Journal of
Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2016 | Vol. 7 | Issue 11 |
pp. 1012-1035
Hardy, C. H., ISS Theory:
Cosmic Consciousness, Self, and Life Beyond Death in a Hyperdimensional
Physics ArticleISS Theory: Cosmic Consciousness, Self, and
Chris H. Hardy, PhD[*]
Abstract
The Infinite-Spiral-Staircase
Theory (ISST) posits a hyperdimension of consciousness populated by
faster-than-light, high-energy, sub-Planckian sygons pervading the pluriverse. This HD is in fact triune, a braid
of hyperspace (Center, C), hypertime (Rhythm, R) and consciousness (Syg, S),
topologically organized as a double phi-based golden spiral set on a double
BlackHole- WhiteHole Kerr system. Within the Terminal Black Hole of a parent
universe, all matter-systems are translated into pure CSR information or
syg-fields steered by the sub-quantum sygons; and through the White Hole at the
origin, these syg-fields are translated back from virtual sygons into
post-Planck particles and matter systems, still retaining the sygons as a 5th
dimension at their core. ISST builds on the Semantic
Fields Theory (SFT) in modeling a semantic layer of organization in all
systems—their syg-fields (semantic fields) ranging from proto-consciousness to
self-consciousness. As human beings, our mind or consciousness is our global
syg-field, organized in dynamical networks and steered by syg-energy—the sygons
(Hardy 1998, 2001, 2003). The ensemble of all syg-fields form the cosmic CSR
hyperdimension of consciousness, as a gigantic hologram, self-conscious and
evolving.
Positing a
consciousness-HD layer in the universe leads to envision a new paradigmatic
stand in philosophy as well as in physics. The syg-HD operates clearly beyond-spacetime
and is a beyond-matter layer (thus in accord with dualism); yet, given that consciousness-as-process
is steered by the sub-quantum sygon particles, the syg-HD is definitely a blend
of energy and mind (as in monism/materialism). Thus ISST reframes the mind-body
split in a complex dynamical network systems’ framework, as a consciousness HD
existing at a sub-quantum scale in all matter systems (thus setting a type of panpsychism),
and also as a bulk in its own CSR-HD region.
At the scale of the pluriverse, the spacetime
regions of specific universe-bubbles are constantly birthed and then die. The
HD preexists and survives to these matter regions in the BH-WH double spiral,
and pervades them during the life of a universe.
In a consciousness-HD (syg-HD) framework,
consciousness and our mind—the syg-field—operate mostly via the HD, and only a
small part of our syg-field is branching into the brain’s neuronal networks. It
is because the Self and the mind belong to the syg-HD that they instantiate psi
capacities, high meditation states, and some independence from spacetime. In
this framework, death is just the severing of links to the brain-body and the
Self, at death, becomes fully independent from the body and enjoy (in the HD
layer) the same intelligent, creative, and individualized capacities as when
embodied, yet with greater psi capacities.
Keywords: Consciousness
in the universe; cosmology; hyperdimension; panpsychism; psi; survival after
death; post-materialist paradigm.
INTRODUCTION: ADDRESSING COMPLEXITY AND A MULTI-LAYERED REALITY, THE NEW PARADIGM IN SCIENCE
While physics has been plagued by four centuries of materialism, psychology and philosophy were, during that same period, trapped into the insoluble antinomy between idealism (mind wholly different from body/matter) and materialist monism (mind as a by-product of body/brain); in the mid 20th century, the materialist paradigm became enforced in science.
My
theoretical stand in Semantic Fields Theory (SFT, Hardy 1998) was that both
positions—materialism and dualism—are lacking, something amply demonstrated by
the fact that the mind-body split
could never be resolved and that the qualia couldn’t be accounted for unless
one takes a first-person subjective perspective. In brief, we need a new
paradigm. But there is also an arduous problem arising from these two positions’
links to the two contending frameworks of physics—Relativity founding a
perfectly ordered and causal spacetime, and QM instating indeterminacy at the
quantum scale (with materialist monism espousing the causal and local one, and
dualism partly so). As I argued in a 2001 article, at a certain threshold of
complexity, causality and determinism break down. The complexity of neuronal
networks in the brain, and that of multilevel webs in the mind and social
interactions, demanded that we move beyond causality and determinism and postulate instead
instantaneous or synchronistic inter-influences between complex semantic systems
(such as minds or social groups). These could also imply retrocausality, that
is, the influence of future events on past ones, as well as nonlocal proactive
effects—modifying the future environment with intentions, a sort of proactive
PK, as proposed in a Retrocausal Attractor modeling (Hardy 2001, 2003).
I. JUNG AND PAULI’S MIND-MATTER DEEP REALITY
In the 1950s, Carl Jung’s work, discoveries, and his depth psychology, started to fully impact both the scientists and the public. One discovery was the concept of collective unconscious—a lattice of collective psyche connecting all human beings unconsciously (via their personal Self) with the planet (thus nonlocally); of course, this was clashing with biology and materialism viewing mind as local, i.e. contained in the ‘space’ of the brain (Hardy 2015c, JCER). Let’s clarify that for Jung the personal unconscious has a subject—the Self—(just as the ego or ‘I’ is the subject of the conscious), and that the Self is a supraconscious entity, having access to the immense knowledge of the collective unconscious and able to guide the individual Self. Another concept was that of synchronicity as “spontaneous, meaningful coincidences” and connections at a distance, that he deemed “trans-temporal and trans-spatial,” that is, nonlocal (Combs & Holland 1995; Peat 1987; Hardy 2004). Moreover, Jung’s definition of synchronicity made clear references to psi: in his book Synchronicity (1960, pp. 109-110), he defines three types of correlations between the mind’s content and an event: “The coincidence of a psychic state in the observer (1) with a simultaneous, objective, event; (2) with a corresponding (…) external event taking place (…) at a distance, and only verifiable afterward; and (3) with a corresponding, not yet existent, future event.” Thus case 2 refers explicitly to clairvoyance, while case 3 refers to precognition. With physicist Wolfgang Pauli—one of the pioneers of QM—they stated in their fascinating correspondence that synchronicities were acausal phenomena, instantiated by a deep reality, in which mind and matter were blended; the name came to Pauli in a clear dream featuring this “deeper reality” at a scale below quantum fields and distinct from them (Pauli & Jung 2014; Hardy 2015, pp. 89-92).
This layer of deep reality, they
postulated, was a psyche-matter medium in the universe, at a subquantum scale—a
layer in which mind and matter were deeply enmeshed and merged. The
synchronicities would be springing from, and expressing, this underlying
connective lattice. Based on his clinical experience and the science of the
Ancients (alchemy, mysticism, Greek and Middle-Ages philosophy), Jung referred to
this deep layer (as the Ancients did) as “The One world” (Unus Mundus in Latin) or the “world soul” (Anima Mundi in Latin): “We have all the reasons to suppose that there must be only one world, in which
psyche and matter are one and the same, and in which we establish
distinctions for the sole purpose of knowing,” says he in his autobiography Memories, Dreams, Reflections (Jung
1965). Jung and Pauli posed acausality (instantiated by synchronicities, the
unconscious, and the Self) as a fundamental principle equal in strength to
causality, but working through instantaneous meaningful interconnections, thus
outside of time or space constraints.
As
we’ll see, the syg hyperdimension of consciousness (syg-HD) postulated by ISST
fits perfectly their definition and accommodates the types of nonlocal
processes that they listed as belonging to the deep reality, such as psi, the
quantum entanglement, and the spin complementarity – Pauli’s law of spin (Jung
& Pauli 1955).
II. HYPERDIMENSIONS, MAJOR PHYSICS PARADIGMS & THE INDEPENDENCE OF MIND-SOUL
II.1. Hyperdimensional physics neither determinism nor indeterminacy
Physics has been seminal in showing us that the setting of any problem in an either-or logic is bound to fail. This is what happened during the nearly 230 years of debate between the proponents of light as waves (interference patterns) and those of light as particles (quanta and photons). From Huygens opposing Newton in 1678 to that of Young’s 1801 famous double-slit experiment demonstrating wave-interference patterns (and still to our day spurting out unsolved paradoxical results), to Einstein solving the photoelectric effect by light quanta in 1905—both schools could cite successful experiments proving clearly that their theory was supported by facts. The ultimate solution had to be a leap into a paradoxical framework—light was both waves and particles—a leap achieved by Louis de Broglie (1939) in his 1926 doctoral thesis, when he posited that all particles (such as electrons) are driven by what he called a pilot wave; soon followed by David Bohm who developed his own Pilot Wave theory (Bohm 1980, Bohm & Hiley 1993).
Yet
physics once again fell in the grip of a dual competing logic, when it became
clear that Einstein’s Relativity (instating causality) was validated at the
matter and spacetime scale or region (and the 2016 discovery of gravitational
waves was its latest acclaimed success, see Hu & Wu 2016); yet, the
quantum indeterminacy posited by QM was validated at the quantum vacuum and
Zero Point Fluctuations (ZPF) scale. What was the reality of the universe then,
and how could we ever get a picture of the whole universe—the Unified Field
theory physicists are progressively building since Einstein spent in vain the
last decades of his life looking for it? To do that, we had to make a leap
toward hyperdimensional physics—a solution implemented as early as 1919 by
Theodor Kaluza, soon joined by Oskar Klein in 1926.
Let’s
ponder a bit the crucial entanglement problem and EPR Paradox. Einstein
rejected at first QM’s indeterminacy (as posited by the Copenhagen or Bohr’s
interpretation), because he didn’t want to let go of causality equated with
order (“God doesn’t play dice,” said he). And this is why, with Podolski and
Rosen, he proposed the famous EPR
thought experiment to disprove QM. Yet Alain Aspect’s experiments in 1982
(1982a, 1982b), using Bell’s theorem protocol, brought a solid proof of the
entanglement of paired particles and their correlation at such great distances
that it forbade a signal transmission through space. Thus the entanglement was
definitely shown to be beyond spacetime, that is, nonlocal. As John Bell stated
it (disproving Von Neumann’s previous argument), theories proposing nonlocal
yet causal dynamics (such as de Broglie’s and Bohm’s pilot waves driving particles’
behavior) could thus be a viable solution. The unnerving point is that, as
history has it (based on Von Neumann’s faulty but resilient argument), both QM
and indeterminacy (as opposed to causality) were proven by Aspect et al. (1982a, 1982b) and other EPR-type
experiments. Yet the entanglement conforms to Pauli’s Law of Spin (or spin
complementarity) for two entangled paired particles—that the sum of their spins
always has to be equal to zero. Therefore, if an apparatus changes the spin of
particle A (e.g. with a mirror) from +1/2 to -1/2, the paired particle B, even
already as far as the moon, has to shift instantly from spin -1/2 to +1/2.
That’s what Aspect proved. Thus the entanglement, as a global dynamics driven
by the Law of spin, is a clear contravention to indeterminacy, and to the
opposite, it definitely is a nonlocal type of interconnection or influence.
Then it can be modeled as an acausal or synchronistic process (as Pauli deemed
it) or else as driven by a formal cause—an
influence due to a more global organization, as in Aristotle’s 4 causes and as opposed
to material or billiard balls causality—such as Rupert Sheldrake’s (2009)
morphic fields. (The indeterminacy, nonetheless, remains at the level of each
particle having such or such spin.) So that, in either case, it falls in the
category of the nonlocal hidden variables
(i.e., unknown causes or processes).
When
Jung and Pauli defined synchronicities as acausal
processes, it meant they instantiated a wholly different organization than
material and sequential causality—a new universal principle of interconnection beyond spacetime, and as fundamental as
causality. Then we are back to HD physics as the most probable explanation, and
the only viable one at the present, given that materialist monism, positing a
one-block spacetime, is out of the question, and given that dualism doesn’t
offer a real foundation or a substrate for consciousness in the matter and
biological universe.
Since
the mid nineties, I developed the Semantic Fields Theory (SFT) that postulates
mind and Self to be complex dynamical networks coupled with the brain’s
neuronal networks but being nevertheless able to operate independently and
beyond Newtonian-Einsteinian laws; for example, experiments show that psi
violates EM inverse square law, and even linear time. In SFT, all systems and
beings have semantic fields instantiating a layer of consciousness/sentience
(from a proto-consciousness to a self-referent mind), and these can thus be part
of a HD organization as posited by ISST (Hardy 1998, 2015). Semantic fields are
steered by instantaneous network connections based on meaning and an index of semantic proximity (meaningful and
affective resonances and links). These instantaneous network connections (that
I call spontaneous linkage process),
are also the basis of our mostly unconscious thought process (Hardy 1998, chap.
4). This connective dynamics based on links and meanings instead of causal
chains, in my view, is the way synchronicities work; and ISST now clarifies the
nature of the (semantic) syg-energy creating these connections, as being the HD
sygons.
II.2. Hyperdimensional physics: only way to unify QM, GR, and the 4 forces
Theodor Kaluza, in positing a 5th dimension, showed that only hyperdimensional (HD) models could unify the four forces (Brandenburg 2011, Kaku 1994, Witten 1981). In 1919, Kaluza rewrote Einstein’s equations with a 5th dimension, which was a 4th dimension of space—a hyperspace, best represented by a hyper-structure like a hypersphere or a hypercube (also called tesseract), like the one in Christopher Nolan’s 2014 movie Interstellar. (See Figure 1)
Fig. 1. A tesseract or hypercube. (a) Creator:
Robert Webb, using Stella software. Find
it at http://www.software3d.com/Stella.php
Credit: Wikipedia Commons. (b) Extracted by
CHH. On YouTube “Unwrapping a tesseract” (0’47”) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BVo2igbFSPE)
Kaluza’s
solution produced both Maxwell’s EM field equations and Einstein’s field
equations for gravity, plus a mysterious scalar field he called the radion. John Brandenburg (2011, p. 197)
comments: “The boundary between geometry and forces was now gone, EM was
geometry in five dimensions, and gravity was a force. The fields could now be
unified.” Then the mathematician Klein (best known for his Klein bottle) calculated that the 5th dimension not only
had a physical reality, but was compact, that is, curled up in a tiny circle,
the radius of which was Planck length
(of about 10-33 centimeters). Klein’s equation thus integrated
Planck constant, and now, astonishingly, the equations of QM could be derived
from it. The Kaluza-Klein theory (KK theory) was at the time overshadowed by
the rise of QM, but it became forefront research in the
nineties.
Several
theories propose a hyperspace (5th extra dimension) in compactified
or warped models (5thD extremely small, curled up) or in an
extensive form called a bulk; the
leading one by Lisa Randall and Raman
Sundrum (1999), within a string theory framework, and called the
Randall-Sundrum (or RS) model, implies a 5-dimensional warped geometry, and comes in two versions, one with a bulk. In the bulk RS model, the 5D
bulk surrounds two branes, the Planckbrane (on which strings are 10−33
cm in size, the Planck length), and the Tevbrane, our 4D world (16 orders of
magnitude higher, at 10−17 cm). Also, various superstring theories (9 or 10 D) pursued the integration of
the four forces and were unified by Edward Witten into M-theory (1995), positing
a multiverse with 11D, elaborated upon by Susskind (2003).
II.3. A hyperdimension of consciousness: integrating psi and psyche with physics
Just like in physics the only way to integrate QM and Relativity (the 4 forces) is by adding extra dimensions, so the only way to integrate consciousness with physics is by postulating a hyperdimension of consciousness that would then be blended to the physics hyperdimension. This solution is also required by the fact that a gamut of mental and psi processes operate beyond spacetime and cannot either be founded on indeterminacy since they are driven by meaning (see Bem 2011; Mishlove 1997; Mitchell 1996; Nelson et al 1996; Radin & Nelson 1989; Targ et al 1979.) Therefore they can only be grounded by positing a hyperdimension of consciousness—one that would, just like hyperspace in the Randall-Sundrum bulk model, surround and contain the 4D spacetime universe. Bernard Carr (2007, 2014) proposes a hyperdimension based on sheets (2D brane surfaces) to account for consciousness (mainly in its perceptual and psi facets).
While
SFT and ISST postulate a type of panpsychism, some may question ISST’s solution consisting in integrating consciousness
with physics in a single physics paradigm that, nevertheless, is not a monism
(even a dual-aspect one). Let me clarify my own position.
Physics
cannot anymore tolerate having two distinct sets of theories reflecting
contradictory paradigmatic stands—spacetime causality versus quantum
indeterminacy; it has worked ceaselessly to bridge the gap, pursuing Einstein’s
grand vision of a unified theory. Following the same logic, we cannot any
longer allow to have two paradigmatic stands to account for the whole universe—one
physics-based and the other addressing the reality of the mind (and
awareness/experience). And even less so to have so-called Theories of
Everything (TOEs) accounting for a matter-only universe (but not accounting for
awareness of that matter-only universe), especially when the latest data show that
ordinary matter (particles, atoms, stars and galaxies) amounts to only 5% of
the total energy of this universe.[†]
Jung
and Pauli laid the foundation for such a unified theory of a mind-matter
universe. They observed and modeled a region, or deep reality, in which mind
and matter were merged. The Self and the collective unconscious bathe in this
deep reality, in which acausal instantaneous meaningful connections are the
prominent dynamics (as in synchronicities). ISST postulates this deep reality
to be a triune hyperdimension (hyperspace, hypertime, and consciousness). Both
models (rather complementary) have an impact on the question of life after
death. But first let’s review the survival question in the light of the main
actual paradigms.
II.4. The survival question within major physics and philosophy paradigms
Let’s note first that the question of a consciousness living or dwelling in an extra dimension is much wider than just our survival beyond bodily death; it has also an impact on whether any entity (intelligent or not, in any galaxy or any region of the pluriverse or multiverse) may inhabit another manifold than our 4D spacetime. For example, do fifth or eighth dimensional beings exist, the way they have been pictured in various movies, such as W.D. Richter’s The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai Across the 8th Dimension (1984) or Christopher Nolan’s 2014 Interstellar? Could some intelligences dwell in an unfathomable hypertime? Could immaterial spirits such as fairies or angels have some reality?
It
has always been recognized that in our materialistic-reductionist monist paradigm
in which only matter is considered to be real, no survival of the soul, nor any
immaterial or extradimensional being, may ever exist. The argument is that
since mind or consciousness cannot function independently from the brain’s
neural networks or space localization, then it doesn’t exist without it and the
death of the brain-body means the death of its captive mind. However, with 95%
of the total energy of the universe being non-matter—either dark matter or dark
energy whose nature is still an enigma—the materialist paradigm has suddenly
become, at the turn of the century, somewhat of an antiquity. As for Cartesian
dualism, with mind being a totally different substance than matter/body/brain,
of course non-matter entities (souls or n-dimensional beings) are allowed and
therefore the survival of bodily death as well. However, dualism has failed to give a
satisfactory ground for the observed two-way interactions of mind with the
brain-body. As for, idealism, it has no explanatory power either, being too
weak at explaining consciousness without a material body, and it has clarified
neither the nature nor the processes of individualized thoughts and
experiences.
An
interesting solution is that of Rupert’s Sheldrake morpho-genetic fields: a theory
positing that fields of form (morphic fields), of a nature different from the
biological and matter systems, would in-form these systems (and even behavioral
and mental processes) via morphic
resonance, acting as the memory of a type or family of systems and guiding
their morpho-genesis (thus along memorized paths). Morphic fields would then be
akin to a formal causation (one of
Aristotle’s four causes). Let’s note that Sheldrake and other scientists have
conducted successful experimentations that lend credit to the existence of such
non-matter fields guiding the organization of biosystems or the psyche (Sheldrake
2009).
Let’s
see now the two contending paradigms in physics. Each one of them, taken alone,
is a dead-end just as far as a viable and evolving universe is concerned. How
much more about one in which intelligent beings like us—not even to mention n-D
beings—could dwell!
(1) A fully deterministic universe,
run by spacetime laws (Relativity framework), doesn’t allow the creation of
novel organization, of diversity and transformation in matter- and bio-
systems. It doesn’t lead to evolution and innovation in nature (not even to the
Darwinian selection or simply the favoring of the fittest), nor to
creativity and choice, and even less so to free will and consciousness!
(2) A fully random and
indeterministic universe (QM framework) wouldn’t even allow a spacetime or any
law whatsoever to exist—even less so intelligence! (We have to grant that
intelligence leads to innovation and thus the creation of order.)
In
order to give a foundation to the evolution of matter- and bio- systems, to
conative processes (intention, will…), to choice, creativity and consciousness,
we need a layered and complex universe, one favoring the interplay of (1) fixed
laws (spacetime), (2) stochastic processes (randomness at the quantum scale), (3)
nonlinear dynamics (chaos theory) leading to the creation of novel
organization, and lastly (4) a dimension of sensitivity, choice, intended
behavior, and intelligence, in a word, consciousness—all
intermingling and interacting. In brief, to simply get to an evolving universe
allowing intelligence to blossom, we need some leeway from set laws (in the
form of diversity, chaos, divergence, change), and a selective or intentional
ordering of this chaos and diversity—at the minimum as a Darwinian favoring or selection within life forms, at best as basic intelligence.
But
now, if we want to have also the types of nonlocal processes we observe (1) in
psi (communication and influence beyond brain localization and beyond spacetime
laws), (2) in the unconscious (archetypes and Self guiding the ego and
providing information), and (3) in some physics dynamics—such as the
entanglement, faster-than-light speed during the inflation phase, etc. (Guth
1997)—then we need to posit a hyperdimension—not only as hyperspace (and possibly
hypertime), but also as a HD of consciousness.
And
within a physics+consciousness HD (that gives a foundation to all nonlocal
processes, whether physical or mental ones), then the nonlocal part of the
mind-psyche can dwell and live as a self-conscious and evolving entity,
autonomous from the body with which it was coupled. Thus, given that all
semantic fields (the Selfs or sentient entities) of beings and systems belong to,
and exist within, the semantic or Syg hyperdimension, ISST postulates that the
death of the body/brain does not entail the death of the hyperdimensional Self.
To the contrary, the syg-field acts as an informational, sentient or
self-conscious field—as a Syg HD field (hyperconsciousness), coupled with a
morphic field (Center HD or hyperspace), and a frequency field (Rhythm HD or
hypertime). The triune HD allows evolved self-referent systems such as human
psyche-minds to not only keep on living beyond the death of the body, but to do
so as self-conscious cognitive entities (the Self or soul), endowed with
volition, intention, autonomy, and able to learn and evolve. Furthermore, the
HD gives them access to greater nonlocal cognition and psi capacities at large.
While the ensemble of all the Selfs (of all cognizant individuals) form the
collective or cosmic consciousness that is the triune HD (Jung’s Anima Mundi or
collective unconscious), the individualized Selfs maintain their own
individuality and personal sensitivity, experience, knowledge, memories, mode
of thinking, network of relations, emotional bonds, etc. This, whether having
an actual body in 4D spacetime, or after the death of this body.
Ironically, a triune
hyperspace-hypertime-consciousness HD also solves the dualism-monism conundrum:
mind and consciousness are different from spacetime as in dualism, and yet they
have an energy component—something that can always be translated in virtual
mass—as in materialist monism. Moreover, this HD (in ISST) is pervading all
matter systems by being at their very core, and is thus strongly coupled with
them, and yet autonomous. This, of course, is in agreement with Gödel’s (1992)
theorem—that the coherency (self-consistency) of a system can only be founded
on a more global level than that of the system itself. In brief, the
self-consistency of spacetime can only be founded on an extra-dimension.
Let’s
turn now to the framework postulated by ISST.
III. ISST: COLLARS OF UNIVERSES EMBEDDED IN THE HYPERDIMENSION
III.1. The Infinite Spiral Staircase Theory (ISST)
The Infinite Spiral Staircase Theory (ISST) postulates a hyperdimension (HD) at the very origin of the universe, that would have contained all the information about myriads of systems optimized in previous universe-bubbles (UBs), as a cosmic DNA, this information being the blueprint of matter- and bio- systems that would then, due to their nonlinear dynamics, evolve during our universe-bubble timeline as new types of systems.
This
hyperdimension is both consciousness and a topological order (geometric or
rather, geodesic) in the form of a spiral driven by the logarithm of phi—thus a
golden spiral. A golden spiral
embeds, at each quarter of circle, a specific radius (and thus frequency)
following the Fibonacci sequence, each radius being a multiple of phi = 1.6180).
This sequence is infinite, and thus the Infinite Spiral Staircase bears a quasi-infinite
set of frequencies (or frequency spectrum) starting from the virtual infinite
(at the X Point of origin) down to Planck frequency (happening at 10-43
second of the universe). At the Planck scale (the first quantum), the frequency
of the universe is about 1043 hertz (Planck frequency is precisely
1.85 × 1043 s−1), which means that the quantum-scale
universe vibrates more than 1043 times
in one single second. How much more near the X-Point, where this frequency
tends to the infinite. It’s only after Planck’s scale (acting as a threshold),
with the frequencies getting lower, and the radius (and wavelength) of the
universe larger, that particles, space, time, and thus causality are
allowed—and all the Standard Model particles will appear in due order, starting
with the Higgs boson, and they will acquire mass while crossing the Higgs
field. ISST calls this region the Quantum-Spacetime or QST manifold, driven by
QM + Relativity. In contrast, the hyperdimension exists before and below Planck
scale, this HD thus occupying the pre-spacetime, at a sub-Planckian or
sub-quantum scale. Many physicists have argued that the laws acting before
Planck scale (still unknown) are of a different order than the ones we know are
acting beyond it. Yet Stephen Hawking (1988, 2003) predicted
sub-Planckian wavelengths inside a Black Hole’s (BH) event horizon, in an
argument referred to as the Trans-Planckian
Problem. And John
Brandenburg, following Erik Verlinde (2010), argues that gravity can
be fundamentally tied to entropy as a cloud of states (an entropic state-space)
above Planck scale,
and that this co-dependence makes it necessary that it be founded on a
sub-Planckian cloud of states, or frequency spectrum, thus giving some weight
to the ISS’ frequency spectrum (Brandenburg & Hardy 2016). Let’s note also
two theories postulating a constant death and rebirth of the universe:
Penrose’s (1989, 2010, 2014) Conformal
Cyclic Cosmology that resets entropy at each new origin, and Lee Smolin’s Fecund Universes Theory (1997) positing
that massive black holes (issued from dead stars) may be the seed of budding
universes, which would retain some of the parameters of their parent universe.
However, neither Penrose nor Smolin postulated a hyperdimension (and even less so
a consciousness HD).
III.2. A triune HD as hyperspace-consciousness-hypertime
In ISST, the HD is triune: firstly the immense set of frequencies forms (by phi) the HD of time—hypertime—spread in virtual space along the steps of the spiral; secondly, the set of radii produces (by pi) the bows (quarters of circles) of the spiral, and thus forms hyperspace as a curved line, thus time-like. Hermann Minkowski, modeled the light cone in 1908 (using Special Relativity), as a hourglass in which events/particles (at the center or present time) have straight worldlines running into the future (top cone) and from the past (bottom cone). Outside of the double-cone is the Elsewhere (beyond spacetime), in which time is space-like (extended), and space is time-like (a line). The cosmic ISS, as HD, presents a space-like Hypertime and a time-like Hyperspace; but it adds another dimension: an HD of consciousness, the semantic or syg-HD, which is the whole spiral itself and its immense databank as a set of frequencies. Thus, the language of the cosmic hyperdimension is music, and its dynamics are basically spins and resonances, waves and interferences, “spin networks” and “loops” (as in Smolin 1997; Sarfatti 2006)—myriads of meaning-driven networks of frequencies (as closed, spinning, strings) that will form the seed of the syg-fields expressing (coding for) all systems existing in our universe-bubble.
This is why hypertime is called Rhythm-Rotation (R),
and hyperspace is called Center-Circle (C), and the semantic/syg HD is called
(S). Thus the ISS is embedding the creative dynamics of pi and phi—two
non-finite numbers. HD Center is the dynamics of the center (or node) creating
its circle (via pi) to set the organizational closure of its own system—and in
the process it creates the identity of a specific system (a property that will
be essential in our 4D region, as systems and chaos theories have shown). As
for HD Rhythm, by oscillating, each bow puts its circle/torus in rotation and
creates a sub-quantum wave-particle carrying its own frequency, a sygon, that, due to its entanglement
with HD Syg and HD Center, is a semantic system by itself. The sygons will be
propelled from the ISS by its initial thrust and energy and will create our
whole universe-bubble with its two regions, the HD bulk and the
quantum-spacetime or QST.
As we know, any frequency is a wave and thus a virtual
string/particle; and since we are in pre-spacetime, the virtual particle is
sub-quantum of course, but it has also a speed immensely superior to C (the
speed of light limit being effective only within the QST region). Thus all
bow-frequencies of the cosmic ISS are ejecting faster-than-light (FTL) sygons
(and networks of them) endowed with the properties of the CSR HD, notably,
information and consciousness.
The ISS spiral at the origin is a White Hole (WH)
issued from the Terminal Black Hole (BH) of the previous universe-bubble. This
double BH-WH system has been modeled by Roy Kerr (1963); it has an hourglass or X-funnel shape (hence the name I
give to the origin, at the center of the hourglass: the X-Point).
As the WH starts erupting from the Terminal BH (TBH),
the spiral staircase unfolds (and enlarges) at blinding speed and ejects
myriads of sygons whose wavelengths get larger and larger, while their
frequencies decrease. The first and highest frequency sygons (called Free Sygons) will launch the bulk of the
HD—as a large and curved region, probably spindle-shaped. When the sygons’ size
reaches Planck length, they will start interfering and creating a foamy
lattice—the Higgs field—and later and bigger sygons will take on mass while
crossing it, becoming the particles of the Standard Model. Yet all particles of
the QST region retain at their core the sygons, as a sub-Planckian, compact and
curled-up hyperdimension. These particles will create the spacetime region as they dart along, propelled by the
ISS initial energy, itself issued from the TBH—starting with the first wave of
neutrinos (the decoupling of the neutrinos happens within the first second),
then the photons wave (the photons’ decoupling, within the first 2 minutes)
will illuminate spacetime and leave the relic radiation or CMB, the Cosmic
Microwave Background that we detect now at about 370,000 years after the Big
Bang.
These first waves of particles will form the spacetime
region (as a spindle or near cylinder) within
the HD larger region, with the vacuum and zero-point-fluctuations (ZPF) as a
membrane demarcating the two regions—QST and CSR HD. (Such a complex boundary
membrane has been modeled by Jack Sarfatti, 2006)
III.3. The sygons in-forming the syg-fields (consciousness) in complex systems
The sygons are consciousness-as-energy, semantic or syg-energy belonging to the CSR hyperdimension. They are able, via the HD Rhythm, to interact instantaneously and exchange information between the systems they dwell in. They constitute and drive (via HD Center) the self-organization of the syg-fields of all systems, whatever their complexity (from a proto-consciousness to a mind). All systems within spacetime have syg-fields, that are their self-organizational dynamics and information, and their identity as systems. And the syg-fields of all systems (whether a rock, a tree, a person, or a planet) (1) are conscious, (2) embed the whole evolving information about this system, and (3) form the HD of this system. This is of course the foundation of the panpsychist view of ISST.
·
At the
human individual level
For human beings, syg-fields are the whole dynamical
semantic network of the person (intelligence, mind-psyche-body organization,
self-consciousness, memory, emotions, skills, etc.). Human syg-fields are
complex dynamical networks, multilevel, that comprise myriads of semantic
constellations, each steering a set of cognitive acts in a specific domain of
activity (such as driving, reading, etc.), each being network-linked to
associated, co-evolving, constellations (Hardy 1998). The syg-fields belong to
the CSR hyperdimension, yet each constellation is coupled to all neuronal,
physiological and somatic systems needed for its functioning in the 4D world.
The dynamics are based on meaningful connectivity and networking, on parallel
and multilevel processing, rather than on hierarchy (top-down) and commands as
in dualism.
For us human beings, our syg-field is our whole
individualized consciousness field/network, that is, our mind and semantic
dynamics + psyche + body consciousness + our relational and interactive
network. The Self is the supraconscious subject of our syg- field, while the
ego (the ‘I’) is the subject of our ordinary state of consciousness, the one
taking care of our social interactions (Jung 1960, Tart 1969). The distinction
Self-ego (whatever the terms used) is the basis of many inner, initiatory,
hermetic, mystic, spiritual, and religious paths of knowledge—defined as a
striving to harmonize oneself with our higher or spiritual Self (soul, atman, Ka…).
And in ISST, this makes a lot of sense if we understand that the ego-consciousness
is mostly centered on the social and physical world. In contrast, the Self (via
the syg-field and the sygons) can have access to the collective consciousness
and the capacities allowed by the hyperdimension—meditative and spiritual
states of consciousness, psi communication at a distance in space and in time, influence
on bio- and matter- systems such as healing, connection to the collective
unconscious and its immense accumulated knowledge… In ancient cultures such as
the shamanic ones (covering Aboriginal and Siberian ones and most African,
Native American and South American ones, and also pre-buddhist Asiatic ones, as
well as in eastern religions, alchemy and esoterica, we know that a gamut of
practices have been developed in order to reach or operate within the “spirit
world” or dreamtime (e.g. the shamans’ out-of-body trance, the possession
trance), or to achieve this ego-Self harmonization (e.g., the nagual or Eagle
consciousness in Yaqui culture, samadhi meditation states and yoga paths, mystical
fusion states in Christianity and Islam)—many of these paths of knowledge said
to lead naturally to the awakening of siddhis
or psi capacities such as clairvoyance, prediction, healing. (Let’s note that
the field of psychological anthropology acknowledges that most ancient
cultures, as its pioneer Erica Bourguignon (1976) observed it, had a form of
trance, and these are sorted out as either shamanic (intentional and volitional
conscious trance) or else possession cults (impersonation of spirits without
self-consciousness within the trance.)
·
At the
collective and cosmic levels
Carl Jung has defined the collective unconscious as a sort of lattice or medium of
communication among all human psyches (and their subject the Self), in which archetypes—collective psychic blueprints
(such as that of heroes) endowed with consciousness and an immense “psychic
energy”—may influence the psyches of individuals attracted to them. Yet, on the
one hand, Jung integrated the animals and plants in this collective unconscious,
in an alchemical way, for example as symbols and archetypes (expressing the
guidance of the Self), or else as animal or plant souls—a perspective that concurs with that of the shamans on sacred
plants and animals, viewed as self-conscious and able to guide and teach
individuals on a quest (for example in South and Central America). On the other
hand, the collective unconscious, as Anima Mundi, partakes of a sort of supra-consciousness
(as an entity, a whole, being more that the sum of all psyches/Selfs
constituting it) that Jung deemed trans-temporal
and trans-spatial, thus definitely nonlocal,
and the stuff of the deep reality
that, with Pauli, they explored at a later time. And there, we meet the concept
of an extra dimension.
In ISST-SFT, the part of the psyche that is not
strongly coupled with the brain-body and contains all the information is the HD
syg-field (whose subject, or organizing self-consciousness, is the Self). The
syg-fields of all individuals and all systems form a hyperdimensional collective
consciousness at a planetary level (collective unconscious, Anima Mundi),
fueled by syg-energy, and in which the linked or resonant syg-fields (the
personalized mind-psyches) keep interacting and exchanging qualified information
(via the sygons). Let me note that when viewed from the perspective of the ‘I’
or ego involved in the social and material spheres, his/her own Self and
syg-field are relegated to the unconscious; it is mostly with a
self-development, shamanic, or yogic, path that the Self or Atman may become
part of conscious awareness. (The leap from SFT [1998] to ISST [2015] consists
in modeling the syg-fields and the semantic dimension as a HD, and syg-energy
as HD sygons.) And at the cosmic scale, the CSR HD is the ensemble of the
syg-fields of all systems (matter-, bio-, or just HD systems) in our universe. This is why the HD is not only
self-conscious but quasi omniscient in this universe, and why it is a
collective and evolving Anima Mundi at the cosmic scale, system-linked to all
its components syg-fields (all minds and all systems’ psyches). As a
consequence, any syg-field with enough syg-energy may have an influence on any
group of syg-fields (e.g. a society, a planet), or even theoretically on the
whole.
This is in total contrast with a creator god who would
be of a different substance than his creation/creatures and would only issue
commands, and with a one-time-created and non-evolving creation. (Note the
parallel in logic with the dualist framework of a mind only issuing top-down
commands to the brain-body.) In ISST, not only each psyche-mind is a personalized
and meaning-generating part of the hyperdimension, but the evolution of the
whole—The One—is instantiated by the evolution of all its parts—the individual
syg-fields of all systems, each a self-conscious and free creative entity. Now,
since syg-fields are networks and use a connective dynamic based on meaning,
the syg-field itself (e.g. that of a human being), as a system, is already a
collaborative, dynamic, self-organized and constantly evolving, self-creation.
The cosmic HD is just the same type of semantic dynamical system at the cosmic
scale—its body being the matter
region of the universe, that is, the QST. Thus, the cosmic consciousness is
constantly evolving because its component systems —the individualized syg-fields/minds—are
in a permanent creative evolution by themselves. In ISST, the cosmic
consciousness is only the ensemble of all the Selfs of all beings and systems—it
is a One-Plural, a multifaceted holographic self-conscious system, yet an
entity who is more than the sum of his/her parts but who evolves via his/her
self-conscious parts (the syg-fields). Moreover, being beyond spacetime and
nonlocal, the self-conscious cosmic HD knows the far past as well as the future
and its lines of probabilities. The trends toward specific probable futures are
constantly reorganized with the real time creative input of all beings and
minds of all intelligent civilizations (via their syg-fields). So that the
cosmic anima is, like us, an individual constantly self-creating and
self-organizing her/his mind and mindscape with intelligence, creativity,
sensitivity and art, and through myriads of connections with other syg-fields
and their environment. Yet, as a One-Plural, her/his knowledge and capacities
are more that the sum of the minds-psyches composing it, and therefore we can
expect that she/he is endowed with wisdom and hyperconscience.
·
ISST: On
the ontological side
(1)
The global systemic and holographic framework of ISST
is that the triune hyperdimension (CSR HD) preexists the spacetime region (QST)
and gives birth to it, thus forming a collar of universe-bubbles (Figure 2). So
that a universe-bubble like ours consists of a CSR HD preexisting, then
birthing, surrounding, and pervading the QST region whose boundary is the
quantum vacuum and Zero Point Fluctuations.
Fig. 2: A collar of universes: The CSR
hyperdimension existing in the Phi-based spirals in a BlackHole-WhiteHole
system,
and surrounding the QuantumSpacetime (QST) region.
(2) The information-seed of all systems evolving in
spacetime is transmitted from a parent universe-bubble via the cosmic CSR HD
(acting as a cosmic DNA) via the ISS’ immense data bank at the origin.
Therefore, there is no creatio ex nihilo
(creation from nothing), and no personalized divine creator as totally
different in substance from his non-divine creatures. In contrast, all beings
have a HD Self (or soul) and their ensemble constitutes the collaborative
cosmic hyperdimension. Then all beings and even matter systems—all having a HD
syg-field—not only partake of the One-Plural, but continuously in-form or
create the Whole who has given birth to them. It is a sort of self-creating
consciousness loop at all scales.
(3) The self-creating, self-organizing, and
self-conscious cosmos is neither deterministic nor random; but rather the
creative interplay of both, plus nonlinear dynamics and creative intelligent
input from the beings that constitute it.
(4) The whole cosmos (HD+QST) is a collective
intelligence, a multilevel system both in its wholeness and in its parts (Hardy
2015b).
(5) ISST posits a type of panpsychism since all
systems have a consciousness-HD core (the sygons as a compact HD), the
syg-fields of these systems being more or less evolved (from a
proto-consciousness to a mind).
(6) The universe’s global organization is holographic
and self-conscious—all parts have the information of the whole, and can
influence groups of syg-fields.
(7) The cosmos is a fine-grain blending of mind and
matter, at all scales.
(8) ISST’s paradigm of a self-conscious cosmos and
collective consciousness is a leap beyond monism versus dualism, beyond QM
versus Relativity, beyond the mind-matter and mind-body split.
(9) The image of a personalized god creating the
universe at a specific point in time switches to a collective consciousness
perpetually self-creating through the input of all its parts—the syg-fields of
all beings and systems, and relatively to their syg-energy strength—and who, as
a holographic system, keeps learning and evolving at all scales.
(10) An interesting consequence of the ISST model is
that all intelligent civilizations in our universe are somehow co-evolving
among them and influencing each other (despite the fact some could be a million
years ahead of us or behind us), and moreover they are also co-evolving with
the planetary bodies they inhabit.
(11) And of course ISST transforms deeply not only the
perspective on human freedom and free will, but it has also a deep impact on the
question of life after death.
IV. CONTINUOUS LIFE OF UNIVERSES AND BEINGS IN THE HYPERDIMENSION
IV.1. Birth and death of universes: the cosmic scale
Since the triune hyperdimension (CSR HD) preexists the spacetime region (QST), we have, in between universe-bubbles (UBs), a Kerr BH-WH system. ISST postulates it to be—within its two singularities—pure Center-Syg-Rhythm hyperdimension, that is, a field of dynamic self-conscious information or cosmic consciousness, as a near infinite set of frequencies spread in hyperspace on the phi spiral.
In
the Terminal Black Hole of the previous universe-bubble, all matter- or bio-
systems lose their matter layer and are transcribed (sublimated) into pure CSR
sygonic semantic energy (thus forming the cosmic DNA). These were the systems
that had been viable, enduring, and optimized in the previous parent UBs.
Fig. 3: Phi-based ISS spirals in a BH-WH system
(Black Hole on the left; White Hole on the right),
instantiating the pure CSR hyperdimension
surrounding the QuantumSpaceTime region.
In
the White Hole of a new UB (the birthing cosmic ISS), the bow-frequencies of
the spiral eject FTL sygons, the nearer to the X-Point of the origin, the
higher the frequency (and the smaller the radius). The early high energy
sygons—the Free Sygons—ejected with tremendous momentum, will form the large HD
region (in the form of a spindle) of what will become a UB. Then, when the
bow-frequencies are down to Planck frequency, the sygons’ wavelengths are so
large that they start interfering, creating foam and loops at the mouth of the
ISS, thus forming a lattice in front and perpendicular to it, that will give
rise to the Higgs field. The large sygons will now have to cross this lattice,
which is becoming denser and denser, and they acquire mass and bloat in size,
thus morphing into the particles of the Standard Model.
The
first two waves of high energy particles we know of—the decoupling of the neutrinos (within the first second) and that of
the photons (at 1.40 minute)—literally create the spacetime region as they speed
forward, within the HD bulk already created by the Free Sygons, as a smaller cylindrical
region. Meanwhile, the foamy lattice extends around the spacetime region as the
latter moves forward (like a balloon) and becomes the vacuum, a complex
boundary surface between the spacetime and the HD regions—behaving as the
double membrane modeled by Sarfatti (2006), standing between spacetime and the sub-quantum
Dirac sea of negative energy, and through which virtual particles tunnel). The
(false) vacuum is an oscillating and bubbling surface boundary, showing
permanent fluctuations of virtual particles (hence the ZPF indeterminacy). However, the Free Sygons had
occupied the region that is now spacetime (QST), and they are still there,
immensely more numerous than the large sygons that have been ‘clothed’ in mass
while crossing Higgs field—the known particles, assembling themselves to form
atoms, then molecules, etc. The new particles retain in their core the original
sygons (and their information), thus forming the 5th D, compact
(sub-Planckian), of these particles. These core-sygons are individual ISSs—a
quasi-replica of the cosmic ISS, and bearing its information as in a
hologram—and they constantly send sygons back to the source, the cosmic ISS, about
their own evolving system. Thus, all systems, via their individual ISSs, are constantly
in conversation with the cosmic ISS, and their information is imprinted on the
cosmic ISS—acting as the Akashic information field (see Laszlo 2004). But here,
in contrast with Ervin Laszlo’s A field,
this Akasha is sub-Planckian, that is, sub-quantum, and does not reside in the
quantum vacuum iself which, in ISST, would bear only informational traces of
the tunneling of sygons through the vacuum membrane, appearing as loops.
The
ISS theory thus highlights the deep coherence and systemic dynamical
organization of the pluriverse—the collars of UBs. It also brings an interesting
understanding about a puzzling fact: that all simple atoms (hydrogen, helium,
deuterium) still existing at our present time in our whole universe have been
formed within twenty minutes after the Big Bang. If we consider that all
particles and atoms bear a priceless information about all possible systems
they can form or be part of, then nature being economical wouldn’t get rid of
this information and the atoms would keep on existing until they are transcribed
back into pure CSR information within a black hole. It has been calculated that
the photons from the first light (the photon decoupling) make up 96% of all
photons reaching us—that is about 400 Big Bang photons by cubic centimeter
around us when we walk in the street! (Bogdanov, 2004) The remaining 4% come from
the light of stars.
So let’s see the consequences regarding our topic,
the post-mortem life issue.
In the collar of UBs, each UB receives at birth
the cosmic DNA of its parent UBs (the information about optimized systems), yet
it will be free to improvise and create, transform these systems, and make them
evolve. So that in a Terminal BH, the information field on the cosmic ISS will
be drastically different than the one received at birth (Hardy 2015a). The HD
sygons (whether free or embedded as a 5th D in systems) are the deep
reality of our universe, and they steer all nonlocal communications and
inter-influences between entities—a constant two-way interaction with the
origin, and among resonant syg-fields (such as minds); thus high states of
consciousness and psi phenomena are instantiated by the sygons and the HD,
including weird forms of nonlocality such as retrocausality or synchronicities
(Hardy 2016).
In brief, at the pluriverse scale, there is no
loss of information, ever. Matter is birthed by the hyperdimension, and when
disintegrated within a BH, it is translated back into pure HD sygonic
information imprinted on the ISS. Thus is preserved an axiom of QM, that no
information is ever lost. As modeled by Nobel laureate Gerard 't Hooft
(1993), the whole information about a volume (i.e., a BH)
is inscribed on its surface (i.e., on the surface of the BH’s event-horizon); consequently, the Holographic
Principle states that all information about this universe is inscribed on the
2D surface of its cosmological horizon.
In ISST, the universe as we experience it in our
4D world had an origin and will die in a Terminal Black Hole (and numerous partial
BHs before that). However, the HD
pervading the universe, unfathomable, dwells beyond the birth and death of
matter systems (including universe-bubbles); it is eternally existing as a self-conscious
whole (the Hindu Tat Vam Asi—I am
That, I am What is); yet, in contrast with a creator god deemed immovable and
distinct from the created, the CSR HD is constantly evolving and learning
through its component systems. As the whole is more than the sum of its parts,
the cosmic CSR HD knows more than all of its parts but both its knowledge and
its beingness, constantly evolving, are neither perfect nor total. Thus the ISS theory opposes the
concept of a creator god—especially when viewed as immovable, omnipotent and
omniscient. Its originality is that it is neither a creator god nor a blind
materialistic universe, but a self-creating and self-evolving, multilayered,
hologram. In brief, as a holistic (whole, coherent) and holographic
system, the CSR HD knows all of its parts, and is self-conscious in its
wholeness and in its parts as well. Thus, universe-bubbles are constantly
birthed and then die (in terms of their QST matter region); yet their
information is preserved and passed on to the following UB, via the CSR
hyperdimension. Death at the cosmic scale is only a transformation, a
translation into pure hyperdimensional consciousness; and birth is the reverse
process.
Thus is shed a new light on an impersonal, yet
self-conscious and creative Wholeness, with whom each one of us intelligent
beings may communicate through our Self. The implicit aim of the perpetual
creation of UBs would thus be the exploration and expression of creative acts and
mind potentials by entities at all scales and at many embedded and interactive
levels.
IV.2. The hyperdimensional Self alive beyond spacetime
We saw that ISST (and SFT) have integrated and
elaborated upon Carl Jung’s concepts of a collective unconscious, and of the
Self as a supraconscious and transcendent subject of the personal unconscious,
as connected to other Selfs and to the Anima Mundi (the collective Self as the
One-Plural).
It is within cognitive psychology that I developed SFT
yet, as a researcher on world cultures and PhD in psychological anthropology
and a practitioner and expert on meditation and self-development techniques,
I’m totally in accord with Jung’s concept of the individuation process that reframes the ancient paths of knowledge
and initiation in the language of depth psychology. Initiation paths are found
in most ancient cultures and religions, as well as in Christian and Muslim
mysticism. As Mircea Eliade (1954) has shown, initiation was a world-wide path
of knowledge aiming at exploring the spiritual dimension of the world (the
dreamtime for
the Australian Aborigines) and at developing one’s own mental and psi
capacities, yet its practices differed with each culture.
Individuation and initiation reflect a layered cosmos
and the perennial knowledge that: (1) each human being has a transcendent,
supraconscious, Self (or soul), and an ordinary state of consciousness driven
by the ego, which is more centered on one’s body and social environment (Tart,
1969); (2) this Self can access a deeper knowledge than the ego, and activate
new mind potentials by getting connected to the world soul or dreamtime. According
to some ancient knowledge paths, enlightenment (or awakening) is the ego-Self
fusion (“death of the ego,” “Mystical or Alchemical Marriage”), and once
attained, the individual reaches beyond
duality (advaita in Hinduism) and
can connect or harmonize oneself with cosmic consciousness (Brahman, the Tao,
The One)
Now, let’s focus on the topic of the bodily death for
human beings.
SFT posits that the main part of our being is
extra-dimensional, that is, operating in the semantic dimension beyond space and time (just as Jung had
predicated it about the Self and the unconscious); and that only a small part
of our semantic field is intermingled with the brain’s networks and the body
via eco-fields (body consciousness). In ISST+SFT, our syg-fields are thus
operating freely in the syg hyperdimension and create spontaneous interconnections
with resonant syg-fields (e.g., those of our loved ones, but also those of our
pets, our houses, relished works of art and systems of thought, etc.). The Self
is the supraconscious subject of the whole syg-field, and is steering the
individuation process or ego-Self integration. As Jung showed it, it is the
Self of a person who acts as a guiding entity in most symbolic and numinous
dreams—mostly appearing as the repressed side of the psyche, either the
feminine anima or the masculine animus, in order to balance the person’s
psyche—and this explains the representation of a personal guardian angel. And in one’s life, the Self is ever devoted to the
awakening of the ego and is able, from within the syg hyperdimension, to concoct
synchronicities, events, or situations that will send a message to the ego.
Thus, to draw the global picture, the syg-field, being
both the information-field of the person and steering his/her semantic and organizational
dynamics, contains moreover the whole dynamical memory of this person—as information,
selfhood, organization, procedures, and processes.
In this framework, death is just the shedding of the
bio-matter system by the Self—something like an uncoupling of the Self and its HD
syg-field from matter—both Self and syg-field being highly personal and
strongly individualized. In fact, the degree of originality of the syg-field
and Self of a person is higher than that of their fingerprints because the
syg-field is also the ensemble of their affective, social, and intellectual
networks. Bodily death, for the individual Self, is just severing the
connections to the brain’s neuronal networks. However, all past connections of
this person’s syg-field with still living loved ones, objects, places and
environment are enduring, because they are primarily psychic and mental (i.e., semantic)
links and bonding. However, ISS Theory—as a cosmic consciousness
framework—doesn’t lead to any judgment of the souls or punishments after death.
If the global aim of an incarnation is to learn and expand one’s consciousness
and talents, then it’s likely that the Self will ponder its achievements and
shortcomings during its past life; but this is only a learning process and has
nothing to do with a condemnation and even less so with an eternal judgment; here,
we only have a Self taking one’s own responsibilities.
CONCLUSION: FULLY CREATIVE INDIVIDUALS POST-MORTEM
As we have seen, before/below Planck scale (at the origin, then
surrounding the spacetime or QST region, and at the end of a
universe bubble), there’s
the pure CSR
HD—the
syg-fields embedding the ISS, before they express (or clothe) themselves in
matter after/above Planck scale, in the QST region (as in Figure 2). Thus, an interesting consequence
of ISST’s framework is the fact that a self-conscious hyperdimensional region leads
to the necessary existence of beings and systems that would be pure CSR-HD
systems (that is, syg-fields without material bodies in spacetime), and
networks of them (such as groups of Selfs or souls). While these immaterial
beings are devoid of ordinary matter or bodies, they nevertheless have a high
syg-energy (as well as a morphic field) and may have an influence on the
organization of matter systems in the spacetime region. This is similar to an
alive human being doing a self-healing visualization and whose syg-field will
transmit a healing energy toward his/her body. After the death of the body, the
syg-field, as we saw, still exists as an intelligent, creative, volitional and
evolving personality. Thus, the Self of a deceased person is a pure CSR HD
being that exists only in the hyperdimension. I surmise that a pure Self
(disembodied) wouldn’t have as much influence on spacetime systems as an
embodied Self on his/her own body, but could still tinker with 4D reality.
Another pure CSR-HD system could be the syg-field of a
galaxy that has been swallowed by a Black Hole (at any point in the spacetime
of a UB), and whose matter would have been crushed by gravity. It would now exist
as a pure field of information—syg-energy organized as a syg-field and able,
under favorable conditions, to act as galactic DNA and give birth to a new
galaxy.
To give a more precise picture of the question of the
survival beyond bodily death within the ISST framework, a deceased person,
having shed his body, would be his pure Self—having all the memories and also
the accumulated talents of his previous life. This is in accord with the Buddhist
and Hindu concept of the Self (atman) being conscious between incarnations, in the
Bardo.
Given the large research on communications with the deceased
(e.g., Brune 2009; Gurney et al 1886;
Myers 1903)—and my own experiences recounted in The Sacred Network (Hardy
2011)—my stand on this issue is that the pure HD Selfs (as individual souls—the deceased) (1) have maintained
their individuality and their mindscape, (2) are still thinking, creative,
acting, and learning, able of intention and volition, (3) they have kept their
past relational network and have even added new HD friends to it, (4) they
moreover enjoy the larger scope of a HD consciousness (reaching to any
coordinates in space or time) that allow them to communicate freely with their
past loved ones and colleagues, whether this is registered consciously or via
their unconscious by the living individuals. (All these properties and
capacities can be fluidly derived from SFT-ISST). This means that, as intelligent
beings living in the 4D spacetime, the more we are able to connect and
harmonize ourselves with the syg-HD—to our own Self through high meditative
states—, and the more we may be able to communicate with HD beings.
REFERENCES
Aspect, A., Grangier, P., & Roger, G. 1982a. “Experimental realization of Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-Bohm
Gedankenexperiment: A new violation of Bell's inequalities.” Physical Review Letters, Vol. 49, Iss.
2, pp. 91-94 (1982) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.49.91
Aspect, A., Dalibard, J., & Roger, G. 1982b. “Experimental test of Bell's inequalities
using time-varying analyzers.” Physical
Review Letters, Vol. 49, Iss. 25, pp. 1804–1807 (1982) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.49.1804
Bem DJ. 2011. “Feeling the Future: Experimental
evidence for anomalous retroactive influences on cognition and affect.” J.
of Personality and Social Psychology, 100 (407-25). <http://dbem.ws/>
Brandenburg J. 2011. Beyond Einstein’s Unified Field. Gravity and Electro-magnetism
Redefined. Kempton, IL: Adventures Unlimited Press.
Brandenburg JE. & Hardy CH. 2016. “Entropic Gravity in Pre-Spacetime
& the ISS Theory of a Cosmic Information Field.” Prespacetime Journal 7(5), 828-838. (April 9, 2016). <http://prespacetime.com/index.php/pst/article/view/968/944>
Bohm D. 1980. Wholeness and the Implicate Order. London:
Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Bohm
D. & Hiley BJ. 1993. The Undivided
Universe: an Ontological Interpretation of Quantum Theory. London, UK:
Routledge.
Bogdanov,
I. & G. 2004. Avant le Big Bang. Paris: Grasset Poche.
Bourguignon,
E. 1976. Possession. Corte Madera, CA: Chandler & Sharp.
Brune F. 2009. Les
Morts Nous Parlent. Paris: Livre de Poche.
Carr B. (ed.) 2007. Universe or Multiverse. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ.
Press.
———. 2014. “Hyperspatial models
of matter and mind.” In E. Kelly, A. Crabtree & P. Marshall (Eds.). Beyond Physicalism: Towards Reconciliation
of Science and Spirituality. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
Combs A, & Holland
M. 1995. Synchronicity: Science, Myth,
and the Trickster. New York: Marlowe.
de Broglie L. 1939. Matter and Light: The New Physics (trans. W. H. Johnston).
Mineola, NY: Dover Publ (original in French 1937).
Eliade,
M. 1954. The Myth of the Eternal Return:
Or, Cosmos and History, trans. W.R. Trask. Princeton: Princeton U Press.
Original in French 1949.
Gödel K. 1992. On Formally Undecidable Propositions of Principia Mathematica and Related
Systems. Mineola, NY: Dover Publ.
Gurney E,
Podmore F., & Myers FWH. 1886. Phantasms
of the Living. Forgotten Books.
Guth AH. 1997. The
Inflationary Universe. Reading, MS: Perseus Books.
Hardy C. 1998. Networks
of Meaning: A Bridge between Mind and Matter. Westport, CT: Praeger.
———. 2001. “Self-organization, self-reference and
inter-influences in Multilevel Webs: Beyond causality and determinism.” J. of Cybernetics and Human Knowing, 8
(3). UK: Imprint Academic. https://independent.academia.edu/ChrisHHardy/Papers
———. 2003. “Multilevel
Webs Stretched across Time: Retroactive and Proactive Inter-Influences.” Systems
Research and Behavioral Science, 20, (2), 201-215.
———. 2004. “Synchronicity:
Interconnection through a semantic dimension.” Presentation at 2d
Psi Meeting, April 2004, Curitiba, Brazil. https://independent.academia.edu/ChrisHHardy/Papers
Hardy CH. 2011. The Sacred Network. Rochester, VT: Inner Traditions.
———. 2015. Cosmic DNA at the Origin: A
Hyperdimension before the Big Bang. The Infinite Spiral Staircase Theory. USA: CreateSpace IPP.
———. 2015a. “Topological Dynamics
Setting a Field of Information at the Universe’s Origin. ISS Theory.” Paper presented at the Space
Technologies & Applications International Forum (STAIF-II). Albuquerque,
NM, April 16-18. https://independent.academia.edu/ChrisHHardy/Papers
———. 2015b. “A systemic and hyperdimensional model of a conscious
cosmos and the ontology of consciousness in the universe.” Proceedings, 59th meeting of Intern. Soc. for the Systems
Sciences (ISSS), Berlin, Germany (Aug. 2015).
———.
2015c. Nonlocal
processes and entanglement as a signature of a cosmic hyperdimension of
consciousness. J. of Consciousness
Exploration & Research (JCER),
6(12), 12/04/2015.
———.
2016 (pre-print). Nonlocal
consciousness in the universe: Panpsychism, psi, & mind over matter allowed
in a hyperdimensional physics. J. of
Nonlocality.
Hu
H. & Wu M. 2016. “Celebrating Einstein’s general theory of relativity: LIGO has detected
gravitational wave predicted by Einstein 100 years ago.” Prespacetime Journal 7(2), February
2016, 442-444.
Hawking SW. 1988. A Brief
History of Time. New York: Bantam Books.
———. 2003. “Cosmology
from the Top Down.” Paper given at Davis Inflation Meeting, 2003. http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0305562
Jung CG. 1960. Synchronicity: An Acausal Connecting Principle,
in The collected works of C.G. Jung: Vol. 8. (Bollingen Series, XX),
Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press.
———. 1965. Memories, Dreams, Reflections. New York: Vintage/Random.
Jung CG, &
Pauli W. 1955. The Interpretation of Nature and the Psyche. NY: Pantheon
Books.
Kaku M. 1994. Hyperspace: A Scientific Odyssey Through
Parallel Universes, Time Warps, and the 10th Dimension. New York: Anchor.
Kerr RP. 1963. Gravitational Field of a Spinning
Mass as an Example of Algebraically Special Metrics. Physical Review Letters 11(5):
237–8.
Laszlo E. 2004. Science
and the Akashic Field: An Integral Theory of Everything. Rochester, VT: Inner Traditions.
Mishlove J. 1997.
The Roots of Consciousness. New York:
Marlowe & Co.
Mitchell ER. 1996. The
Way of the Explorer. New York: Putnam.
Myers FWH. 1903. Human
Personality and Its Survival of Bodily Death. London, UK: Longmans. https://archive.org/details/humanpersonality01myeruoft
Nelson RD,
Bradish GJ, Dobyns YH, Dunne BJ, & Jahn RG. 1996. “FieldREG anomalies in
group situations.” Journal of Scientific Exploration, 10(1): 111-41.
Pauli W. & Jung C.G. 2014. Atom and Archetype. The Pauli/Jung letters, 1932- 1958. Princeton, NJ: Princeton
University Press.
Peat FD. 1987. Synchronicity: the Bridge between Matter and
Mind. New York: Bantam Books.
Penrose, R. 1989. The Emperor's New Mind.
Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
———. 2010. Cycles of Time. Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ.
Press.
———. 2014.
“On the gravitization of quantum mechanics 2: Conformal cyclic cosmology.” Foundations of Physics 44(8): 873-90.
Radin D. & Nelson R. 1989. “Evidence for
consciousness-related anomalies in random physical systems.” Foundations of Physics, 19, (12), 1499-514.
Randall L, & Sundrum R. 1999. “An alternative to compactification.” Physical Review Letters 83: 4690-93.
Sarfatti J. 2006. Super Cosmos; Through Struggles to the Stars.
(Space-Time and Beyond III). Bloomington, IN: Author House.
Sheldrake R.
2009. Morphic Resonance. The Nature of Formative
Causation. Rochester, VT: Inner Traditions/ Park Street Press.
Smolin L. 1997. The
Life of the Cosmos. New York: Oxford Univ. Press..
Susskind L. 2003. “The anthropic landscape of string theory.”
arXiv:hep-th/0302219
Targ R, Puthoff H, & May E. 1979. “Direct perception
of remote geographic locations.” In CT Tart et al. (Eds.), Mind at Large (pp. 78-106).
New York: Praeger.
Tart C. (Ed.) 1969. Altered states of consciousness. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Tart C. (Ed.) 1969. Altered states of consciousness. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
't Hooft, Gerard 1993. "Dimensional reduction in quantum
gravity". arXiv:gr-qc/9310026
Verlinde E. 2010. “On the origin of gravity and the
laws of Newton.” arXiv:1001.0785 [hep-th]
Witten, E. 1981. "A new proof of the positive energy theorem". Communications in Mathematical Physics. 80 (3): 381-402.
Witten, E. 1995. "String theory dynamics in
various dimensions". Nuclear Physics B. 443 (1): 85-126. arXiv:hep-th/9503124
°°°
Biographical Note: Chris
H. Hardy, Ph.D. in ethno-psychology and former assistant of research at
Princeton’s Psychophysical Research Laboratories, NJ. Systems theorist,
research on consciousness—via Jungian & transpersonal psychologies,
consciousness studies, cognitive sciences. Recent research on a cosmological
theory (ISST) integrating consciousness in a systemic and hyperdimensional view
of the cosmos (Book: Cosmic DNA at the
origin, 2015). Since 1995, she elaborated the Semantic Fields Theory (a cognitive theory based on complex
dynamical networks). More than 60 papers to date and 17 books on
consciousness. Dr. Hardy presents papers regularly at international scientific
conferences.
[*]
Chris Hardy,
Eco-Mind Systems Science, Seguret, France.
[†] See the PLANCK
cosmology probe team’s release of March 2013, then early 2015 at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_%28spacecraft%29
- 2013_data_release
[last accessed 10/16/2016]
No comments:
Post a Comment