Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
1Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
A New & Very Advanced Physics - The Emerging Model of an Idi

A New & Very Advanced Physics - The Emerging Model of an Idi

Ratings: (0)|Views: 23 |Likes:
Published by Azure

More info:

Published by: Azure on Oct 27, 2012
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

09/16/2013

pdf

text

original

 
 1 
A NEW AND VERY ADVANCED PHYSICS:THE EMERGING MODEL OF ANIDIOMATERIAL NATURE
 
 A. R. Bordon 
LIFE PHYSICS GROUP - CALIFORNIA
In neoclassical physics – the post-Einstein physics ruled by the Standard Model – the means aretheory and model-making, and the method is an empirical one: experimentation. In the “soft” sciences such as the social sciences (as opposed to the “hardest” of sciences – physics), themethod is an experimental nomothetic empiricism. The key to science done within the StandardModel in physics seems to lie in what is admitted in as data: it must be “physical” and bepropelled by theoretical requirements prompted by the Standard Model.Even strings and superstrings, highly mathematical entities, must induce integration of naturalphysical forces – the strong, the weak, electromagnetism and gravity. And when strings aregiven sensorial conformations, they are visualized as vibrating single strand, corkscrew-like andclosed loop in shape. The substance of physics then begins at the Planck limit and extends allthe way to the upper limits of the EM range. In the world, this is the domain between infinityand the infinitesimal.  And then there is a physics of life, driven by a pursuit of ultimate causation and the theoreticalmodel and principles by which David Bohm’s enfolded “orders” unfold upward and downwardcausality chains. This is not a theistic pursuit to prove God exists – though an emergingWorking Model hints at a vast and elegant superintelligence as prime source. Life physics’ unwitting pursuit has turned out to be (1) ultimate causation (or the decipherment of whathappened before the Big Bang in “negative” time and “negative” space), (2) the formulation of superdomains that stem in sui-genesis from a T-boundary (which an emergent Working Modelpredicts they exist outside the limits of 4-spacetime), and (3) the accessing of asupercontinuous plenum by a geometry of interconnectivity through a growing understanding of discernible rules (which means levels of manifestation in ratios of space/time by which causalityvectors move “up” or “down” strong negentropic orders of symmetry [utmost near the T-boundary, and relatively least in 4-spacetime]). Physical science today is dominated by a Platonic material realism, in which cause (as upwardcausation) stems from the interaction and movement of elementary particles, thus making thismovement of particles the ultimate causal agency of everything in 4-spacetime. “Consciousness” and “mind” in material realism are but mere epiphenomena, totally secondary to the causalpower of matter. 
 
 2
  At the opposite end of the paradigmatic spectrum, we find monistic idealism, in which “mind” and “spirit” and “consciousness” reign supreme. In this paradigm, causation runs in a downwarddirection – from mind and spirit to matter. A complex oscillating biological entity (such as ahuman being) acting in the world then behaves with causal power in this paradigm.  And then, here comes a physics of life prompted by an initial pursuit of “principles” and “rules” and “logic” that could operationalize Bohm’s enfolded orders of the implicate, but which endedup connecting the dots of a model of ultimate causation and causality. In doing so, those of uswho engaged in extension neurosensing (or ENS) (a form of clairvoyance-on-demand promptedand assisted by technological means which used a physics-of-life model applicable to life onEarth known from the Working Model as biogeosystemics) connected (or interfaced) withinformation of such “size” and “density” that surpassed all previous “takes” as to constitute averitable cumulus.From this gargantuan cumulus of information, the seven extension neurosensors (six others andmyself) began the arduous, often daunting task of decoding (or translating interfaced cumulusinformation into sensorially meaningful information) and deciphering (interpreting and assigningmeaning to decoded accumulated) information. It is this process that I have led over the lastnine years, deciphering all sensorially meaningful accumulations into an emergent picture. Andit is this “picture” that has become our Working Model. 
METHOD AND THE EMERGENT PICTURE OF NATURE
 What kind of picture does Nature paint of itself as this Working Model? Well, to use philosophyas the canvas and philosophical paradigms as the broadbrush with which the “picture” can bedeciphered, we can say that Nature paints itself as monist-idealist
and 
material-realistic. TheWorking Model paints her as idiomaterial (comprising of Bohmian relatively independentsubtotalities) manifested in all of the Model’s superdomains as monistic idiomorphs whichundergo a transformative process with definite protocolar “stages” of transformation – fromthought-matrix transforms early on, to more condensate-transforms, culminating in a templaicconformation (or quantum potential) which the Working Model says to work in tandem with 4-spacetime EM (electromagnetic) templates in a continuous mirrored “dance.”   Along the way, traditional terms (e.g., consciousness, spirit, matter, mind, reality, and particle)ceased to have any meaning at all to the seven of us. The explanatory demands made bydeciphered information almost immediately required a new “languaging system” that couldallow the preservation of integrity and accuracy of the deciphered information. To wit,languaging system (in the sense used here) is much more than mere spoken or writtenlanguage. It must also take into consideration the method used (extension neurosensing orENS), the modalities of information acquired and their innate characteristics, and the sensorial
 
 3
translations that must be made to make the information intelligible and accessible to humanintellectual demand characteristics.  A neurosensor interfaces with an information cumulus capable of containing an informationdensity and bandwidths that far surpass any form of accessing by mere intellectual means. Thekind of information accessed can best be described as vitalizing, or vitalized. It would come at,often, many different gradient of enfoldments, will contain visions and emotions and sounds of strange characteristics – often coming from levels of manifestation in which four or more spatialdimensions expressed the percepts in the neurosensor’s holonomic experience.  Another parallel and correlative gradient may express emotive information of such depth andoverwhelming power that would require a neurosensor to decode and decipher this aspect inbite-size fashion, using “filters” which allowed him or her to experience the emotionalbandwidth often accompanying other information modality streams with a modicum of safecomfort. Information also manifested in sound forms, which initially would have little or nomeaning to inexperienced neurosensors.  All in all, the effort has not been to develop abstractions of sensorial transforms, but to learn tothink and experience in a holonomic fashion in levels of manifestation higher than 3-space and1-time, and be able to “translate” it all into 4-dimensional holonomic experience and intelligibleintellectual expression. In fact, holonomic experiencing is the desired medium of decoding alldetected “raw” data.Holonomy – a holophrastic term that captures an entire aspect of the neurosensingmethodology – is the means by, and through, which a neurosensor “fleshes out” the detectedinformation from a cumulus into a 4-dimensional perceptual gestalt. It is such gestalten thenthat serve as the perceptual “platform” from which meaning could be carefully andsystematically derived – although not necessarily in discrete languaging (i.e., standard spokenand written language, in Eastern/Western language meaning sets). Neurosensors learned to treat “knowings” as “working hypotheses” of what is understood as “first passage” through the cumul (or information aspect of the cumulus being deciphered).They are also encouraged to revisit any given cumulus as many times as necessary to developincreasingly more global grasps of the content information, or of any one aspect thereof.Thus, it is not uncommon for aspects of a gestalt to be revisited often, for in doing so, aneurosensor peels more of the embedded meanings of the gestalt, and therefore, he or shemay modify internal knowledge with more accurate intellectual grasps of the relevantinformation under consideration. How many times is this required? In practical terms, as manytimes as required to have a working understanding of the aspect of a given cumulus of interestto any one of us.

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->