I Have a Quantum Question & a Complaint to Corey DeVos (Re-post)

This is just a re-post after noticing some typos.  Everything is the same as before.  I don't expect anyone to dare respond to this but should you care, please feel free to do so.

11:41 PM - I Have a Quantum Question (Re-post)
Current mood: high
Category: Religion and Philosophy

Friday, December 19, 2008

I Have a Quantum Question and a Complaint to Corey DeVos
Category: School, College, Greek

Part 1: Differentiating Gebser's Manifestations of the Fourth Dimension from Pre-Trans Fallacy

Current mood:  presentiating
Category: acategorical

..
 

Let us pause and observe for a moment that by introducing time as a fourth dimension, Einstein made possible changes in our knowledge of certain phenomena and occurrences which altered the foundations of physics and mechanics. But when we speak today of a fourth dimension, a wider frame of reference than that of Einstein's theory of relativity forces itself upon the observer, one which links the fourth dimension not merely with time or even the measurable time of particular movement of velocities, as in the case of Einstein's theory, but rather with the assumption of an invisibly efficacious component.

 

(Gebser)

 

I will attempt to explore a strange yet increasingly visible component of mutations called "parallel quadruplicities." These are symmetries created across the space-time continuum by at least two to four individuals (per set or symmetry) who are separated by space, time, or by both, so as to never come in contact with each other on a personal basis yet who repeatedly make similar discoveries independently of each other. These discoveries, when noted, create a pattern or a symmetry across not merely "space-time," but also across the achronon as they unfold. 

Occasionally, symmetries occur "simultaneously" (in the sense that they occur either instantaneously or within a 10-year interval); but from personal observation they appear to be patterns that unfold over time or sometimes simultaneously. Something perhaps akin to "nonlocal correlation," a term coined in twenthieth-century physics that I came across while reading either The Tao of Physics or Quantum Questions when I was 27 years old.

 

Thus far I have noticed a second person and possibly a third on Myspace who is regularly in the habit of stealing my ideas or experiences before I think or have them and then posting them as if they were their own. My theory is that it occurs on Myspace on the Internet not as willful or conscious act within the respective co-participants or "ego-consciousnesses" (unless they become conscious to it) but occurs, instead, consciously within "the itself" ("beyond ego" in the transpersonal realm) for the sake of "presentiation," that is, for the sake of "making present."  By "Present," I mean:

2.  The "Present" is not identical with the "moment" but is the undivided presence of yesterday, today, and tomorrow which in a consciously realized actualization can lead to that "presentiation" which encompasses origin as an ineradicable present.

[placeholder for definition]

Should they fail to count as "presentiation," I would like to get to the bottom of these anomalies once and for all.

I need to re-read Quantum Questions to refresh my memory of the current question so as to better tease apart Gebser's concepts of four dimensional, indeterminancy, and parallel-quadruplicities from New Age concepts relating to "quantum mechanics proves Eastern mysticism" of the 1970s. Wilber has already debunked these theories of Fritjof Capra, David Zukav, and Deepak Chopra and others as narcissistic and simple reductionism.  This--in spite of these authors having their "heart in the right places" and being "well-meaning" for the sake of integration between science and religion. 

 

I've actually had the opportunity to communicate with "Fritj" himself, author of The Tao of Physics, via fax conversation during my senior year of college in '94. At the time, I was taking a philosophy course called "Science and Religion" and was writing a research paper called "The Red Queen, Eastern Mysticism and Twentieth-Century Physics," which explored the mysterious relationship between subatomic particles and Eastern mysticism and philosophy. At the time, I thought I was in the midst of some major scientific breakthough or discovery; unaware that this particular scientific or New Age paradigm had come and gone some time between the '70s-'80s, when I was only a kid.

 

Gebser, incidentally, was highly influenced by findings in the new physics of the early twentieth century such as Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle and Einstein's Theory of Relativity.  He went on to interpret the findings of these and other disciplines of his day as irruptions and manifestation of the newest mutation in consciousness structure, in which the basic concern of consciousness shifts from spatiality (having sufficiently mastered "space") to that of temporics (a basic concern for time in all of its manifestations).  I am wondering why Wilber rarely (if ever) gives any treatment to time component of Gebser in his theory of consciousness.  Of course, I do realize that in the context of "primordial ground" or unmanifest formlessness of origin (which is always ever-present), there is no "space" or "time" to speak of.  However, whenever we speak of the manifest world in terms of consciousness-development or unfolding, there is indeed a reification of both space and time to reckon with in terms of increasing dimensionality.  There is also an increasing reification of the achronon [placeholder for link].

Gebser differs from Capra, et. al. in that he did not postulate that at the crux of this issue is whether consciousness truly alters the behavior of these subatomic particles by way of observation; nor whether any of these discoveries made in the the new physics have any validity in the exterior macro (spatial) world of Newtonian physics.  Nor, for that matter, did he argue that physics has any validity in the interior super-macro (and temporic: which includes also the timeless) transcendent spiritual realm beyond merely citing the discovery of these phenomena in physics as examples of a basic concern for temporics.  This is my interpretation.  Gebser did, however, incorporate a great many concepts from twentieth century physics such as "indeterminancy" and "time" as a fourth dimension into his overall theory of consciousness-development. 

My current guess is that changes occur in subatomic particles as a result of light that is shined directly on these particles by instruments that interfere with these particles while in the act of observation; but not from "consciousness" or observation itself. However, at the time of writing my paper in '94, I was thoroughly convinced that the opposite held true in light of my conversation with Capra and his book, The Tao of Physics.  I had even used Wilber's Quantum Questions (my introduction to transpersonal psychology) to prove my contention.

 A short time after submitting this paper--which my professor praised as being "the most fascinating paper he had ever read in his entire career"--I decided to re-read Wilber's book, Quantum Questions, which I had used as one of my sources for my research paper. At the time, I was in the habit of "skipping around" in a book so up to then, had only read a few essays of some physicists whose mystical writings were included in the book. So it wasn't until I actually went back to read the other portions of the book that I had previously skipped over (such as the important foreward or introduction written by Wilber) that I discovered that I had misread Wilber's position on "physics = mysticism" entirely.  And this is when I initially made the shocking discovery that my professor had, in so many words, called my failure (my research paper) "art."

 

Quantum Questions wasn't at all about "physics = mysticism" but was instead, a critique about the New Age movement and popular science writers who had popularized that notion during the '70s and '80s and as a consequence were being reductionistic in their thinking toward spirituality. When I made this realization at age 27, in 1994 or '95, it was a paradigm shift.  Except that this time, it was not a scientific breakthrough but, rather, about an inner breakthrough or discovery that was subtle yet far more significant and profound: my initial irruption, as it were, out of deficient Green immersion.

Part 2: About saying things out loud & my complaint to Corey DeVos

I emailed you, Corey, to get your permission to upload the conversation to my Reverbnation player to share with others at my blog on Myspace, which I feel provides a good introduction into the problem of Boomeritis as it relates to the Eastern mysticism and quantum physics. I was too young to be a part of Boomeritis but am told that I am afflicted with the narcissism. I disagree with such criticisms: I am not narcissistic: only honest. Honest as in, I've just figured out the meaning of these lyrics:

 

"Jump down turn around shake it on a Saturday nite, you don't have pay the crowd, but if you're gonna say it, say it out loud, YEAH!"

(Track ? on Reverbnation)

The song is about saying thing out loud and calling attention to certain things that should be kept silent.

Part 3: A Note to Everyone

But now to shift gears and return to my opening paragraphs from another post, "Update: Another Live Performance Coming Soon:

If 'surfaces, surfaces, surfaces was all that I saw,' it was not because I didn't like the inside of a person but only that I found the outer shell of a person too disagreeable or disturbing as a consequence of hypersensitivity. This position or attitude is not a 'personal thing' or a matter of personal choice but may well be condemned as superficial or "unevolved" by those who are prone toward neurotypical bias or to delusions of spiritual grandeur or superiority. To some extent, at least in the social arena, the charge of my superficiality is possibly justified. And I will be the first to grant that in many different lines of personal development, I am less evolved than most individuals due to arrested development, emotional immaturity, an immature nervous system, or to abnormalities in the reptilian complex.

 

Were it not that I am faced with predators who regard me as a highly desirable sexual object to be taken advantage of (which compounds my issue of hypersensitivity), perhaps my issue of hypersensitivity could be more flexible or more forgiving and less of an issue. For this reason and others, I have avoided social contacts but not as a personal thing but rather a Sensory Processing Disorder issue. This disorder is further complicated by another neurological disorder, Asperger Syndrome: which is not always comorbid with Sensory Processing Disorder and ADHD but on rare occasions does indeed manifest comorbidly as a trivalent condition (as in my particular case). In addition, Asperger, combined with my committment to "just the truth of it, please," predisposes me toward political incorrectness and to the spiritual verticality of agency as opposed to the horizontality of communion or community.

 

I still intend to write about Gebser's philosophical contributions to the role of time as a novelty in the four dimensional structure of consciousness as I feel that it is necessary to differentiate his writings from mysticism = new physics from New Age thinking and popular junk science from the '70s and '80s. In addition, I also plan to discuss similarities and important differences between Gebser's discussions on manifestations of the newest consciousness in four dimensionality from those manifestations that are merely reactivations of lowered forms of consciousness from previous structures, such as the reactivation of deficient magic from the one dimensional structure or deficient psychic phenomena from the two dimensional structure, both of which are phenomena invoked unnaturally by psychics, mediums, or shamans.  Otherwise, these phenomena are invoked unwittingly or accidentally by "average" individuals who do not operate from higher structures. Yet, because of certain similarities shared by phenomena from these lower structures with manifestations of the newest consciousness in the fourth dimension--namely, that they all defy mechanical-causal explanations of rationality and logic within the three dimensional spatial world of "space,"--they are potentially all going to be "lumped together" and categorically dismissed by those who are Integral as "pre-trans fallacy" or New Age "spiritism" irrespective of dimension or structure of the manifestation or phenomena from which they arise.   

I find it to be of signal importance to distinguish aspects of previous dimensions of consciousness from the arational and from manifestations of the achronon so as to integrate the work of Wilber with Gebser.  And also to make allowances for the reality of these various "supernatural" phenomena occurring within their respective structures.  Most of them are instances of reimmersion into magic or mythic consciousness both of which are structures still contained in us and superimposed on top of the reptilian complex, the most primitive portion of the brain.  Otherwise, these prerational, irrational, or arational phenomena may be dismissed categorically by the Integral as "pre-trans fallacy" and make-believe and/or categorically defined by those believers of New Age spiritism or shamanism as 'proof' of "spiritual evolution" irrespective of structure or dimension.

 

At first, I felt that this Wilber-DeVos introduction may have been necessary for an introduction on Ken Wilber's work on pre-trans fallacy with regard to quantum physics and Eastern mysticism to my Myspace readers. It still would have been ideal; but as I've had no luck in response from you, Corey, for permission to use your and Ken's audio (in spite of the fact that you've read my request), I will assume that you have a philosophical problem with the fact that I am a pirate or am occasionally prone on very rare occasions to criticize Ken's work from a theoretical standpoint. This is really unfortunate as Corey was the first and only person to personally welcome me into the integrallife.com community. For this reason, also, I have removed all audio conversations that I had once featured on Ken Wilber on my Reverbnation player until I go through the proper channels in consideration of copyright or piracy issues. I have not done so with any of the other artists on the playlist, all of whose works were copied without their permission but still remain on my Reverbnation until further notice.