##
THE SCIENCE OF CONNECTIVENESS
The genesis of the concepts presented first appeared in a report entitled The Unification of Mind and Matter: A Proposed Scientific Model.^{1} The report is a written documentation and extension of invited presentations by the two authors at the 1st ISSSEEM Conference held in June 1991. A summary of the concepts was first published as a three part series^{2} in The Journal of Religion and Psychical Research. Although this second ISSSEEM article represents a major update, it does contain portions of the copyrighted JRPR second article that are being published with the kind permission of The Academy of Religion and Psychical Research, Bloomfield, CT.In Part III the authors will explore the relationship of their model to human experience. KEYWORDSCausality, connectiveness, consciousness, maps, mathematics, metaphysics, mind, non-local, physics, quantum, reality, symbol.
EXTENDING THE MODELWhat happens when technology is unable to build an instrument that can probe into a realm that the mind asserts is there? For example, the high energy physics community would like to build a Superconducting Super Collider to study particles and processes that are important in developing the "Theory of Everything." Unfortunately, while the technology is available, Congress says the money isn't. As another example, consider the question of life in other parts of the universe. Again, technology can't get us there. However, science fiction, with its warp drives and time machines, proves that the mind can still "boldly go where no one has gone before." In other words, the absence of hard data does not preclude the creation of models, only that they become more difficult to defend when they are challenged.Our model is a case in point. The existence of Mind as a realm having rather different properties than physical matter is not a difficult concept. After all, this is the basis of the famous "Cartesian split", now over three centuries old, which serves as the core belief for objective science -- the belief that there are no observer complications in experiments. What may be difficult to comprehend is the idea that the contents of Mind have a connection to the world of matter; i.e., the Cartesian split is only an approximation, not an absolute truth. Therefore, the issue that must be addressed is what is the nature of this connection between the contents of Mind which are spaceless and timeless and objects in the physical world which are space-time limited?In dealing with this and other related philosophical matters, we have chosen to construct our model from concepts as close to the scientific mainstream as possible. The reasons for this choice should be readily apparent to anyone who has tried to present new ideas to audiences grounded in western paradigmatic thinking. Not only are we interested in communicating clearly with as wide an audience as possible, we would hope that these ideas resonate strongly with people who appreciate the scientific process and its complexity. Our model takes scientific concepts beyond the point where direct experimental testing through physics is possible. Nevertheless, we believe that sufficient hard data are available from other areas of human experience to make a strong case for the mind-matter connection.Alternative ApproachesOver the years there have been numerous models proposed that embrace a scientific base which address the mind-matter interface and the role of consciousness. Some of these models invoke spaceless-timeless realms, others do not. A review of consciousness models for the years 1975-1990 was published as a two part series in The Journal of Mind and Behavior.^{4} The review covers the work of David Bohm, Robert John and Brenda Dunn, J.C. Eccles, Henry Stapp, A. Goswami, Saul-Paul Sirag, R.W. Sperry, G. Bateson, and others. Two related models outside the scope of the review are the work of William Tiller on a lattice model of space^{5} and an interpretation by Thomas Bearden of an expanded version of electromagnetic theory that relies upon the "scalar waves" of Nicola Tesla.^{6}Special ConsiderationsBefore getting into the details of our model, it is useful to list several phenomena that present severe challenges to the accepted scientific paradigm. It is our belief that these and related phenomena should be comprehended by an expanded view of reality. 1. Non-local connections. 2. Healing and other such beneficial person to person effects that transcend distance. 3. Phenomena commonly known as psi, i.e., psychokinesis, telepathy, clairvoyance or remote viewing, and precognition. 4. Information storage in physical materials as manifested in psychometry, homeopathic remedies, crystals, and sacred relics. 5. The sporadic, inconsistent, and often irreproducible nature of these kinds of phenomena. DETAILS OF THE MODELImplications of Non-LocalityErwin Schroedinger, one of the principle architects of quantum mechanics, called non-locality "quantum theory's most distinctive feature, the place where it differs most from classical expectations." Unlike all conventional interactions which drop off with distance and cannot travel faster than light, the quantum linkage due to non-locality is as strong at a million miles as at a millimeter, and its changes are transmitted instantaneously - considerably faster than the speed of light. ^{7}In 1964 John Stewart Bell proposed a crucial test between the predictions in quantum theory of non-locality and those of any theory based on the concept of local reality. This test, known as Bell's Theorem, did not propose an experimental situation in which non-local interactions are directly observed. Instead, Bell invented a simple argument that could be tested experimentally that would indirectly demonstrate the necessary existence of non-local connections.^{8} Local reality means that effects that are strong within a given region of space fall off outside, so that it makes sense to divide the world into separate, self-contained systems that interact by forces and signals that fall off rapidly with distance. Thus, the idea of non-locality is shocking, because for hundreds of years scientists have said that if anything moved it was because something else acted on it. Non-locality suggests that distant systems can be connected in a totally new way -- a way in which distance no longer seems to matter. The experimental results are now in, and most physicists are well satisfied that quantum theory has been confirmed and local reality ruled out. The tests of Bell's theorem demonstrate that the quantum linkage is real and provide the key evidence in physics pointing to a connection beyond space-time. Whether we like it or not, nature has chosen to include this instantaneous linkage into her creation of reality. ^{7} These careful experiments were carried out by Alain Aspect and others and have shown that quantum systems are correlated in ways that defy explanation in terms of any connections, interactions, fields, pushes, or pulls that would have any meaning in conventional physics.^{9} Today, the only possibility for continuing to believe in a local-reality theory is to suppose that the Bell correlations are somehow the result of a physical interaction or signal that passes between the detectors at a speed that is faster than light.^{10} This would be in direct violation of the theory of relativity.It is interesting to note that most physicists accept non-locality as a confirmation of quantum theory. However, it still remains a black sheep of the quantum family, and physicists avoid drawing too much attention to its bizarre implications. Most prefer to assume that non-local influences occur only at the particle level, although quantum physics itself provides no rationale for this assumption. In fact, quantum physics is now being successfully applied, not only to the particle level, but to atoms, to bacteria, and even at the cosmological level.^{11} We have, therefore, taken the position that non-locality pervades all phenomena and that the world could be filled with innumerable non-local influences even at the macroscopic level of human experience.Non-locality forces physics to deal with a troublesome dilemma. On the one hand is the undisputed success of quantum theory, based on fundamental interactions that propagate with the speed of light. On the other hand are the Bell correlations that are instantaneous and which could stretch undiminished across the galaxy. Clearly, the grab-bag of conventional explanations does not contain the material for modeling this strange behavior of nature. The theory must be capable of representing particles in space-time while simultaneously manifesting non-local features. The connection between our space-time world and the mental realm must be a one-step process in any model of reality.The Penrose TwistorBell's theorem and the necessity of non-local reality have not had nearly the impact on physics that one might imagine, given the startling implications of the theorem and its experimental tests. Ballentine has charted more than 2 decades of citations to Bell's landmark paper showing a gradual rise to about 33 per year. ^{12} This "ho-hum" response is easily explained by realizing that to the great bulk of practicing physicists quantum mechanics is a calculational tool that works exceedingly well for certain kinds of problems, but as a guide for the formation of a philosophy or worldview it may be subject to too many differing interpretations.^{13}Nevertheless, to those having philosophy as a passion and who see quantum mechanics as the window to the basic structure of the universe, Bell's theorem may indeed be "the most profound discovery of science." ^{14} Those working in this area, in particular those concerned with developing some kind of "theory of everything" or TOE as it is called by physicists, must somehow resolve the dilemma mentioned above. We note in passing that "theory of everything" is a "tongue in cheek" phrase in physics and should not be interpreted too literally. However, the search for the TOE is taking science into new territory and has helped contribute to our supply of ideas for this model.There are three principal approaches being undertaken to the TOE which are potentially capable of providing mathematical pictures of "the other side" of space-time and of how our physical world unfolds or is "created" from beyond space-time. They are called superstring theory, knot theory, and twistor theory. The theory we wish to elaborate upon in connection with our model is twistor theory, a creation of Roger Penrose, mathematician and theoretical physicist at Oxford and author of the highly acclaimed book The Emperor's New Mind.^{15} It may be only coincidence that Roger Penrose was developing the beginnings of twistor theory about the same time that Bell published his famous theorem. But over the three decades since that time twistors have received even less public notice than has Bell. For example, Barrow's 1991 book makes no mention of twistors while giving considerable coverage to superstrings. ^{16} This apparent neglect could be attributed to the somewhat radical approach that Penrose and his colleagues have taken as well as the difficult mathematics that must be mastered in order to deal with twistor space.^{17} The latter problem may be responsible for the dearth of literature on twistor theory for physicists who want to explore its features without too many mathematical accouterments. Fortunately, Peat^{18} has helped fill part of this gap with a non-mathematical survey of twistors, and we have relied heavily on his work in order to provide this brief description of how they relate to the non-locality issue.Twistors are inherently non-local in their structure. This is because they are designed not to embody spacelike dimensional qualities; instead they combine quantum mechanical angular momentum (spin) and relativistic linear momentum (speed of light). As a result twistor space, which is made up of these objects, has the property of defining direction but not separation or distance. Non-locality is therefore an intrinsic and natural property of twistor space. However, space-time is where we live, and it is also the abode of the conventional fields and formulas of physics. In order to take advantage of the power of the twistor formalism, the physics of space-time can be taken over into twistor space (and vice versa) by means of a set of mathematical rules called the Penrose transform. ^{17} When the transform is applied to the space-time manifold it turns out that a "null line" or ray of light in this manifold corresponds to a point in twistor space. In other words, the points of twistor space can be thought of as encoding global or large-scale knowledge about space-time. Bell's quantum connection, therefore, finds a natural home in twistor space. The deeper structures of reality do indeed lie outside of space-time.To resolve the "dilemma" on how to represent the physical world of space-time while simultaneously manifesting non-local effects our model utilizes two rather specialized subjects in physics which we have not needed to discuss up to now. The following two points will help set the stage: 1. Alfred North Whitehead (1861-1947), philosopher and mathematician, has proposed a "process" model of the world which is regarded as one of the major philosophical works of modern times. ^{19} Stapp^{20} has argued that this model provides a natural theoretical setting for quantum theory. "The basic elements of the model are events that actualize, or bring into existence, certain definite relationships from among a realm of possibilities or potentialities inherent in the set of prior events." The Whitehead model is also in accord with the idea that "actualization" is brought about by mind or consciousness as part of a feedback loop.2. The Unification Program for the forces of physics is driven by the belief that the forces are "gauge fields" and have their roots in an underlying "gauge symmetry" in abstract mathematical spaces ^{16} (which our model places in realms beyond space-time). These forces have an interesting commonality, in that they each obey a universal speed limit--the velocity of light. We propose that this common feature can be attributed to an origin for these forces of physics in an archetypal pattern outside of space-time.Combining these two points leads to a picture of the physical world continuously "unfolding" or evolving out of the non-local knowledge realm of archetypal patterns at the finite rate of the speed of light. (This picture is not unlike that proposed by David Bohm ^{21} with his implicate and explicate orders.) Thus quantum connectedness, which is intrinsic to the realm beyond space-time, is compatible with the realm of matter with its universal speed limit.An analogy may help illuminate this picture. Consider a loom which has a human operator watching the pattern unfold. The machinery of the loom runs at a fixed speed, but the operator has the ability to change the pattern at any time so that it conforms better to what she has in mind. Thus, there is continuous feedback between what is unfolding and what has already been created. .The weaving of the fabric of reality involves this continuous back and forth exchange between space-time and the higher realmsAdditional Mathematical ConnectionsThere is one more link in the chain that needs to be discussed in connection with the details of the model. This remaining link bridges the gap between twistor space and still higher dimensional spaces. The needed connection is provided by fiber bundle theory. This is a branch of pure mathematics called differential geometry. Bergman ^{22} provides this description of these geometrical structures:
- "Given a manifold, such as space-time, called the
base manifold, one attaches new manifolds to each point. These attached manifolds, all identical, are the fibers. They may have any dimensionality, not necessarily that of the base manifold. Each fiber can be subjected to mappings, or transformations on itself, which maintain the fiber's essential properties. ... Given a fiber and its permitted self-mappings, one may introduce a connection that establishes 'corresponding' points on fibers at nearby points."
Fiber bundles fit into twistor theory in an essential way. Ward and Wells provide an extensive review of the mathematics that connects fiber bundles to twistor space. -
Perhaps the most frequent (and valid) criticism of parapsychology is that significant experimental results are not repeatable upon demand. Indeed, many observers of parapsychology, both within and outside the field, claim that the repeatable parapsychological experiment simply does not exist. This criticism is not unique to parapsychology, of course; the lack of replicable experiments is ubiquitous to virtually all the social and behavioral sciences.
^{24}
We suggest that reproducibility is an The Creation of FormMathematicians have been exploring the fabric of form based upon a formless space beyond dualities, before any distinction has been drawn. Thus, both "the unmanifest" and a creative process from which form arises can be symbolically described. The approach is as follows. In order for any universe to come to observe itself and therefore learn, even through intuition, it must somehow split itself into that which is seen and that which sees. This process involves both distinction and self-reference -- two inseparable and hence conceptually identical ideas. The starting point for this process is "the unmanifest" called the "Void" in metaphysics. The Void is the opposite of (and hence the support for Everything That Is), and hence it can also be called the All. Mathematicians conceptualize this "empty set" by first framing nothing and then throwing away the frame!^{27} An entire universe of forms comes into being with the making of one distinction. It is this simplicity of distinction that underlies the dynamics of nature, life and movement -- the binary choice of yes-no, true-false, over-under, inside-outside, etc. What the mathematicians are saying is that this simplicity boils up from the realm of the Void/All via archetypal patterns into the complexity of the geometry and topology of the perceived world. They have demonstrated "how a rich world of periodicities, waveforms and interference phenomena is inherent in the simple act of distinction." ^{26} All from framing nothing!Distinction, therefore, implies the more complex and dynamical processes of self-reference, feedback, and learning. Since our model assumes an interconnected unity in a hierarchy of levels, it then represents a cosmos that is learning through a multiplicity of feedback paths, both in nature and in human beings. The mathematical subjects discussed below supply further clues as to how the dynamics of the feedback process between Mind and matter might be taking place. WavesIn the example of the sand particles on the metal plate, we note that the static form of a pattern and the kinetic-dynamic process are being generated and sustained by an essential periodic vibration. In science once a phenomenon can be recognized as "wave-like," then a great deal about that phenomenon can be predicted even though the mechanism by which the waves are generated is not clearly understood. By the use of mathematical "transforms" it is possible to symbolically span beyond space-time. In Part III we will describe how a Fourier transform of an ECG time waveform into an ECG frequency spectrum provides additional insight into archetypal patterns. Complex NumbersComplex numbers, a branch of mathematics, illustrates another transformation process and provides a glimpse of an additional possible dynamic relationship between Mind and matter. The complex number system with its "imaginary" square root of -1 was invented to accommodate the needs of mathematicians but soon found a host of applications in physics and engineering. Imaginary numbers serve as a kind of "rotator" which moves a quantity into another "realm." The very names for the two kinds of numbers ("real" and "imaginary") suggest this sort of action. Thus, in relativity theory, time is wedded to space by making it imaginary. Also in applications involving time-varying quantities, such as electromagnetic theory, fluid mechanics, aerodynamics, and waves, complex numbers play a major role in simplifying the mathematics. But for our purposes the most interesting feature is shown by Kauffman ^{28} to be the fact that the self-reference process is precisely mirrored by the formalism of complex numbers. It should be no surprise, therefore, that quantum mechanics, the only branch of physics that incorporates the observer as an integral part of the system, can not be formulated correctly without complex numbers. Complexity and Chaos TheoryA mathematical symbolic representation of the process for the manifestation of 3D-form (in formation) in space-time may be the new science of complexity that includes chaos theory as a subset.^{29} Our model would suggest that microscopic fluctuations at the edge of the quantum vacuum eventually appear as a macroscopic expression in the physical -- that the system effectively acts like a "pump" that brings microscopic fluctuations up to a macroscopic expression. In deterministic chaos theory there is great sensitivity to initial conditions. Hence, our model might explain why decisions/choices that originate beyond space-time in the Mental realm could produce a "power of mind over matter." The unpredictability inherent in chaos theory is due to these initial choices/decisions which set the constraints upon the process. Nevertheless, behavior does appear to settle into a particular "chaotic" pattern. This pattern is known as a "strange attractor" since although the same combination of variables never occurs twice the system behaves as though attracted by some strange influence. In fact, we could postulate that a higher dimensional attractor might correspond to an archetype. Such an archetype might tap the infinite reservoir of energy in the quantum vacuum and thereby constitute a model for the "life" process. Fractals and ScalingThe strange attractor is a fractal. ^{30} Feedback and self-reference are related to fractals which can be expressed as mathematical recursive forms.^{28} The unimaginably detailed structures created by fractal geometry have been found to succinctly describe complex natural objects and processes.^{31} Even a landscape with all its complexity can be generated with fractal mathematics.Fractals exhibit "scaling properties" which results in self-similarity among scales. This means, for example, that one can take a section of coastline (a fractal) and magnify it, obtaining a result that is equally plausible as a stretch of coastline. Hence, for patterns in the physical world that can be represented as fractals, their coupling to the archetypal counterparts in the spaceless-timeless realm would appear to be independent of their physical size. In other words, for feedback from an appropriate archetype, it makes no difference if the physical pattern is on the scale of the solar system, a mountain range, a tree, a crystal, the DNA molecule, or the spin structure of an atomic nucleus. An important characteristic of fractals is that a small change in the generating form creates a corresponding change in the fractal pattern everywhere, and at every scale. Thus, the mathematics of self-similar fractals could be representing a key organizing principle in nature -- one that creates a type of "holographic" universe. InterpretationThis discussion of the dynamics of the Mind-matter linkage has focussed on several kinds of mathematical ideas. Since we have described the linkage itself in terms of the symbolic systems of mathematics, it is natural to describe other aspects of the process in more or less the same way. However, we are not able to be very specific on how these other mathematical processes might integrate into the general dynamical picture. At the present time the best we can do is obtain hints and glimpses about what may be going on. However, the various kinds of mathematics described do have a common feature. They are self-referential with the inherent power of transformation to realms beyond space-time. Perhaps this feedback mirroring process via mathematical symbols is bringing us into contact with some more encompassing archetypal pattern that is behind the emergence of the physical out of these higher realms.We wish to emphasize an important point about symbols. When the symbols associated with any form of language including mathematics are discussed, they, of necessity, consist of patterns in our physical world. Hence, a symbol represents a pattern within our three-dimensional space. As discussed in Part I, symbols serve the role of mediator between the happenings in the physical or outer reality and the spaceless-timeless or inner reality. Therefore, we have used the terms archetypes or archetypal patterns to define the order and symmetries beyond space-time. In Part III we will integrate the key concepts from Parts I & II and address their implication for human experience and energy medicine. William C. Gough _ Foundation for Mind-Being Research _ 442 Knoll Drive _ Los Altos, CA 94024 _ Voice & Fax: (415) 941-7462.CORRESPONDENCE: The authors wish to thank Robert Bourdeaux (8510 Brink Rd., Gaithersburg, MD 20882) for his artistic contribution to the creation of Figures 1 and 2 of this paper.ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS:REFERENCES AND NOTES:
II, 2 (1978), pp.27-47. (ThisJournal is no longer operational, but copies of Tiller's articles can be obtained from: Librarian, Fetzer Foundation, 9292 West KL Ave., Kalamazoo, MI 49009.) 6. T. E. Bearden, On Rotary Permanent Magnet Motors and 'Free' Energy, Raum und Zeit 1, 3 (1989), pp. 43-53. 7. N. Herbert, Notes Toward 'A User's Guide to the Quantum Connection', Psychological Perspectives 19, 1 (1988), pp.56-63. 8. N. Herbert, How Bell Proved Reality Cannot Be Local, Psycho logical Perspectives 19, 2 (1988), pp. 313-319.9. A. Aspect, P. Grangier & G. Roger, Experimental Tests of Realistic Local Theories via Bell's Theorem, Phys. Rev. Lett. 47 (1981), pp. 460-463; A. Aspect, P. Grangier & G.Roger, Experimental Tests of Realization of Einstein- Podolsky-Rosen-Bohm Gedankenexperiment: A New Violation of Bell's Inequality, Phys. Rev. Lett. 49 (1982), pp. 91-94; A. Aspect, J. Dalibard & G. Roger, Experimental Tests of Bell's Inequalities Using Time-varying Analyzers, Phys. Rev. Lett. 49 (1982), pp. 1804-1807.10. F. D. Peat, Einstein's Moon: Bell's Theorem and the Curious (Contemporary Books, Chicago, Quest for Quantum Reality 1990). 11. S. W. Hawking, A Brief History of Time (Bantam Books, New York, 1988). M. Kafatos & R. Nadeau The Conscious Universe: (Springer-Verlag,Part and Whole in Modern Physical Theory New York, 1990), pp. 37-38, 83-84. 12. L. E. Ballentine, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics Since the Bell Inequalities, American Journal of Physics 55, 9, (1987), pp. 785.1987.13. N. Herbert, Quantum Reality: Beyond the New Physics(Doubleday, New York, 1985). 14. H. P. Stapp, Bell's Theorem and World Process, Nuovo Cimento 29B, (1975), p. 270.15. R. Penrose, The Emperor's New Mind: Concerning Computers, (Oxford Univ. Press, New Minds, and the Laws of Physics York, 1989). 16. J. D. Barrow, Theories of Everything: The Quest for Ultimate (Oxford University Press, New York, 1991).Explanation 17. R. S. Ward & R. O. Wells, Jr., Twistor Geometry and Field (Cambridge University Press, New York, 1990).Theory 18. F. D. Peat, Superstrings and the Search for the Theory of (Contemporary Books, Chicago. 1988).Everything 19. A. N. Whitehead, Process and Reality (Macmillan, New York, 1929). 20. H. P. Stapp, Whiteheadian Approach to Quantum Theory and the Generalized Bell's Theorem, Foundations of Physics 9, 1/2 (1979), p 1. 21. D. Bohm, Wholeness and the Implicate Order ((Routledge & Kegan Paul, London, 1980); Hidden Variables and the Impli cate Order, Zygon 20, 2 (1985), pp. 111-124.22. P. G. Bergmann, Unitary Field Theories, Physics Today 32, 3 (1979), p. 44. 23. M. Bunge, Causality and Modern Science: Third Revised Edi (Dover Publications, New York, 1979), pp. 31-33.tion 24. D. I. Radin, E. C. May & M. J. Thomson, Psi Experiments with Random Number Generators: Meta-Analysis Part I, Research in , pp. 14-17.Parapsychology 1985 25. W. C. Gough, Book Review -- Too Hot to Handle: The Race for Cold Fusion, Fusion Technology 22 (Aug. 1992), pp. 188-191. 26. H. Jenny, Cymatics (Basilius Presse, Basel, 1974). [Quoted in Kauffman & Varela, p 171), (following reference)]. 27. L. H. Kauffman & F. J. Varela, Form Dynamics, Journal of Social and Biological Structures 3, (1980), pp. 171-206. 28. L. H. Kauffman, Self-reference and Recursive Forms, Journal of Social and Biological Structures 10, (1987), pp. 53-72. 29. R. Lewin, Complexity: Life at the Edge of Chaos (Macmillan,New York, 1992). See Fig. 10, p. 189. 30. J. Gleick, Chaos: Making a New Science (Penguin Books, New York, 1987), pp. 139-140. 31. H. Peitgen & D. Saupe, Eds. The Science of Fractal Images (Springer-Verlag, New York, 1988). FIGURE CAPTIONS: PART IIFigure 1. Pictorial representation of the decent into the world of the ultimately small and beyond. From the spaceless-timeless "knowledge realm" of archetypal patterns, the physical world of three dimensional space and time begins to manifest at the Planck length. Figure 2. Schematic illustration of the model for the connection between the realms of Mind and matter (mind/brain). From the physical world of space-time, we can use mathematical symbol systems (Penrose transforms, twistors, and fiber bundles) to understand our linkage to the spaceless-timeless "knowledge realm," yet always with a loss of its full beauty. Updated May 12, 2006. |