The Post-Quantum Physics of Matter, Mind, Consciousness by Jack Sarfatti

I have no idea what your point is here? I never use the words "complex invisible" You admit your idea has nothing to do with my essay. Therefore, I have no interest in spending time on your theory. Best of luck.

Perhaps this may help?

I also remember seeing it I think it was by Penrose a whole list of different scenarios for different scales of orch OR but I can't quite remember where I saw it

I think I can say is that when Roger talks about non-computability that is physically realized by post quantum local retro causal entanglement messaging due to action reaction between waves and particles

Indeed I think this also relates to Godel's incompleteness theorem because incompleteness in mathematics depends upon all mathematics being an algorithm and which steps occur in only One Direction in "time"

In terms of graphs Godel only tacitly considered tree graphs without closed loops that correspond to CTCs (Deutsch Lloyd)

Sent from my iPhone

On Mar 3, 2017, at 9:45 AM, Hameroff, Stuart R - (hameroff) wrote:

I'll try and find a copy. For some reason its not on my website at the moment.

I agree the pathway qubits are topological and resistant to decoherence (or premature OR which replaces decoherence).

We (me, Tuzsynski et al) described that in our 2002 paper 'Conduction pathways in microtubules'. Bandyopadhyay has experimentally shown quantum states in microtubules for as long as 0.1 msec.

s

--

If it ain't broke don't fix it it's not a good idea to try to reinvent the wheel

What I'm trying to say is that I will not waste any of my time on new theories when Einstein's theory works perfectly well if it is properly applied, the same for quantum theory

what I am doing is radically conservative in John Wheeler sense

I am building upon battle tested well-established theories

PS I am only interested in this particular form in discussing the details of Roderick Sutherland's important new extension of quantum theory

I will not spend any time on people's original ideas for fundamental new theories of physics

This paper has just come to my attention

"Quantum theory from rules on information acquisition

Philipp Andres Ho ̈hn

Vienna Center for Quantum Science and Technology, and Institute for Quantum Optics and Quantum Information, Austrian Academy of Sciences, Boltzmanngasse 3, 1090 Vienna, Austria

E-mail: p.hoehn@univie.ac.at

Abstract. We summarise a recent reconstruction of the quantum theory of qubits from rules constraining an observer's acquisition of information about physical systems. This review is accessible and fairly self-contained, focussing on the main ideas and results and not the technical details. The reconstruction offers an informational explanation for the architecture of the theory and specifically for its correlation structure. In particular, it explains entanglement, monogamy and non-locality compellingly from limited accessible information and complementarity. As a by-product, it also unravels new 'conserved informational charges' from complementarity relations that characterise the unitary group and the set of pure states.'

My comment: I like this approach. Nonlinear non-unitary non-statistical PQM would also follow from this kind of way of looking by allowing keyless entanglement signaling equivalent to Sutherland's action-reaction weak destiny/history wave-particle Lagrangian and Valentini's "sub-quantum non-equilibrium" ~ CTC non-algorithmic processing NP -> P etc.

On Mar 6, 2017, at 11:04 AM, art wagner wrote:

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1612.06849.pdf

"One nit to pick:

' ... we now know how to make observed quantum entanglement connecting widely separated particles consistent with Einstein's relativity.'

Though I know this is the majority view,"

In fact it's not. Majority view is that there is some kind of "faster than light" nonlocalty and that does contradict Einstein's CLASSICAL assumption that no action at a distance outside the light cone. The advantage of local retrocausality as recently convincingly argued by Huw Price, Rod Sutherland and others is that it explains the completely metric independent nature of quantum entanglement. That is, with the old idea of Costa de Beauregard's "zig-zag" (also found in Aharonov's and Cramer's models) the spacetime separations between the future strong measurements of the parts of the entangled whole are irrelevant - they can be timelike, light like or spacelike.

"no one has ever observed quantum entanglement without first assuming that which was to be proved."

Your remark is unintelligible to me.

"Relativity suffers no such disadvantage. Better to make quantum theory a subdiscipline of information theory."

Very vague, what's your point?

You do not understand what I am saying. Quantum theory is not complete as a physical theory in the same way that special relativity is not complete physically. General relativity is to special relativity as post-quantum mechanics is to quantum mechanics. Special relativity and quantum mechanics both fail to obey the action-reaction organizing meta-principle. There is no back reaction of matter on spacetime in special relativity. Similarly, there is no back reaction of matter and spacetime on their respective quantum information pilot waves in quantum theory in the Bohmian picture. The Copenhagen et-al pictures are seriously incomplete because they only have quantum information waves without any matter and any spacetime as classically independent "beables" in the sense of the Bohmian picture.

As far as formal completeness, Godel "proved" that any formal system of sufficient complexity is incomplete if it is to be consistent.

I understand that, Jack.

"Special relativity is internally consistent, however. Try tinkering with one of these postulates:

-- the laws of nature are uniform in all inertial frames.

-- the speed of light is constant in vacuo.

Is there not reversibility built into these statements? One can define a superluminal particle from these principles as one which changes trajectory without changing velocity. This is purely physical, and from repeated action of this sort one derives Einstein's (and Descartes') philosophy that no space is empty of field."

False. One can have tachyons in SR. In QFT the appearance of a tachyon is an instability trigger of a spontaneous symmetry breaking of the ground state e.g. Higgs mechanism, superconductivity, ferromagnetism, crystal formation etc. see P.W. Anderson "More Is Different."

"That seem to be your action-reaction organizing meta-principle, and it is all local; i.e., superluminal particles can't be distinguished from their counterparts that we count as real."

You are very confused here. There is no connection between superluminal particles and PQM action-reaction. As a matter of fact in weak measurement sense superluminal motions of the particles do happen between the strong measurements in the QM limit with zero PQM action-reaction. However the anomalous effects are washed out by quantum noise if you only look at strong measurement data. Sutherland explains all this in detail.

Antony Valentini has argued that the Born-Feynman probability rule (i.e, to take the modulus square of complex number path amplitudes ~ exp[i(classical action)/hbar] and to add the amplitudes coherently before squaring when the outcomes cannot be distinguished, but to square first before adding when they can, is not a fundamental law of nature, but is an accident corresponding to what he calls "sub-quantum equilibrium." What I am calling "Post-Quantum Mechanics" (PQM) corresponds to Valentini's "sub-quantum non-equilibrium" in which what he calls entanglement "nonlocal signaling" happens.

Subquantum Information and Computation

Antony Valentini

"It is argued that immense physical resources - for nonlocal communication, espionage, and exponentially-fast computation - are hidden from us by quantum noise, and that this noise is not fundamental but merely a property of an equilibrium state in which the universe happens to be at the present time. It is suggested that 'non-quantum' or nonequilibrium matter might exist today in the form of relic particles from the early universe. We describe how such matter could be detected and put to practical use. Nonequilibrium matter could be used to send instantaneous signals, to violate the uncertainty principle, to distinguish non-orthogonal quantum states without disturbing them, to eavesdrop on quantum key distribution, and to outpace quantum computation (solving NP-complete problems in polynomial time)"

https://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0203049

Valentini wrote the above in 2002 before Huw Price, Ken Wharton, Rod Sutherland convincingly explained, in my opinion, that spacelike nonlocality is not a good way to think of quantum entanglement. The alternative "Costa de Beauregard zig-zag" used implicitly at least by Yakir Aharonov and John Cramer in their respective interpretations of quantum theory, is preferable because it is consistent with the symmetries of Einstein's classical theories of relativity if we allow "weak measurement" future causes of present effects as well as the usual past causes of present effects of orthodox von-Neumann "strong measurement" interpretations. Indeed, the observed violation of Bell's inequality can be most simply and elegantly understood as the effects of future causes (strong measurements) of past effects (at the moment of emission of a pair). From this point of view it is obvious why the space-time separations between strong measurements of the localized parts of the entangled whole do not matter. Those separations can be spacelike, timelike or lightlike even in curved classical spacetime where one can try to connect them with corresponding geodesics. Huw Price has also pointed out that John Bell was confused on the difference between "super-determinism" and "local retrocausality." This confusion caused him to erroneously think that local retro-causality conflicted with "free will." All of this presupposes that we live in a "block universe" one physicist in particular thinks that this means there is no dynamics. This not the place to argue this, although, I mention it in passing, since it was discussed in this workshop. Suffice it to say, that the Lagrangian form of dynamics only makes sense in the block universe picture in which we take the global 4D spacetime view. The "dynamical" view is that of the Hamiltonian formulation (3D + 1). One beautiful result of Sutherland's fully relativistic Lagrangian for Bohm's pilot-wave particle theory is that because of the Costa de Beauregard "zig-zag" and the use of Yakir Aharonov's advanced "destiny" and retarded "history" waves in the "weak measurements" of the particle motions between strong measurements, is that we no longer need higher-dimensional configuration space in the description of many-particle entanglement. Indeed, Sutherland has applied this notion to the problem of quantum gravity.

From the structure of Sutherland's Lagrangian, which has classical particle parts independent of h as well as quantum parts dependent on h, it became clear to me that Valentini need not use the word "sub-quantum." The "beables" are not at some hidden level at all. They are at the classical physics level. Furthermore, Valentini thinks that "non-equilibrium matter" is only found around the time of the Big Bang. On the contrary, I propose that all living matter is "non-equilibrium matter" in the sense of locally-decodable key-less entanglement signaling that is strictly forbidden in the limit of orthodox quantum theory. Indeed, I propose that Sutherland's weak measurement action-reaction piece of his Lagrangian corresponds to what Valentini called "sub-quantum non-equilibrium." Furthermore, when one reads Roger Penrose's books, e.g. Emperor's New Mind, Shadows of the Mind, Fashion, Faith and Fantasy etc. one sees mention of the possible importance of Herbert Frohlich's macro-quantum coherence in pumped open non-equilibrium dissipative structures. This leads me to further conjecture that any such open macro-quantum coherent pilot wave, but classically thermodynamically non-equilibrium system will be post-quantum with Sutherland's action-reaction not equal to zero. Indeed, I conjecture that the PQM action-reaction term will be proportional to the amount of external pump stress-energy current densities above Frohlich's critical threshold. The mathematical model here is formally similar to that of a coherent laser beam above threshold rather than in the thermodynamic equilibrium of a conventional Bose-Einstein condensate. Now it turns out that Sutherland's PQM action-reaction is proportional to a factor, which when set equal to zero in the limiting case PQM 竊' QM is exactly de Broglie's guidance equation that the particle world lines coincide with pilot wave "fluid" stream lines (gradients of the phase of the pilot waves). This explains why, in a beautiful way, we can dispense with the particles entirely in the orthodox quantum limit and pretend they are not there. Of course, doing that leads to bending over backwards with contortions like "wave function collapse", "problem of the classical limit" etc. - all non-problems in the Bohmian 1952 picture not to be confused with his later less intuitive "implicate/explicate order" speculations. I have no need of that hypothesis here. Finally, it needs to be pointed out that the basic Sutherland Lagrangian theory is non-statistical "God does not play dice" (Einstein) it is nonlinear and non-unitary. The statistical linear unitary QM limit comes from doing several things:

1) setting the wave action-particle reaction term to zero

2) integrating over the future destiny causes of past effects with the ad_hoc Born rule weighting factor ||^2.

As an example the Aharonov weak measurements at x are of the form for a local operator J

< J(x)>w = J/

Therefore, the integral over all possible = J

And it appears as if time only flows one-way from past to future in accord with the Arrow of Time of the Second Law of Thermodynamics as in Henry Stapp's talk at this conference for example.

That w equation did not come through OK I need to change the < to (

w = (destiny|x)J(x|history)/(destiny|history)

integrating over all (destiny| as a complete set with the Born weights |(destiny|history)|^2 gives

= (history|x)J(x|history)

Comments on David Kaiser's How the Hippies Saved Physics relevant to the essay,

"Little could Herbert, Sarfatti, and the others know that their dogged pursuit of faster-than-light communication--and the subtle reasons for its failure--would help launch a billion-dollar industry. ... To Stapp, Bell's theorem and the landmark experiment by group member John Clauser led to the "conclusion that superluminal transfer of information is necessary."6 And so the agenda was set. The question of superluminal information transfer, and whether it could be controlled to send signals faster than light, would occupy Herbert, Sarfatti, and the others for the better part of a decade.

Their efforts instigated major work on Bell's theorem and the foundations of

quantum theory. Most important became known as the "no-cloning theorem," at the heart of today's quantum encryption technology"

[Sarfatti Comment of March 8, 2017

I now realize, though many of my colleagues are still stuck in the "faster than light" explanation of quantum entanglement, that "local retrocausality" i.e. future dynamical causes of past effects explain all of quantum entanglement weirdness.

What John Bell really proved is that the common sense idea that there are only past causes of future effects is wrong. There is no need to invoke faster-than-light action-at-a-distance that is in violation of the 'spirit' if not the "letter' of Einstein's special theory of relativity. The local retrocausal explanation of quantum entanglement is more general than the faster-than-light explanation because the former neatly explains why the space-time separations among the future strong measurements of the localized parts of the entangled network make no difference in the absence of intervening noise decoherence from the environment. The idea of future causes of past effects in a block universe was already introduced by Wheeler and Feynman for classical electrodynamics and then for quantum theory by Feynman. It was taken up by I.J. Good, Fred Hoyle, Yakir Aharonov, John Cramer, but most importantly by Oliver Costa de Beauregard in his "zig-zag" back in the 1950s. We were all aware of it in the 1970s, but because of Bohr's ghost in the hypnotic rhetoric of the Wizard Wheeler, we were in a spell and did not properly realize its importance until recent work by Huw Price at Trinity College, Cambridge and Roderick Sutherland at the University in Sydney. Therefore, all the references to "faster-than-light" in Kaiser's book do not reflect my current view on the meaning of quantum theory. Of course my efforts and Nick Herbert's efforts in the 1970s to make a faster-than-light quantum entanglement communicator using only quantum mechanics were doomed to failure because no one then really understood its limitations. It was only through our failures that others like Stapp, Eberhard, Wheeler's students Zurek and Wooter's et-al were prodded into inventing the no-cloning and other no-signaling theorems. However, this does not mean that Nature does not allow locally decodable keyless entanglement signaling. In fact Nature does allow it in living matter as seen in brain presponse and the SRI CIA precognition data et-al. It just means, as Einstein thought, that quantum mechanics is incomplete and that God does not play dice with the universe.

"Suppose there is even something vaguely teleological about the effects of consciousness, so that a future impression might affect a past action." Roger Penrose, "The Emperor's New Mind" pp 442-445 (1989)

"It seems to me that biological systems are able in some way to utilize the opposite time-sense in which radiation propagates from future to past. Bizarre as this may appear, they must somehow be working backwards in time." Sir Fred Hoyle, "The Intelligent Universe", p. 213 (1986)

The issue of using entanglement as a command-control-communication network is a separate issue the realm PQM (Post-Quantum-Mechanics) that contains QM (Quantum Mechanics) as a limiting case in the same way that Einstein SR (Special Relativity) is a limiting case of GR (General Relativity). Eugener Wigner's "action-reaction" organizing meta-theoretic principle for construction of theoretical physics models is the common thread connection PQM to GR. QM and SR both violate Wigner's action-reaction principle restored by Rod Sutherland in his fully relativistic weak measurement Bohm pilot-wave/particle Lagrangian able to handle many-particle entanglement in a completely local retrocausal "zig-zag" manner that dispenses with the need for higher-dimensional configuration space. Sutherland has also applied this idea to field theory in his paper "Naïve Quantum Gravity."]

Wheeler sent Sarfatti a preprint of his 1974 Oxford talk, for example, complete with its "participator" stick figure and self-actualizing universe cartoons, and it made a deep impression on Sarfatti. He began to cite it and build on its ideas even before Wheeler's essay had appeared in print.29 Sarfatti aimed to stitch these diverse ideas together. ... Sarfatti took the point that everyone's consciousness participates in shaping quantum processes, both by deciding which observations to make and by collapsing the multiplying possibilities into definite outcomes. Sarfatti recast Wigner's main argument in terms of action and reaction. Surely matter can affect consciousness--LSD and other psychedelic drugs had made that lesson clear enough--so why not posit an equal and opposite reaction of consciousness on matter? To Sarfatti, such a move paid double dividends: it opened up a possible avenue for understanding psychokinesis, and it offered hope that Age of Aquarius students might come back to physics classrooms, finding new relevance in the subject.30 Most mental contributions to the behavior of quantum particles, Sarfatti continued, would be "uncoordinated and incoherent"--that is, they would each push in different directions and, on average, wash out. But, as Uri Geller seemed to demonstrate, certain talented individuals might possess "volitional control" such that they could impose some order on the usually random quantum motions. Some "participators" seemed to be more effective than others. Moreover, thanks to Bell's theorem, these individuals could exercise their control at some distance from the particles in question. In short: perhaps Geller could detect signals from far away or affect metal from across a room because the quanta in his head and the quanta far away were deeply, ineluctably entangled via quantum nonlocality. Bizarre? No doubt. But was it really any more outlandish than Wheeler's giddy flights?31 Sarfatti's first effort to bring Geller and psi into the rubric of quantum physics appeared as the lead article in the inaugural issue of a brand-new journal entitled Psychoenergetic Systems. Brendan O'Regan, whom Sarfatti first met at the Stanford Research Institute psi lab before departing for Europe, helped launch the journal to feature just this kind of reasoned--and, granted, speculative--investigation into effects beyond the usual boundaries of science. ...

In September 1975, Jack Sarfatti gave a presentation to the group on "Bell's theorem and the necessity of superluminal quantum information transfer." A month later, Herbert followed up with his own presentation on "Bell's theorem and superluminal signals."5 That December, Berkeley physicist and Fundamental Fysiks Group member Henry Stapp also weighed in. As he put it, "the central mystery of quantum theory is 'how does information get around so quick?'" To Stapp, Bell's theorem and the landmark experiment by group member John Clauser led to the "conclusion that superluminal transfer of information is necessary."6 And so the agenda was set. The question of superluminal information transfer, and whether it could be controlled to send signals faster than light, would occupy Herbert, Sarfatti, and the others for the better part of a decade. Their efforts instigated major work on Bell's theorem and the foundations of quantum theory. Most important became known as the "no-cloning theorem," at the heart of today's quantum encryption technology. The no-cloning theorem supplies the oomph behind quantum encryption, the reason for the technology's supreme, in-principle security. The all-important no-cloning theorem was discovered at least three times, by physicists working independently of each other. But each discovery shared a common cause: one of Nick Herbert's remarkable schemes for a superluminal telegraph. Little could Herbert, Sarfatti, and the others know that their dogged pursuit of faster-than-light communication--and the subtle reasons for its failure--would help launch a billion-dollar industry. Like Nick Herbert, Jack Sarfatti was quick to appreciate some of the practical payoffs that a faster-than-light communication device would bring. In early May 1978, Sarfatti prepared a patent disclosure document on a "Faster-than-light quantum communication system." The document was the first step in a formal patent application. In addition to filing his disclosure with the Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks in Washington, DC, he sent a copy to Ira Einhorn, scrawling across the top: "Ira--please circulate widely!" (This was a year before Einhorn would be arrested for murder; his "Unicorn preprint service" was still in full swing.) [Sarfatti's talk] began by citing Clauser's experimental tests of Bell's theorem, before citing a preprint of Henry Stapp's paper on superluminal connections, which Sarfatti most likely received directly from Stapp at one of the group's weekly meetings.7 Sarfatti began to pull out of his downward spiral in the early 1980s. Perched at his regular location (Caffe Trieste, North Beach, San Francisco), he had fallen in with a curious crowd: politically conservative thinkers who were drawn to certain New Age ideas. Chief among them was A. Lawrence ("Lawry") Chickering. A graduate of Yale Law School, Chickering worked for the conservative magazine National Review before returning to his native California in the early 1970s to direct the statewide Office of Economic Opportunity under Governor Ronald Reagan. Near the end of Reagan's term, Chickering founded a new political think tank in San Francisco, the Institute for Contemporary Studies, and convinced such leading conservatives as Edwin Meese and Caspar Weinberger to join the Institute's board. Chickering quickly became known as the intellectual leader of the "New Age Right." Where others had seen only left-leaning collectivist ideas on display at Esalen or in the Eastern mysticism craze, Chickering discerned a strong element of "personal responsibility." Borrowing from est and the human potential movement, Chickering tried to hone anew "therapeutic vocabulary," as he explained to a journalist: some new means of discussing contentious political issues in a way that emphasized each faction's common ground. When Reagan was elected president in 1980, and Meese and Weinberger joined the new cabinet, Chickering suddenly had the ear of the White House. Sarfatti, in turn, had the ear of Chickering.7 Chickering sent memos to highly placed bureaucrats in Reagan's Defense Department touting Sarfatti's work and lobbying for funds to support further research. At a March 1982 dinner in Washington, DC, hosted by Secretary of Defense Weinberger--until recently a board member of Chickering's think tank--Chickering struck up a conversation with the undersecretary of defense for research and engineering. He followed up with a long letter a week later, to describe in more detail "the work of a physicist friend of mine which just might have profound implications for certain aspects of the technology of warfare."8 Chickering mentioned the CIA memorandum from 1979 that had expressed some interest in Sarfatti's ideas, and then made his pitch. "Jack says that if in fact we can control the faster-than-light nonlocal effect," then one could make "an untappable and unjammable command-control-communication system at very high bit-rates for use in the submarine fleet. The important point here is that since there is no ordinary electromagnetic or acoustic signal linking the encoder with the decoder in such a hypothetical system, there is nothing for the enemy to tap or jam." "I know this sounds like science fiction" or even "occult 'sympathetic magic,'" Chickering admitted, "but no one honestly knows for sure at this point." Wouldn't it be in the nation's interest to invest a little of the Pentagon's discretionary funding to test Sarfatti's hypothesis, rather than ignoring the idea until some rival country ran with it instead?9 ... Chickering introduced Sarfatti to a whole new network of people. Around the time of his memo to the Pentagon, for example, Chickering and a friend (the wife of the Reagan administration's new ambassador to France) met in Paris with physicist Alain Aspect, right in the midst of Aspect's groundbreaking experiments on Bell's theorem, to convey messages from Sarfatti.13 When an editor of the journal Foundations of Physics compared Sarfatti's unusual position to that of another "rogue" physicist who also sought to challenge physics orthodoxy without a stable institutional position, Sarfatti was quick to draw a distinction. "The difference is that I am now getting a sympathetic hearing at the highest levels of President Reagan's Administration ..." ... Newly immersed in Chickering's circle, Sarfatti's political leanings swung solidly to the right. He began to write with characteristic ire about the leftist excesses of people and groups with whom he had enjoyed close relations only a few years earlier. A typical rant dismissed "charlatans and 'New Age' anti-rationalists of the drug-crazed and meditation-glazed 'counter-culture,'" with their "pop-Eastern mysticism."15

[Sarfatti Comment March 8, 2017 Here Kaiser makes a mistake confounding cause with effect. He did not realize that my earlier memo of 1981 that got to Reagan via Paul Nitze and also Cap Weinberger Jr contained the words "rendering nuclear weapons impotent and obsolete."]

His ideas harnessing quantum entanglement likewise began to reflect the latest political hues. For example, Sarfatti imagined fulfilling Reagan's famous call to render nuclear weapons "impotent and obsolete"--the phrase Reagan used in March 1983 when announcing his new Strategic Defense Initiative, or Star Wars program--by shooting entangled quantum particles at enemy missiles from space-based battle stations. The particles would induce harmless nuclear reactions inside the warheads, rendering the fissionable material inert. Unlike many of his other brainstorms about Bell's theorem, this one made it into print, appearing in the journal Defense Analysis in the mid-1980s.16

"The application to deep space communications is obvious," Sarfatti concluded: messages could be relayed instantly across vast, cosmic distances. Benefits would accrue closer to home as well, such as "giving instant communication between an intelligence agent and his headquarters"--that is, espionage. Clearly his prior experiences with Harold Puthoff, Russell Targ, and their remote-viewing experiments at the Stanford Research Institute had left their mark. "In this case," Sarfatti clarified, "we would not use the above system but would use the same principle using e.g. correlated psycho-active molecules, such as LSD, affecting the neurotransmitter chemistry." Presumably the image of CIA agents doped up on LSD, communicating instantly with operatives half a world away via correlated brain impulses, seemed no more far-fetched than the parapsychological effects in which Sarfatti had been immersed for years.9"

[Sarfatti Comment - indeed they are not as shown by Hal Puthoff and Russell Targ.]

Kaiser, David (2012-07-16). How the Hippies Saved Physics: Science, Counterculture, and the Quantum Revival . Norton. Kindle Edition.

Yea, it cannot be true if PQM is true. Classical computers do not have giant quantum coherent pilot waves that receive impressions directly from their classical electomagetic fields and charges. Qualia are those impressions. Therefore, no classical computer can be conscious as a matter of fundamental law IF PQM is a good map of that territory that we call physical reality.