Wednesday, September 27, 2006

But What Can You DO with This?

(Lest you be tempted to dismiss this research as a quasi-spiritual search for truth/God/something really big...)

Imagine if you will... the door to a highly-sensitive research laboratory, and the lock on the door isn't any form of bioverification, but rather a series of flashing lights linked to a random trigger. To unlock the door you have to activate the window of opportunity and then 'find the universe' where the lights flash in a predetermined pattern. If you can successfully control the randomness and get the lights to flash in a predetermined pattern within the window of opportunity, you gain access to the lab.

Imagine if you will... a quadriplegic, trapped in an immobilized body with no way to interact with his environment. Prototype technology that attempts to convert EEG recordings of brainwaves into instructional signals exists, but it is unsightly and imprecise. What if an visual interface with a random feed existed, where specific output patterns could be translated into instructional signals? Control the randomness, and feed your instructions to the machine.

Why hasn't this technology been developed? The basic formula of random feed plus perceptual interface is already in use in psychokinesis experiments around the world... But it is commonly perceived that your ability to influence such a device is sporadic and unreliable. Hhhmm... perhaps then what is needed is a paradigm and a training plan that will enable a person to gain better control over his ability to influence a random system at will.

Think it can't be done? Think again...

Friday, September 22, 2006

Randomness Isn't Random

One of the first things you need to learn before you are ready to live in Smearland is that randomness isn't random. (And yes, that contradicts the currently-held fundamentals of quantum physics. Einstein never liked the idea that chance and unpredictability were at the heart of the universe. And he was right.)

Random can be defined as "lacking any definite plan or order or purpose; governed by or depending on chance; unpredictable". But your ability to predict or identify a pattern depends on your KNOWLEDGE of the system. Therefore, what you perceive as random (or not) is based, in large part, upon what you know about the system. (You'll have to ponder this idea for awhile; it's simple, yet the implications are profound.)

Why is this important? Because we are searching for the hidden variables that determine what outcome will be observed. And we are looking where no one else has looked before - in the mind, where observation occurs.

Wednesday, September 20, 2006

Synchronicity, Coincidence, & Luck

What I'm doing doesn't seem quite so crazy when you stop to looks at all the concepts we have for the same basic idea - that there is a relationship between what the mind is thinking/believing/imagining, and what appears in the world around us. Think about the concepts of synchronicity, coincidence, and luck...

There have been two books written on the subject of exceptionally lucky (and unlucky) people. It is oddly coincidental that these books were written almost 30 years apart, yet both were called The Luck Factor, and both reached almost the same conclusions about the psychological correlates of luck. Almost... Both authors (Max Gunther and Richard Wiseman) described the role expectation plays in luck, but they are on opposite ends of the spectrum when describing the types of expectations held by 'lucky' people. Gunther claimed lucky people showed a marked tendency to expect the worst, while Wiseman claimed that lucky people showed a marked tendency to expect the best. An unresolvable contradiction in findings? Not at all...

There are many states of mind that fall under the category of 'expectation'. You might even go so far as to describe degrees of expectation, ranging from a vague feeling of apprehension, to a detailed image of what you expect to see and your reaction to it. Something to keep in mind when you are trying to navigate Smearland... What exactly where your thoughts leading up to the observation of this coin flip? Did you create an image of the flipped coin? Did you have an accompanying feeling of boredom, or a sense of impending failure?

We'll talk much more about specific states of mind, their neurophysiological and neurochemical correlates, and their effects in Smearland. But don't wait for me... Start paying attention to what is going on in your own mind.

Tuesday, September 19, 2006

The Elegant Universe

Yes, indeed. The universe and its laws are elegant, particularly when viewed from a slightly different perspective than the one you are used to...

In case you arrived late to the party... Quantum physics tells us that we only ever see one state of a particle that could have expressed any of several other mutually-exclusive states. It goes on to say that these particles exist in an entirely different way when they are not being observed. This causes a major and previously-assumed-to-be-unsolvable problem for those who'd like to know about the true nature of things.

The science of physics has drifted away from observation and into math to try to move beyond this problem. I ask - have we really learned all we can from observation? Perhaps it is simply time to alter what we are observing...

Rather than assume that the stuff of the universe is collapsing from wave state to particle state, and then reverting back to wave state when we aren't looking, why not take the perspective that our consciousness is simply only able to interface with 'reality' in a limited way? Rather than spend time trying to figure out the rules that govern the stuff (which we know we cannot observe in its 'true' state), why not spend time studying the interface (consciousness) and the the mechanisms and rules that govern it? Ten-dimensional string theories may generate great math, but they don't generate great testable hypotheses. Consciousness, as a phenomenon, has and does generate testable hypotheses.

Beyond the observer problem (a place few dare to go) is the problem of state selection. Of all the possible states of a system that we could experience, how is the state that we actually experience chosen? Again, if we shift our focus away from the behavior of things 'out there', and look to the dynamics of perception and cognition, we may begin to approach a logical and rule-based answer to this problem. Perception and cognition are already acknowledged mechanisms for deciding what from 'out there' will end up in conscious experience; why should they be excluded from a role in the state selection proces?

It has been suggested that state selection is accomplished by some type of differential(s); the nature of that differential(s) has been the product of speculation, as it has usually involved hypothetical constructs. What if the differentials are completely contained within the mechanisms of consciousness? What would they look like? How would they manifest themselves in our everyday experiences?

And the question at the heart of my investigation... How could we harness them?

Wednesday, September 13, 2006

Introduction to Smearland

"Listen, there's a hell of a universe next door: let's go!"

Imagine for a minute that the Universe had another dimension to it... Not the hypothetical, you'll-never-see-it dimensions of string theory or M theory, but an actual dimension that you could move through much as you move through space, provided you knew how to manipulate the forces that propel you through this dimension.

Naturally this extra dimension would have to be 1) integrated with our perceivable temporal and spatial dimensions, 2) capable of explaining more of our everyday experiences than the current 4-dimensional model, and 3) on friendly terms with Occam.

This 5-dimensional picture of the universe can be conceptualized as a multiverse - a Universe containing all possible parallel outcomes. And rather than rehash quantum physics, parallel universes, etc. in the necessary level of detail, for now let me give you this illustration of the multiverse... Suppose, when you flipped a coin, that it was possible to navigate your way to the universe where the coin landed on Heads, and that it was equally possible to steer yourself toward the universe where the coin landed on Tails. The outcome of the coin flip is not random at all; rather, our movement toward the final state of the coin is governed by laws and dynamics of force, just as our movements through the spatial dimensions are.

When you can understand and use these dynamics to plot a course through the sea of possible universes that is the multiverse, you have entered Smearland.

Tuesday, September 12, 2006

DISCLAIMER

I have spent many years collecting data and notes with the aim of one day writing a book or a (really long) paper. Haven't written that yet. But I have collected some thoughts on what I have studied and put them in this blog. As this blog is obviously not a scientific paper in a refereed journal, please accept the following suggestions and disclaimers before diving in...

In the event that what you read here distresses you in any way, you are cordially invited to view this entire blog as a piece of fiction: the work of an overactive imagination. Enjoy it and return to the ennui of the 'real' world. That doesn't mean that it is a piece of fiction; it's simply easier to tell yourself two words - 'science fiction' - than it is to get upset about anything you find here.

You should absolutely seek to verify anything you find here that you are tempted to believe. Seriously - don't take my word for any of this.

Some quotes found here may not include the proper attributions because these quotes have be recopied over time and the source information has been lost. Or I find that the quotes have more of an impact when the source is not acknowledged.

This blog may appear fairly chaotic in its presentation of ideas. Original post order has been maintained throughout the editing process, but some of the stimuli for the individual posts have been deleted. Also, some portions of the text have been altered for narrative cohesion, but the substance remains the same.

Additional editing may happen at any time.

Additional disclaimers may be added at any time.