The addition was the heat and the lizard hallucinations. An example of subtraction would be looking for a book on the shelf and not seeing it even though it is plainly insight. I don't know how many times I have looked for a book on the shelf and couldn't find it because I am thinking, for some reason, it has a blue cover and instead it has a red one. The book can be plainly in full view but because of my bias for a blue cover I can not see it on a conscious level.
We humans are extremely limited on what we can sense. For example, our visual spectrum is limited to around 380 to 750 nanometers. And what we can hear runs from around 20 to 20,000 Hz. This hearing range is further limited by the amount of pressure we can detect.
When I started thinking about these and other limitations, I wondered what we would experience if we could access it all. The "answer" hit me like a bolt of lightning: If we experienced everything we would experience nothing. One way to look at this is that if we saw the complete spectrum of light we would be swamped. What we would see would probably be an intense blinding glare of absolutely white light.
Similarly, if we heard the entire spectrum of sound we would experience a din so loud that we would be aware of nothing in particular.
We gain our awareness by severely filtering the candidates that make it to our consciousness. I have heard it said that our unfiltered inputs number around 4,000,000,000 but we are aware of -- at even at the unconscious level-- is on the order or 2,000. That amounts to less than 0.0001%!!
When I first read about the Multiple Drafts Model I was struck by the similarities to it and quantum probability.
A useful simplified discussion of quantum probability would be the thought experiment "Schrodinger Cat". In this example the cat in a closed box is both alive and dead until observed. When an observer enters into the picture and "sees" the cat it immediately is either dead or alive but not both. Prior to the observation the cat was both alive and dead!
In the Multiple Drafts Model, many processes offer an explanation for an observation and perhaps one is selected. This seems to be comparable to quantum probability in that many mental states exist simultaneously until one is observed. The "unobserved" states evaporate and are usually below our level of awareness or are quickly forgotten.
The two seemed similar in that something in multiple simultaneous fuzzy states collapsed to something in a well defined state. Keep in mind, that I am approaching this from the point of view that both the body and the observed phenomena are part of the "real" world. This means whatever quantum laws are affecting the "material" states is affecting the "material" and "mental (configuration of neurons)" states of the observer too. Both collapse into states consistent with each other. However, the "mental" state is subject to interpretation of the "experiencer". Which in my experience seems to be completely open ended. I guess this leaves room for imagination, hallucinations and delusions. And I got the feeling that what determined the end "physical" state of the observed and the "experiencer" was the observer field. And I mean to separate the "experiencer" from the observer.
The observer is the field encompassing both the observations and the "experiencer". The "experiencer" in my mind is just part of the subset of "reality" and not really differentiated from the observation by the observer.
To the observer the "boundaries" of the two systems are artificial and an artifact of the limited awareness of the "experiencer". They are both parts of the universal puzzle whose ever changing edges still have to fit together to make the big picture. What we experience as self is a composite system made of the observation, the "experiencer" and the observer. This is just my opinion. I have absolutely no physical evidence for this. But I do have a very strong feeling that this is somehow correct.
What struck me was that if the superposition of all the quantum states canceled out. That is, the sum of it all was zero. So if we were aware (experienced it all) at once you would experience nothing. This would also hold if everything was comprised of vibrations (string theory or Buddhist philosophy) it could be that the whole thing amounted to absolutely nothing. And the only reason we see anything at all is because we are only seeing part of the picture. The entire pot of soup amounts to nothing but it is not mixed very well (in our experience) so we experience some precipitates. In short, what we are seeing is a local inhomogeneity.
An example of this would be zero. The sum of all real numbers from minus infinity to plus infinity is zero. So zero could be viewed as a completely full set by definition because it contains ALL real numbers. By focusing on a subset you can conceptually materialize something useful.
The fact that zero is a completely full set seems to be implied in the rules for subtracting negative numbers. The rule is that to subtract a negative number, you change the sign and then add. So if you, for example, subtract negative eight from zero you change the sign of the negative eight to positive eight then add.
When you do that you start with nothing (zero) subtract negative eight and wind up with eight. Start with nothing then remove something and wind up with something!!?
In effect you removed the canceling effect of the negative eight from the complete sum which resulted in the expression of the positive eight.
Perhaps our limited awareness works in the same way. By removing the canceling effects, we come to experience the material world. That is by being unaware of most of what is there we are aware of some of what is there. And if we were aware of it all we would be aware of nothing at all because the sum of all would be zero!
Somehow, we either "choose" what to be aware of or it is chosen for us. I know that part of the choice (filter) is made by previous experiences and conditioning (social heredity) by my own experience.
In the next blog entry (No Cause for Alarm -- or Anything Else), I will recount problems I have encountered when my limited and selective awareness of conditions along with prior conditioning resulted in a wrong judgement in the assignment of causes.
To the observer the "boundaries" of the two systems are artificial and an artifact of the limited awareness of the "experiencer". They are both parts of the universal puzzle whose ever changing edges still have to fit together to make the big picture. What we experience as self is a composite system made of the observation, the "experiencer" and the observer. This is just my opinion. I have absolutely no physical evidence for this. But I do have a very strong feeling that this is somehow correct.
What struck me was that if the superposition of all the quantum states canceled out. That is, the sum of it all was zero. So if we were aware (experienced it all) at once you would experience nothing. This would also hold if everything was comprised of vibrations (string theory or Buddhist philosophy) it could be that the whole thing amounted to absolutely nothing. And the only reason we see anything at all is because we are only seeing part of the picture. The entire pot of soup amounts to nothing but it is not mixed very well (in our experience) so we experience some precipitates. In short, what we are seeing is a local inhomogeneity.
An example of this would be zero. The sum of all real numbers from minus infinity to plus infinity is zero. So zero could be viewed as a completely full set by definition because it contains ALL real numbers. By focusing on a subset you can conceptually materialize something useful.
The fact that zero is a completely full set seems to be implied in the rules for subtracting negative numbers. The rule is that to subtract a negative number, you change the sign and then add. So if you, for example, subtract negative eight from zero you change the sign of the negative eight to positive eight then add.
When you do that you start with nothing (zero) subtract negative eight and wind up with eight. Start with nothing then remove something and wind up with something!!?
In effect you removed the canceling effect of the negative eight from the complete sum which resulted in the expression of the positive eight.
Perhaps our limited awareness works in the same way. By removing the canceling effects, we come to experience the material world. That is by being unaware of most of what is there we are aware of some of what is there. And if we were aware of it all we would be aware of nothing at all because the sum of all would be zero!
Somehow, we either "choose" what to be aware of or it is chosen for us. I know that part of the choice (filter) is made by previous experiences and conditioning (social heredity) by my own experience.
In the next blog entry (No Cause for Alarm -- or Anything Else), I will recount problems I have encountered when my limited and selective awareness of conditions along with prior conditioning resulted in a wrong judgement in the assignment of causes.
No comments:
Post a Comment