A Quantum Theory of Consciousness May Require a Paradigm Shift in Biology by Maurice Goodman
It is often assumed that the known physical laws form a closed system and are complete. It is also assumed that biological theories require no additional principles that are fundamental other than those we already know. Assumptions such as these are acting as a barrier to progress in biological theories and an understanding of consciousness. This paper examines the unexplained inconsistencies among fundamental particles and forces and the fundamental gaps in our knowledge of biology and the cell in particular that may impact on such progress. Also, the laws of quantum mechanics are examined and found to be grossly incomplete. Furthermore, gravitational decoherence times are way too long and electromagnetic decoherence times are way too short to relate to millisecond brain processes. Surprisingly, weak force decoherence times over cellular distances are of the relevant dynamical timescale needed, suggesting that if any force is associated with the global properties in and between neurons (such as consciousness) it is the weak force. This finding concurs with a twenty year old theory that argues for a fundamental link between the weak force, electron neutrino and the biological cell. That theory also predicted the mass of the electron neutrino that is soon to be verified. The consequences for biology and future consciousness theories, of this radical change of paradigm, are considered. See http://jcer.com/index.php/jcj/article/view/429
The Universe Is Composed of That Which Is Aware of the Universe by Steven E. Kaufman
My philosophy is that That of which the universe is actually composed is not other than That which is aware of the universe. We, as formless Awareness, create the experiential forms to which we then cling, thinking that our continued being depends on our continued clinging. But how can our being depend upon something that we ourselves create, something that in the absence of our being, in the absence of our Awareness, cannot even be known? See http://jcer.com/index.php/jcj/article/view/430
The Nature of Reality in a Nutshell (Part I) by James Kowall
Reality is characterized by four aspects of reality: (1) forms of information, (2) the flow of energy, (3) perceiving consciousness, and (4) the Source of information, energy and perceiving consciousness. The scientific framework for this characterization is discussed in terms of the holographic principle, non-commutative geometry, an observer-dependent cosmic horizon arising in de Sitter space with a positive cosmological constant, and the one-world-per-observer paradigm. In this scenario, the observer is present at the central focal point of a cosmic horizon that arises in the observer's frame of reference, acts as a holographic screen, and projects the observer's space-time geometry. A consensual reality shared by many observers is possible if their respective horizons overlap. This scientific framework can only explain the nature of forms of information and the flow of energy. This leaves us with the quandary of how to explain perceiving consciousness and the Source. An argument is made that perceiving consciousness can only be understood as a focal point of consciousness that is differentiated from the Source and arises in relation to a holographic screen, in which case the Source can only be understood in the non-dual sense of an empty space of potentiality or a void of undifferentiated consciousness. This is Part I of the two-part article (the references are listed at the end of Part II). See http://jcer.com/index.php/jcj/article/view/433
The Nature of Reality in a Nutshell (Part II) by James Kowall
Reality is characterized by four aspects of reality: (1) forms of information, (2) the flow of energy, (3) perceiving consciousness, and (4) the Source of information, energy and perceiving consciousness. The scientific framework for this characterization is discussed in terms of the holographic principle, non-commutative geometry, an observer-dependent cosmic horizon arising in de Sitter space with a positive cosmological constant, and the one-world-per-observer paradigm. In this scenario, the observer is present at the central focal point of a cosmic horizon that arises in the observer's frame of reference, acts as a holographic screen, and projects the observer's space-time geometry. A consensual reality shared by many observers is possible if their respective horizons overlap. This scientific framework can only explain the nature of forms of information and the flow of energy. This leaves us with the quandary of how to explain perceiving consciousness and the Source. An argument is made that perceiving consciousness can only be understood as a focal point of consciousness that is differentiated from the Source and arises in relation to a holographic screen, in which case the Source can only be understood in the non-dual sense of an empty space of potentiality or a void of undifferentiated consciousness. This is Part II of the two-part article with references at the end of the article. See http://jcer.com/index.php/jcj/article/view/434
The Revealed Yet Still Hidden Relation between Form & the Formless by Steven E. Kaufman
Science holds that it is form that gives rise to the Formlessness by which all form is apprehended. Science has never even considered the opposite possibility. What is the opposite possibility? That it is when formless Consciousness reaches a certain level of complexity that physical forms poof into existence. How does that which is formless become complex? By flowing in relation to itself, over and over and over again. See http://jcer.com/index.php/jcj/article/view/431
What Is Versus What Should & Should Not Be by Steven E. Kaufman
The actual source of happiness is the absence of conflict with one's self, and that can be had regardless of whether "what is," in this moment, is or is not wanted. However, when one applies the idea "should not be" to that which is not wanted, then the self-conflict that creates suffering arises. The acceptance and allowing of the forms that arise in one's awareness as "what is" is the shovel that allows one to dig one's self out of the hole of self-conflict that is the ultimate source of one's suffering, as opposed to just continuing to dig the hole deeper using the shovel of what should and should not be. See http://jcer.com/index.php/jcj/article/view/432