The Here-and-Now by Clinton Kyle Miller

Kyle, i have been admiring your courage in dealing with the oldies on your posts on other essays too. Keep it up, as you act positively, thanks to 'here and now' or in other words 100% living in the present!

i think the post i refered to was made on the essay of Dr Carlo Rovelli. He is still to respond and i noted your interjection! Below i mention a few observations on 'consciousness':-

There are five levels, waking, dreaming, deep sleep, meditation and cosmic. The first three are experienced by all, while the fourth can be culvitated or one may be born with. The last is the ultimate and one may have glimpses of the same through the fourth level. Meditation is 'beingness without localism'. The proof lies in being fresh,sensitive, awake but restful.Opposing forces appear complimentary, anxiety (future) and tension(past)go away and one lives 100% in the present moment! All-embracing love follows and each cell of the body is alive with full life-force. Clarity and innovation follows as complexities vanish along with I-ego.Both intuitive and inspirational thinking dawns, as ignorance is replaced by wisdom.

My last posting of Oct 30 continues to the last on your essay! Thus, it is impertinent for me to sign in again. In fact , i re-read your essay today and felt i have something to share. Let me give the same pointwise below:-

1.It is difficult but not impossible to know about the first 0.4 billion years about our Universe. In my essay, i have conjectured the primordial matter to consist of heavy neutral quarks that decayed quickly to the the fractional charged quarks currently known from Particle Physics. Also, the dark matter being non-baryonic, it most likely to be constituted by such Quarks, frozen as such. Then, visible universe gradually resulted in the nuclei of light elements like H and He. These are the ones we need to look for prior to the formation of the first star around 0.5 to 1 billion years after the start. Such searches are possible but very difficult as one needs to go to the farthest steller objects lying 13 billion years back in time! Only the telescopes looking at various e.m. parts of the spectra, installed at moon or beyond will enable such data to be observed even today!

2. Science can't test causation, as it only answers how and not why. Why's are the Nature's own logic evolution, with no control, except of cosmic consciousness itself! Getting the value of 'Pi' is merely a calculative problem, which will always remain limited to our capapbility to calculate. No more significance need be attached to it.

3.Objective/subjective duality is intrinsic to the universe as perceived by us, the observer/observed duality. To this one may even add a third element ' the process of observation'. If the process of observation takes care of both the individual and cosmic consciousness together, things can change!

4. Connecting consciousness to what we call Quantum Theory of the day and then invoking Planck's scale to work out quantum nature of consciousness, is really like giving dominance to Q.M. over the non-physical entity 'consciousness'. 25 millisec. gamma-synchron is not verifiable from Neurological studies. It is also in conflict with the ideas of telepathy, intuition, miracles like prior information or inkling a human brain is able to develop! Kindly note a mention of Prof. Ecless, Nobel Winner neurologist, where he talks about the neuron activity in the SMA of brain, as none was expected from within. He then postulates an artificail covering around SMA of brain that intercepts and records outside influences on neurons. That information never dies as the non-physical sheath does not die with the body/brain!

5. In your triangle, the body and mind needs triangulation with consciousness, which need not be 'The Planck Scale'.

Dear Kyle,

hope you are gone from this site temporarily as i didn't receive response to last post of Nov.04. May i also request that you find time to go to other MSS i posted on my essay site soon after the main essay MSS got posted. These are ' Science Interface with Spirituality' and ' Inconstancy of the Physical Constants and Strengths of the Force-fields'. Spirituality may be treated as 'consciousness' if you are allergic to its 'wrong' association with the religions in this world! My essay MSS is really the third in the series i penned down after experiencing ' broadening ' of my perspectives following meditation cum Yoga practice!

Your essay was a delight to read.

I was also pleased to note the respected shown to Heinz Pagels by yourself and as shown in the various posts.

I was worried that I was the only one who appreciated him.

Good Luck.

I do agree with you, Clinton Miller, that the question of Time is an unsolved question that is blocking modern science.

This question drives obviously to the scientific method and the physics' tools/language in which the subjectivity introduced by Time plays a great part.

In other words, as Zeno of Elea and Aristotle pointed it, Time is the less objective 'thing' in the Science's field. The many ways to catch the Time through heart's pulse, sun-dial, temperature-scale, light-scale, speed-scale, regular flow of a drop, symmetry with the past, music, pendulum, etc., is betraying the subtlety of the Time 'phenomenon'.

But let me tell you that taking Einstein as an example is very surprising! Because Einstein is one of the most subjective scientists. 'Multiplying entities beyond necessity' is in fact exactly what Einstein is doing. In his special Relativity Theory for instance, one train motion phenomenon is multiplied in two speed rates. On this basis, exactly against Occam's advise, in the 'General Relativity' we have many 'arrows' mixing time and space, that is to say an objective matter with a subtle phenomenon. Here one have an example of the big trouble that a retrospective subjective idea of time is bringing.

Your mistake here in my opinion comes from the fact that you think the 'here and now' as a 'present time', a little bit like the German philosopher Heidegger does in his lessons about antique Greek Science ('sein-dasein'), although the 'here and now' is 'past time': coincidence is always 'a posteriori'. You do insist on 'present time' but you are still in past.

The idea of 'block time' is of course as subjective as Einstein's theory does. Instead of arrows you have cubes but made with time too. The strength of 'block idea' related to space and matter, is here only in our mind.

On this basis -Einstein or Quanta physics- you can multiply dimensions as many times as you will as Superstring theoricians do.

In my own statement I point the difference between two scientific languages or tools: Geometry and Algebra, and I explain why Algebra triumphated during the XVIIth in France. Geometry speaks about the internal structure of Matter although algebraic language is trying to catch outside 'phenomenons'.

For example Helmholtz or Riemann are misunderstanding Euclide when they think he is not precise enough: measurement or localization is not Euclide's goal.

And here is the risk of algebraic tool: although it let think that it is more precise and objective than Geometry, Algebra is the most approximate and subjective scientific tool.

When scientists are splitting the particle in their model in matter and wave, what do they do? They give to matter the value of a subjective 'a posteriori' algebraic idea of matter's motion. Future? Here and now? Dynamics? No: Past and statics!

There is one difficulty more, coming from your sagacious description of the (actual) laws of Physics as 'something akin to a notion of 'God'. This makes everybody going against these laws a 'Blasphemer'. I personally do not believe in the 'free Science' idea. This forum is an exception: scientific debate is usually as closed as a Monastery.

Hi Kyle,

The essay and document very much remind me of a wonderful book by William Samuel,

The Child Within Us Lives!

A Synthesis of Science, Religion and Metaphysics

And from a review by Richard Fuller,

"The Child Within Us Lives!, by visionary and philosopher William Samuel, pulls together the true nature of things, particularly time, space, matter and awareness (life). The result is a deeply meaningful perception of our original nature, the child within."

This really is "new" to me, and thanks for writing it.

Welcome back , Kyle. Your presence on the site is refreshing as you possess perhaps the maximum 'child-like' nature amongst us all in this essay competition. i shall get back to you after studying your 1 1/2 page on 'consciousness'.

Dear Kyle, your note on 'consciousness' is well presented. However, you have kept its scope limited to the three stages of wakefulness, dream and dep sleep only. There is a comprehensive aspect of it beyond the human beings (few thousands yrs. of existence) that links to the creation of the universe itself. It is clear that nothing physical has led to the creation of the physical universe! Cosmic consciousness is the most appropriate candidate as it is timeless,birthless and indestructable! Let me present a few points below to elucidate the preamble given above:-

1.There are plenty of mysteries documented alround the world relating to the prodigeous behaviour of young children ( beyond the DNA linkages ). These stand in contrast to your statement 'human is born without an understanding of the world around and only the interactions with othersd....'.

2. Some years back, i happen to see on the Internet a quote from Prof. Eccles, a Nobel awardee neurologist from University of Oxford, U.K.. He observed neuron activity in the Supplementary Motor Area (SMA) of the brain when none was expected. He postulated there appears to be external interactions that are stimulating the neurons in SMA. He expressed the belief that such interactions are getting recorded in a non-physical covering around the SMAS. The latter does not die with the death of the body and thus such interactions record is carried permanenetly after death of an individual.

As per the eastern traditions, with belief in re-birth of the soul in another body, there is a term called 'Samskaras'. That carries in nutshell the cosequencies of actions in the past birth into the present life.

3. You are correct when you assert about the harmful effects of 'conditioning' of a child through the modern education system. " We are not what we are made of!". It is true in our education system too. We all need to broaden the outlook to all existing knowledge in a holistic manner.

4. Asc indicated in earlier postings too, it is unfortunate that the people in the west confine to the western philosophy. There are hosts of personalities in the east who developed rich concepts for good living through their inward life research on human experiences, self as well as others. Any one can look up ancient literature on Upnishads, Puranas, Gita and Patanjali Yogashstra. Max Mueller of Germany was one author of modern days who has written extensive commentaries on such ancient literature of India. It is all about secular living with no connection to any practiced religion of the day.

In my own essay, the term Spirituality is secular in context and relates better with Humanity than religion.There is a misnomer in the west about Yoga/meditation, as propounded by Patanjali, as a religious text!

5. You are right to conclude that 'consciousness' is a conceptualization of exisitence and that we have still to go far and continue to 'wonder' about the mysteries of life as also of the Universe we live in!

6. May i request you to see my post of Nov., 13 on my own essay site!

Hope this post will also interest other authors in this essay competition, in order that we broaden our outlook beyond our upbringing and acquired education in the respective locations.

Once again your contradiction -Clinton Miller- is that you take the more subjective theoretical statement, Einstein's Theory, to prove that there is a break between objective Nature and subjective Scientific language. Although the break is between objective Nature and MODERN Science. That is to say C.K. Miller is himself prisoner of the vicious circle that I call 'Teleology'.

The matter becomes 'wave' or 'flow' through the Algebraic tool which is an approximations successives of Nature phenomenons that became model idea (see my own statement on this forum for more details -'Square Wheels Or Real Dynamics?'). Or:a Snowboard idea of Snow that becomes Board.

The paradoxes are obvious in the Algebra, not in the Matter, especially the paralogism of the 'Standard model'. The lack of dynamism is included is this word 'standard'. If you think 'standard', you will deduce a standardized Nature and this is the Quest for Higgs Boson!

- Dr Narendrah Nath should notice that starting from an opposed postulate, suggesting to let the Time and 'cognition' on one side, Dr C. Rovelli is adopting temperature scale at the end, chemical/biological analogy like C. Miller. Rovelli is driving the Subjectivity off but he does need a scale nevertheless. But the Scale IS Subjectivity.

C. Miller at is turn is fighting the Time with his 'here and now', but 'here and now' is 'Past Time' again coming back like a boomerang, not 'Present-Time' (about the same 'here and now'-Time that 'Quanta Physics' is translating in Future-Time!).

Furthermore, asking the question of the Nature of Time in the framework of 'Quanta Physics' or Einstein's theories is like asking the question of Light. Time which is everywhere now has been introduced by the studies and experiences on Light in France and England during the XVIIth Century (especially R. Descartes, C. Huygens, I. Newton).

Dear Kyle,

Nice to see that you have broadened your outlook a bit. However, i find you don't care to look at the eastern philosophies of Zen, Buddhism and the ancient litrature i cited for you from India.i even provided a reference of Max Mueller, the well-known German Philosopher cum Theologist who extensively translated the ancient Indian scriptures for the convenience of the Western world. UNless we open up ourselves to all the knowledge available today, how can one be sure about new cotributions, original or amended in a different language format. Words are often found to be inadequate to reflect the level of one's own thinking, what to say of others! Often i feel language/vocubulary needs to grow constantly if we hope to achieve something unique/innovative. The well known facts from the History of Science indicate taht many a great scientists were not understood or appreciated for great lengths of time, untill some others came on the scene to project those works in a different language so as to be better understood. When i was in USA during my graduation, i was told H.A. Bethe could not be understood until Weisskopf explained what Bethe had done!

Patajali Yoga Shastra surely will be available in the University Library of the University of Wisconsin. Only then you may appreciate how Pitanjali was able to comprehend the intricate relationship between the observer, the process of observation and the object under observation ( he called it 'cognition')way back 3000 yrs. back!. The subtle distinctions we are all attempting to make to define 'consciousness' is a mere intellectual exercise, rather any understanding in depth about this non-physical entity. Can one who is a creation by the 'other', ever comprehend the latter exhaustively or very positively?

Please do not mind if i appear blunt in my comments here, as i genuinely appreciate your originality in many other ways. None of us has the capability of a finality about fundamental matters!Even a majority in such matters can well be proven wrong one day. That is how TIME operates on all of us, truly a wonder!

I read your answer Clinton Miller that says: 'my 'here and now' is maybe part of the past but not only? That is splitting the split! Are you joking?

The subjective idea of Time we are turning around is Algebraic time, that is to say a reference where 'Past' is a vector, 'Future' another one and 'Present' the dot between the two vectors. On this level of subjectivity, Zeno of Elea proved that you can do away with motion and time in dividing the speed vectors 'ad infinitum'; symmetric of Zeno's demonstration is Einstein one.

One can make a figure of your 'here and now' using Riemann's algebraic sphere. But why not temperature scale? You just need a board.

What about intersubjective experiences now? The risk is autosuggestion in my opinion. And I am sure you will agree that computing many equivalent subjective ideas is not Dynamics.

An example: thermic laws are going both directions:decreasing when you sleep or increasing when you make an effort: here you have two subjective ideas of time that is going faster when you make snowboard (I do not and may be the snow is giving the idea of eternity in this sport?) and slowly when you are sleeping. And you, CKM are picking the death, which is properly an 'event', your 'here and now': it is autosuggestion in my opinion and Dr Narendra Nath will tell you that death is a new birth (and you have trigonometry).

But your example of one clock seen by two people is a good example of common autosuggestion of objective Time too. If nobody had the idea of making clocks, many other tools could have give us the same idea of objective time such as a sun-dial.

Causal Explanations in Thermodynamics...

http://www.jstor.org/pss/187068

Dear Kyle & LeRouge,

Let us come out of the biases that often become so much a natural part of ours that we don't see them so anymore. This requires a very strong training of the human mind. The quotes of Patanjali i made in my essay just indicate how very very difficult it is to get the mind to work beyond the distractions we all have. That is where Yoga cum meditation can help, but individual experiences may still differ as one doesn't truly surrender to the 'total knowledge' of the 'cosmic consciousness'. We all agree that science is rationality but we human beings can't get rid of 'emotionality' that gets reflected through our biases!

i tender my unqualified apology if the above comment appears like a sermon, i have no right to give to others!

Dear Kyle,

Kindly see my post of Nov., 13 on my own essay too. Also, reading literature is one aspect, the other concern the comprehension of the same. There we all may show differnt reactions to the same literature, as we comprehend the same according to our orientation of up-bringing, education and individual experiences in our lives.We can not hope for finality in any argument/reasoning, but we can approach a higher level towards relative truth by critical self analysis based on own experiences.

Are you sure, CKM, that the algebraic language, the angle made by 'vector time' and 'vector space' is the metaphor for 'hic et nunc' or 'hic et nunc' is the metaphor for algebraic language? Last one is my opinion contrarily.

In fact I do not doubt that Paris where I am is real; I do no doubt of my binary computer and keyboard either... But the 'now'? My intuition is that it is nothing else than a conventional word that makes the debate possible between three people like you, me and Narendra Nath for instance, but that is hiding different subjective ideas of time, related to different cultures and personal experiences. The dot is the consistency of your 'now' in other words, but there is no consistency in a dot.

Your 'here and now' do recall the latin culture as the 'ultima necat' just before. But Plato's idea about Time is not Aristotle's one, different from Zeno of Elea, who is not thinking like Zarathoustra, very different from M. Heidegger or K. Marx, not to speak about French M. Proust... (See Bergson's idea of 'duration' taken by Christine Dantas, close at hand of your idea.)

What I try to explain about algebra or arithmetic language is that although it seems to be the more neutral language that make intercultural debate possible, that do suggest objectivity too, it is the less neutral and the more subjective (contrarily to other languages, geometry first of all, but not only).

This suggested idea of neutrality and objectivity made Einstein's theories possible for instance and the 'travel in time', especially the theory based on one 'here and now' (simultaneity) recorded by two different observers, a theory where the subjectivity through algebra becomes more natural than Nature is. Special and General theories are based on algebraic autosuggestion and 'Higgs Boson' hypothesis too.

Last point is about the thermic or temperature scale you and C. Rovelli at least want to use instead of time/space ratio. In my opinion it is coming from the fact that you 'feel' that the speed ratio is not 'natural'. But temperature is as much intimate and subjective as time is, although this scale is less commonly used -it is by Helmholtz in his 'experiences' on gas particles.

But the key is not here, it is in the fact that 'space scale' is governed by two opposite ideas: idea of 'full space' and idea of 'empty space'.

- C. Huygens and his friend acting 'in loco parentis' R. Descartes 'think' space in terms of 'empty space';

- I. Newton their 'opponent' 'think' either in terms of 'full space' or in terms of 'empty space'... in the 'inspiration' of sun light.

What is tempting in Helmholtz thermic scale is the idea of 'full space again', that disappeared due to Einstein theories and useless static 'Probability theory' that creates 'fake time' and 'fake matter' on this basis.

Dear Kyle,

let me wish you the very best in your professional quests.Your response to me before the last post of F. Le Rouge is very apt and i wonder if you will care to respond again, for your studies demand a lot at your stage of life. All good luck!

To F. LeRouge's post above, it is interesting to distinguish between filled and empty space. What will you say about the emptiness of atom's structure when compared with mighty nucleus having almost the entire mass. To me, atom is empty except for the nucleus. At the microscopic level as well as at the macroscopic level of the Universe, i see empty space far far dominate over tiny specks of filled space. What will you make of it. i personally see that 'consciousness' is playing some sort of 'havoc' with Physics. To the human senses, we feel almost all space as filled. Just goes to show that we use words or terms just to play around in our physico-biological world while the reality lies with 'consciousness'- a non-physical entity! As some one felt that the science has ended or if i may add it has just begun to emerge!

Maay i hope our youngest friend , Kyle will speculate further on such aspects so that the humans have a better future in this Universe than what we have had thus far!

Read your also post and also glanced through the two reprints enclosed. The Halographic quantum Geometry appeals to me more than the other paper concerned with Quantum Gravitational effects and Grsnd Unification. Yes, we truly are living in a virtual world generated by the non=physical 'consciousness'. Pure vibration free consciousness is beyond observation while its manifested vibrational consciousness is what appears as our Universe and all its contents , including the Human beings!Science presently is limited by what we can sense through our instruments.The accuracy and sensitivity is improving day by day and thus new facts /interpretations of observed facts are becoming possible. But this does limit us to reach even near the ultimate possibility, since costs will become tremendous, as are evident from the cost of Geneva Large Beam Collider.The present failure in beam sustenance is a small way the nature has indicated the forthcoming difficulties. These are all a product of human fancy but certainly there is a limit to it. The best Lab. given to us is the Nature of the Universe available to us. in my persona;l opinion, the better approach lies with Wilkinson Type telescopic probes put in outer space. These have already given us clues through Microwave Anisotropy of what little we know scientifically about our Universe. Carrying similar stations to the Moon and beyond are going to help better than earth based Accelerators! Cosmic radiations in space are also good indicators where we can see the particles not yet discovered or even postulated. In my essay,i have speculated on some of such possibilities!

Finally, i am convinced taht Human Mind is the best Laboratory that we have. Keeping it in the 'right mind' can help us a lot. For this we need to sacrifice the kind of high technology life we have built thus far in the human comforts. These have only increased human anxieties and tensions at the cost of 'Peace of Mind'. In a way, i hint at such points in my essay. As a scientist, i have fely how very important it is to value our Humanity over what scince has done for us thus far! Let us learn to match and balance the two, before the nature gives a final warning of doom/collapse. The current so-called financial/economic crisis is entirely due to human mistakes we have committed, ignoring to balance the technology with humanity in a way all the people the world over can assimilate in their life-styles. Living beyond one's means is just a small aspect of the same! Our future Science is also tied to it closely. There are things beyond the money wealth and we as humans need to do vigorous search for such 'wealth'!!