop

Thank you for your (name removed by moderator)uts. Again, I am eager.

God bless,
jd

 

[yppop]

Thank you for your (name removed by moderator)uts. Again, I am eager.

God bless,
jd

In my last post I discussed the object we call the mind and defined it as the interaction of the material memory that is a product of the brain and the perceptual memory that is a product of the nous, our spiritual component. Just as nomos activates the universe with a procedure I call the holonomic mechanism (nomos gives the impetus to the cosmic s-frame to increment through a sequence of s-frames as directed by the cosmic algorithm), perceptual behavior is due to a procedure I call the morphonomic mechanism (nous gives the impetus to the morphic s-frame (the body) to increment through a sequence of s-frames as directed by the morphic algorithm). Like the holonomic mechanism the morphic mechanism consists of: an initial configuration that determines the objective of a specific action; information in the form of an algorithm that determines the specific path the body takes; and the impetus that puts it into motion. This is what I believe happens at the implicate level. With the morphonomic mechanism the spiritual (continuous space) activates matter (configurations of discrete space), so at the implicate level there is no body/mind problem.

Our souls are made of nous that is consubstantial with the nomos that is consubstantial with the infinite nothingness. Every soul is uniquely eternal, therefore must have form. We, of course, cannot know the form of each other’s soul, only God can. However I think I know the form of my soul and here is what I believe the form to be: as I pointed out earlier, consciousness which is the manifestation of the corpusculated nous seems to correlate with complexity and hence with the cephalization (the concentration of the nervous system in the head). Cephalization takes a quantum leap with the creation of the human brain. Hence, the nous concentrates in the brain and gives form to the soul that acts as the spiritual part of the mind.

The soul, if it is to advance along a path of increasing goodness, must seek sustenance from God, from His grace and in utilization of the gifts he conferred on each of us. If we are to partake of God’s sustenance, then the soul must form a portal through which the grace must flow.

The soul acting as a portal communicates in three directions: within, outward, and upward. the person that looks always inward without insight, acts subjectively, the portal diminishes, the soul shrivels and the person manifests a self-serving personality; the person that looks outward with tangential insight, acts rationally, the portal fails to grow, the soul stagnates and the person manifests an apathetic personality; the person that looks upward with radial insight, acts transcendentally, expands the portal, and the person manifests a personality full of grace.

Grace is a gift that comes in three packages: habitual, actual, and sacramental. Habitual grace is the gift of wonder that is accepted when contemplating and is rewarded with a feeling of awe. Actual grace is the gift of love that is accepted through compassion and is rewarded with a feeling of joy. Sacramental grace is the gift of piety that is accepted through worship and is rewarded with the feeling of peace. Refusal of God’s grace can lead to ennui, despair, and anxiety. How one deals with God’s grace determines the formation of the soul, which in turn, determines how decisions to act are made. The decision process invariably turns on choices between options. God gave us the gift of discernment with which make decisions and a soul to implement them, this is manifested at the explicate level of reality as free will. Making the God-inspired choices at the explicate level has an impact on the formation of the morphic algorithm (personality) and the size of the spiritual portal.

The soul, then, is the form of the spiritual substance, a portal that communes with God, the engine that drives the morphonomic mechanism and hence a person’s behavior, and the perceptual memory that creates the the kaleidoscope of sensations that leads to alife of awe, joy,and peace.

It is presumptuous of me to think that all this pigeonholing that I’ve done comes anywhere near explaining the human mind and soul, the most complex entity in the universe. It would take a book length presentation to do these ideas justice. They require examples and better organization to convey what I am trying say, so what my posts represent is a schematic and a list of elements for thinking about God and what we represent.

In my next post, I will try to summarize, in a coherent way, what I have presented. That may take a couple of days. When I have presented the outline, I hope there are those who would be willing to engage in a “philosophical” discussion, namely, to focus on certain elements of the outline and to arrive at a common understanding. I would prefer to create a communal thesis, a CAF thesis.

Thank you JD for your support in allowing me to make this very abbreviated presentation of a very extended thesis.

Yppop

 

[JDaniel]

In my last post I discussed the object we call the mind and defined it as the interaction of the material memory that is a product of the brain and the perceptual memory that is a product of the nous, our spiritual component. Just as nomos activates the universe with a procedure I call the holonomic mechanism (nomos gives the impetus to the cosmic s-frame to increment through a sequence of s-frames as directed by the cosmic algorithm), perceptual behavior is due to a procedure I call the morphonomic mechanism (nous gives the impetus to the morphic s-frame (the body) to increment through a sequence of s-frames as directed by the morphic algorithm). Like the holonomic mechanism the morphic mechanism consists of: an initial configuration that determines the objective of a specific action; information in the form of an algorithm that determines the specific path the body takes; and the impetus that puts it into motion. This is what I believe happens at the implicate level. With the morphonomic mechanism the spiritual (continuous space) activates matter (configurations of discrete space), so at the implicate level there is no body/mind problem.

Yppop:

The above paragraph causes me some consternation. This seems to imply that all things operate perfectly. But, as we know, they do not. Humans make good, bad and erroneous judgments - and act on them. What causes the human to make errors, for example, or to choose wrongly?

What’s more, animals err. The dog gets too close to the poisonous snake, for example. How do such errors in the algorithm work in such non-asymmetric ways?

God bless,
jd

 

[yppop]

Yppop:

The above paragraph causes me some consternation. This seems to imply that all things operate perfectly. But, as we know, they do not. Humans make good, bad and erroneous judgments - and act on them. What causes the human to make errors, for example, or to choose wrongly?

What’s more, animals err. The dog gets too close to the poisonous snake, for example. How do such errors in the algorithm work in such non-asymmetric ways?

God bless,
jd

JD
A great question.

The impression you’ve gotten is perfectly understandable. For one thing, pigeonholing, that is putting diffuse ideas in well delineated boxes, does not capture all the nuances, contingencies, and even discrepancies that a complex subject like human nature entails. I more or less flew by the possibilities for good, bad and erroneous judgments" with a single reference in post #71, in the last two paragraphs where I wrote:

"*However God chose to give humans free will, which simply means we are free to apply our rational capability to moderate or enhance the animal needs. Sin originates in the cells when the needs are enhanced rather than moderated. The choices one makes in life has an impact on the object we call the soul. A subject I will take up in my next post.

You may have realized that what I am talking about in this post is man’s moral state. There is much more that can be discussed regarding the mind: its other mental states such as creativity, reflection, contemplation, etc. and other forms of thought such as reverie, amusement, reason, learning, etc. and the whole business of qualia*."

I consider the personality to be a manifestation of the soul. And the soul/personality is the basic entity for decision making both good, bad and erroneous. So I think what you are asking is: how is the soul formed?. I believe each of us is born with a predisposed incipient personality that is enhanced, formed, and changed by the environment in which we are born. My wife and I have raised 8 children and have been closely associated with the rearing of our 22 grandchildren and believe me no two were alike throughout their childhood. At about the age of Confirmation, a personality emerges that often is different than the incipient personality with which they were born and then exposed to the environment in which they were raised. The emergent personality/soul is still influenced by their environment, but the environment has expanded to include strong influences outside the home. The transition to a mature personality occurs later in boys than in girls, but in both there is always room for improvement, which I believe is always a movement towards the teaching of Christ.

IMO the transition period is one where the lucky souls are exposed (or even better immersed) in the grace of God. And this can be done no better than through the Catholic Church and its teachings. I have among my 5 son-in-laws and 2 daughter-in-laws 4 converts that would give testimony to the efficacy of the Catholic Church’s influence on family life. My wife and I have successfully raised a family in which the Catholicism was an essential element. From that success, has emerged 7 successful marriages and 6 successful families (My one daughter and her husband are unable to have children and my one son is a priest.)

The decisions one makes depends on the nature of the soul/personality and the soul/personality is the result of an innate predisposition that has been formed by the environment through early childhood then exposed to or denied exposure to God’s grace throughout maturation. This, of course, does not guarantees a formation of a spiritually responsive soul . Persons that have been exposed throughout their lives to benign circumstances still turn out bad and persons that have been exposed to a malignant environment can turn out good. This is the problem of contingency.

In my model of dual reality, the information available to the cosmic s-frame is downloaded holographically from the Mind of God. Remember that each piece of a hologram contains the whole image that is contained on the complete hologram but with diminished fidelity. Hence errors occur and we have hurricanes in objective reality; wayward personalities in subjective reality; and apostasy in rational reality, just to cite a few deviations from the spiritual axis. And holographic contingency is why sometimes dogs get bitten by snakes. On the other hand, contingency is not all bad, it is the source of free will without which we would be nothing but automatons.

I think all of the elements in my model of dual reality have been presented. Are you still interested? If you are I have a suggestion for turning this thesis into a philosophical discussion rather than a dissertation, for which I aplogize.

Until I hear from you
Yppop

 

[JDaniel]

JD
A great question.

The impression you’ve gotten is perfectly understandable. For one thing, pigeonholing, that is putting diffuse ideas in well delineated boxes, does not capture all the nuances, contingencies, and even discrepancies that a complex subject like human nature entails. I more or less flew by the possibilities for good, bad and erroneous judgments" with a single reference in post #71, in the last two paragraphs where I wrote:

"*However God chose to give humans free will, which simply means we are free to apply our rational capability to moderate or enhance the animal needs. Sin originates in the cells when the needs are enhanced rather than moderated. The choices one makes in life has an impact on the object we call the soul. A subject I will take up in my next post.

You may have realized that what I am talking about in this post is man’s moral state. There is much more that can be discussed regarding the mind: its other mental states such as creativity, reflection, contemplation, etc. and other forms of thought such as reverie, amusement, reason, learning, etc. and the whole business of qualia*."

I consider the personality to be a manifestation of the soul. And the soul/personality is the basic entity for decision making both good, bad and erroneous. So I think what you are asking is: how is the soul formed?. I believe each of us is born with a predisposed incipient personality that is enhanced, formed, and changed by the environment in which we are born. My wife and I have raised 8 children and have been closely associated with the rearing of our 22 grandchildren and believe me no two were alike throughout their childhood. At about the age of Confirmation, a personality emerges that often is different than the incipient personality with which they were born and then exposed to the environment in which they were raised. The emergent personality/soul is still influenced by their environment, but the environment has expanded to include strong influences outside the home. The transition to a mature personality occurs later in boys than in girls, but in both there is always room for improvement, which I believe is always a movement towards the teaching of Christ.

IMO the transition period is one where the lucky souls are exposed (or even better immersed) in the grace of God. And this can be done no better than through the Catholic Church and its teachings. I have among my 5 son-in-laws and 2 daughter-in-laws 4 converts that would give testimony to the efficacy of the Catholic Church’s influence on family life. My wife and I have successfully raised a family in which the Catholicism was an essential element. From that success, has emerged 7 successful marriages and 6 successful families (My one daughter and her husband are unable to have children and my one son is a priest.)

The decisions one makes depends on the nature of the soul/personality and the soul/personality is the result of an innate predisposition that has been formed by the environment through early childhood then exposed to or denied exposure to God’s grace throughout maturation. This, of course, does not guarantees a formation of a spiritually responsive soul . Persons that have been exposed throughout their lives to benign circumstances still turn out bad and persons that have been exposed to a malignant environment can turn out good. This is the problem of contingency.

In my model of dual reality, the information available to the cosmic s-frame is downloaded holographically from the Mind of God. Remember that each piece of a hologram contains the whole image that is contained on the complete hologram but with diminished fidelity. Hence errors occur and we have hurricanes in objective reality; wayward personalities in subjective reality; and apostasy in rational reality, just to cite a few deviations from the spiritual axis. And holographic contingency is why sometimes dogs get bitten by snakes. On the other hand, contingency is not all bad, it is the source of free will without which we would be nothing but automatons.

I think all of the elements in my model of dual reality have been presented. Are you still interested? If you are I have a suggestion for turning this thesis into a philosophical discussion rather than a dissertation, for which I apologize.

Until I hear from you
Yppop

Yppop:

Yes, I remember your words from Post 71. I guess what I was actually thinking about was “sheer accidents,” more than the wills of men and women. I can easily walk out of my room and stub my toe. I could easily get into my car are run someone over. How would sheer accidents fit into what appears to me to be a well thought out asymmetry of configuring cosmic s-frames? And, since God is responsible for all, why sheer accidents?

But, since you expanded in a slightly different direction, you have brought another question to mind. According the the Church, we are each supplied with what is called, sufficient grace, when we are born. Sufficient grace is supposed to propel us into the mode of receiving more of God’s graces. But, sometimes it doesn’t. If it does not, it is thought that God does not waste any more grace on such people. Yet, they continue, still under God’s direct algorithm. This is confusing to me.

If you wish to turn this into a more discursive thread, please do. I am glad, though, that you had the chance to expand your ideas beforehand. How would you (all) like to proceed?

God bless,
jd

 

[Jaaanosik]

Yppop:

Yes, I remember your words from Post 71. I guess what I was actually thinking about was “sheer accidents,” more than the wills of men and women. I can easily walk out of my room and stub my toe. I could easily get into my car are run someone over. How would sheer accidents fit into what appears to me to be a well thought out asymmetry of configuring cosmic s-frames? And, since God is responsible for all, why sheer accidents?

But, since you expanded in a slightly different direction, you have brought another question to mind. According the the Church, we are each supplied with what is called, sufficient grace, when we are born. Sufficient grace is supposed to propel us into the mode of receiving more of God’s graces. But, sometimes it doesn’t. If it does not, it is thought that God does not waste any more grace on such people. Yet, they continue, still under God’s direct algorithm. This is confusing to me.

If you wish to turn this into a more discursive thread, please do. I am glad, though, that you had the chance to expand your ideas beforehand. How would you (all) like to proceed?

God bless,
jd

I am interested, flexible, whatever works for you guys.

It seems God’s grace could be related and understood in relation to soul. What is soul and where it is? That’s the question that maybe should be answered first.

Jano