Equations are not being displayed properly on some articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Our apologies.

Yates, J. (2015). Minds with or without Bodies. PHILICA.COM Article number 465.

ISSN 1751-3030  
Log in  
  1340 Articles and Observations available | Content last updated 21 February, 07:32  
Philica entries accessed 3 653 145 times  

NEWS: The SOAP Project, in collaboration with CERN, are conducting a survey on open-access publishing. Please take a moment to give them your views

Submit an Article or Observation

We aim to suit all browsers, but recommend Firefox particularly:

Minds with or without Bodies

John Yatesunconfirmed user (Institute for Fundamental Studies)

Published in neuro.philica.com

We have analysed methods used to examine the use of the human brain and mind. We have then devised a way to use the S-Matrix method to increase human understanding and to arrive at new realms of perception. We have begun to further their use and are using practical methods for OBE research as explained.

Article body


We use metaphysics to explain why we do not need to dive straight into quantum theory to explain the mind-body problem, as explained in Section A. Otherwise. the iconic picture implied and often illustrated concerning Lazebnik's famous paper "Can a biologist fix a radio?" of a biologist grinding up a printed circuit board in a centrifuge, as described in Section B, illustrates some of the problems which may arise if one oversimplifies a problem, even before beginning to solve it. Such oversimplification can lead to metaphysically inappropriate methods. We design ways of coping with this problem in Section B (iii) entitled "Can a Biologist fix a Super-Regenerative Radio ?" and proceed further in Section B (iv) to suggest a further progress with signal detection theory using ACT-R or SOAR.

The mind-body problem is testable and relevant, although exceedingly difficult. Section B(ii) and Section C explains and qualifies. And in Section C, we describe a way by which the difficulties may be surmounted

Accordingly, throughout Section C we have devised a way to use the S-Matrix method to increase human understanding and to arrive at new realms of perception. We have begun to further their use by means of experimental philosophy, the Anton syndrome, blindsight, and the Pinocchio paradox and are using practical methods for Out of Body Experience research as explained.

Further, in Sections C(d) to C(f), we explain how David Bohm's ideas and the Bohmian implicate order can also be related to our results, as well as more conventional forms of quantum theory, which can also be used. And in Section C(g) we consider briefly the likely future philosophical implications of the ideas presented here.

In Section (D), we provide a simple definition of Consciousness using the MBI (Many Bubble Interpretation).

(A) NDE, Bruce Greyson and minds without bodies

It is widely known from Stephen Hawking's polemics about philosophy (1) that most physicists know next to nothing about subjects unrelated to their primary intent. Hawking's problems have been frequently exposed not only by myself (2) but by many others (1,3). Professor Angie Hobbs, in her brief video "Hawking vs Aristotle" (3) illustrates just a few of the problems. Hawking ignores metaphysics for his purposes, and that is a fatal error.

Professor Bruce Greyson has written many papers and given many lectures (6) on subjects like NDE ('Near Death Experience'). Many others, like Raymond Mays (7) have gone much further on matters like hyper-reality and transcendent reality.We must have a great deal of sympathy for such work. But as we know so clearly from the work of physicists like Stephen Hawking (1) and its critics, we must examine matters in perspective.
Professor Greyson, for example, implies that because nowadays we have quantum theory we must try to understand matters differently to the way they did under Newton's so-called 'mechanistic' approach. But we do not need to dive straight into quantum theory, just do what Angie Hobbs suggests and look at metaphysics. For many years Pepper's "World Hypotheses" (4) has been one of my favorite simple books on some branches of metaphysics and it is worth mentioning that the method of 'mechanism', which subsumes many of Greyson's problems, is simply one of the very many ways of thought which leading thinkers have used and abused.

Thoughtful people often try to adopt another category of thought, which Myers refers to as 'organismic'. Pepper (4) explains how metaphysics helps, and mentions 'organismic' methods as just one way this can be done. But those who have studied Pepper (4) realise there are many other approaches which can also be borne in mind.  Kelly's book helps to explain one such an approach using the work of A.N. Whitehead, an outline of the final part of which is given in two free videos (8).

The important book (8) concludes with the words "The needed help is yet to come". And here it is, I am giving it.

For a start, we can NOT assume the answer is with quantum theory and at the same time,we must prefer that excellent modern mathematics and its application such as quantum theory, particle scattering theory and modern electronics should be eagerly used but not treated as yet another philosophical fetish. That fact is almost Freudian in its implications as in reference (53).

Beyond our careful treatment of both physics and metaphysics, we need to bear in mind modern results in Social Psychology (5). And these must also take account of ideas clearly presented by McGilchrist in "The Master and his Emissary" (10). But we must not be bowled over by McGilchrist's ideas like an Oxbridge 'broken reed'. These ideas were actually used by and referred to by Yates (9), together with the latest M.I.T. work with CSAIL.

It has to be pointed out that social psychology quite properly assures that there are many problems with anecdotal results, such as many of those results used by authors like Greyson (6) and Mays (7). Whilst considering such problems, I also discovered that the work of Parnia, Fenwick and others (11) almost have to be considered carefully in that regard, notwithstanding some forensic statements and of course ignoring unpleasant and destructive media hype - which seems to make eminent scientists scurry like rats.

Appendix 1 gives a simple example of possible anecdotal problems, and to the sincere enthusiast these can easily become like Pelion piled on Ossa. In fact questionnaires are almost inevitable and we would be purblind to the topic if we ignore them at this cutting edge stage. But great care is certainly needed.

There are also the usual current pseudo-philosophical outputs usually by tyros or persons outside the field (12,13,14) which often describe themselves as new expositions such as "Occam's Chainsaw". To summarise, Occam's Chainsaw briefly suggests "there appears to be no study clearly and objectively demonstrating both the presence of a completely inactive human brain and the synchronous co-presence of striking and vivid NDEs taking place at that specific and exact point in time … not one single study". And now, we even have "Einstein's Safety Razor" (15). The conclusion of (15) is "Occam’s Swiss Army knife leads to claims that vary too widely within the same paper, and Occam’s chainsaw cuts down too much of the forest, turning the data of experience into a suffering patient". Briefly, that conclusion seems roughly correct and now we are back to what we are doing.

(B)  Biological Problems

The iconic picture below illustrates some of the problems which may arise if one oversimplifies a problem, even before beginning to solve it. Such oversimplification can lead to metaphysically inappropriate methods, as in Fig1 below.


(i) Can a Biologist fix a Radio ?

Lazebnik (16) wrote a classic paper to present the idea of using an engineering perspective as opposed to classical biological reductionism to describe complex biological circuits. As Yates (21) has already pointed out, development of ecological psychology, often based on the work of JJ Gibson and further work such as that of Wells (22), has also become important.  JJ Gibson's work is very relevant to any serious study involving action. Without action, at best we are left studying the consciousness of corpses as in bygone days.

Clearly a paper entitled "Can a biologist fix a radio?" (16) will be followed up by a paper like "Can a Systems Biologist Fix a Tamagotchi?" (17). A Tamagotchi is a hand held cyber pet. Cardelli argues that an electrical engineer could easily fix a radio, but fixing a software bug in an MP3 player would require expertise in the rather different field of software engineering.

At this stage of the game, real actual mathematicians (18) - and often I have often found that these people do not even know how to feed an elephant - complain that they are dubious about the radio analogy. To quote “… At some point, David (Corfield) said (correctly), the field reaches a stage at which models, that seemed so complete, fall apart, predictions that were considered so obvious are found to be wrong, and attempts to develop wonder drugs largely fail. This stage is characterized by a sense of frustration at the complexity of the process, and by a sinking feeling that despite all that intense digging the promised cure-all may not materialize. In other words, the field hits the wall, even though the intensity of research remains unabated for a while, resulting in thousands of publications, many of which are contradictory or largely descriptive. The flood of publications is explained, in part, by the sheer amount of accumulated information (about 10,000 papers on apoptosis were published yearly over the last few years), which makes reviewers of the manuscripts as confused and overwhelmed as their authors….”

With regard to Jonathan Vos Post's comments (18), We can point out that Tom Stafford (19) recently referred to the important Newell paper (20) which suggests a somewhat similar situation. Newell would like us to
(a) Develop complete processing models – i.e. simulations which are competent to perform the task and include a specification of the way in which different subfunctions (called ‘methods’ by Newell) are deployed.
(b) Analyse a complex task, completely, ‘to force studies into intimate relation with each other’, the idea being that giving a full account of a single task, any task, will force contradictions between theories of different aspects of the task into the open.
(c)‘One program for many task’ – construct a general purpose system which can perform all mental tasks, in other words an artificial intelligence.

I am currently trying to do all of these things, and deal with ACT-R as well as SOAR, of which Newell was a founder after writing that article. Here again we may refer to such things as the work of Yates (21) Gibson (21), Wells (22), and many others such as Harry Heft (23), (24) and for other reasons, Axel Cleeremans (28, 29). And of course we also try to bear in mind the work of Baez (25) on the way of such matters, including particularly his work on the Markov process idea (26, 27).

(ii) How have some Biologists 'Tried' ?

Very small test samples (30) and failed replication studies (31) have been two of the major failures by biologists throughout. For matters of a more advanced nature, such as those considered by Evan Thompson (32), such as 'meditation' and 'philosophy', we are thus left with far less solid ground to compare with, than the often half-hearted experiments on more mundane matters are likely to suggest.

Evan Thompson's approach seems to be a rather AI sort of idea - though he does attempt to consider process rather than entity thus perhaps avoiding reductionist problems (33). I
tend to hold to the view that too much reliance on neural networks, and what has been termed
neoHebbian ideas may produce some progress but are unlikely to be cutting edge (34).  I also
mention a matter which I will present at the Kathmandu conference (36). Bernard Baars (35) takes the view that the mind-body problem is scientifically untestable. This is a situation which, however, can be dealt with (37). Yates (38) has of course already made much progress, and has used Berkeley Madonna successfully in a model of Buddhist meditation.

(iii) Can a Biologist fix a Super-Regenerative Radio

I had great success with small super-regenerative receivers as a child. I used a 1S4 pentode with 67.5v and 90v Minimax batteries and a 1.4 battery for the heater.

There was of course the usual problem of rebroadcasting, which was very obvious on a local medium wave superheterodyne receiver. Nowadays such circuits are currently used above about 27 mhhz for models, garage door openers etc …. Integrated circuits for such devices will probably cost £2 or much less.

Lessing's biography (39) tells how amazed Armstrong was when he discovered, by accident, Super-Regeneration. He thought, after years of studying it, that he knew everything there was to know about regeneration. Suddenly a radio he was working on burst into hitherto unknown gain. When he tried to investigate it, it would as quickly drop back to normal. Eventually, with the dogged determination with which he was famed, he tamed the effect and patented it as Super-Regeneration.

The classic vacuum tube superregenerator looks a lot like a normal regenerative amplifier, except that the grid leak bias network time constant is made very large and the feedback (via the tickler coil) is large enough to guarantee instability. As the amplitude grows, the grid leak bias also grows until it cuts off the tube. The tube remains cut off until the bias decays to a value that returns the tube to the active region.

Thus, no separate quench oscillator is necessary and no so-called 'reaction control'. However, if desired either linear or logarithmic quenching can be used.

The classic work on super-regeneration is perhaps Whitehead's book, frequently quoted in the literature, and in fact I am fortunate enough to have the copy (40) once owned by the great Sir George MacFarlane and signed by Whitehead himself. Hanif (41) gives a current account of super-regeneration. Self-amplification may be regarded as roughly like a form of gamma-synchrony in the brain (42, 44), which can lead to unjustified results like seizures. Of course a super-regenerative amplifier is deliberately designed  to “motorboat.” That is, the power supply is deliberately given a high source impedance with a series inductance, causing the tube to oscillate in short bursts. A detailed physical design is given in (43). Amazing.The super-regenerative effect provides exceptionally high gain, and greatly increases the circuit Q, making the amplifier much more selective than it would otherwise be. So now we just have to do the same thing in the brain.

(iv) Now can we and should we use super-regenerative methods and signal detection theory with ACT-R or SOAR

Obviously this is not easy, but we have already made some progress using S-matrix and many body theory as described in the next sections. We refer back to Newell's work as described in Section (i). I will just mention the interesting SOAR results (45) in VR (Virtual Reality). For actual Astral Projection, we are not using a SOAR program, in fact it will derive from ACT-R which has direct advantages, like its relation to JJ Gibson's work. So through Gold's GOSMR , explained quite well in Karen Sittig's MSc thesis (46) and Gold's two relevant published papers (47, 48), we try - not to use certain internet connections like Sittig - but our own survey results from OBE, and we are still compiling this work

(C) Experimental Philosophy, Astral Projection and the Science of Spiritual Biology

We have devised a way to use the S-Matrix method to increase human understanding and to arrive at new realms of perception. We have begun to further their use by means of experimental philosophy, the Anton syndrome, blindsight, and the Pinocchio paradox (52,59) and are using practical methods for Out of Body Experience research as explained (52) .

Bernard Baars (49) takes the view that the mind-body problem is scientifically untestable and irrelevant and says the work of Crick and Koch (50) should be considered, encouraged and followed. "Good theory cannot rise from armchairs alone". Certainly, and the icon of current experimental philosophy has been the burning armchair, though today people look also to the way experimental work has evolved to complement and strengthen traditional approaches to philosophical questions (51).

I mention an example here (62) of how the work of Sigmund Freud has been applied by neuroscientist Vilayanur Ramachandran (53). It perhaps should be pointed out that Sigmund Freud himself held views which gave a thoroughly modern and Quantum Bayesianism characterization of our scientific understanding of the world (54).

Further to (52), we may wish to avoid (57) the slippery slope of assuming consciousness to be necessarily present in animals through panpsychism to obviously amoral computers, whether PC or other, which are in any case possibly hacked by local or non local enemies. Clearly some progress may follow along such lines, but to conflate a promisingly simple idea of consciousness with too many other possibly related ideas is probably wrong. It is hard to understand where to stop. For example, modern Theory of Mind would probably allow human subjects with Wernicke's aphasia to be considered 'conscious'. A good reason for doing so would be that such persons can often be restored to something near normal human consciousness (58) by utilising behavioural training to induce plasticity in underlying neural circuits to maximize linguistic recovery. We are not at this point attempting to justify moral reasons and it is a reasonable legal axiom that "hard cases make bad law" so we might well prefer to avoid hard cases. So we can probably readily justify brain plasticity increases in a Wernicke's syndrome case, if we wish, as a means to produce or - more likely - increase consciousness. Further, Vilayanur Ramachandran suggests the use of brain plasticity methods in such cases to develop techniques for fundamental brain and consciousness studies (53).

The above introduction should prepare us for some exquisite work on Astral Projection. We have given some further preparatory work and examples in some earlier pages such as (59), in which we pointed out, for example, that much earlier work may have been carried out by Acharya Bharadwa in the holy city of Prayag (known today as Allahabad) in the year 800 B.C. We have already referred here (52) to precautions which may be required with contemporary experimentation.

OBE and the Ramsauer-Townsend Effect

Briefly, we have devised a way to use the S-Matrix method to increase human understanding and to arrive at new realms of perception.

(a) Introduction

We note from reference (60), Appendix 6, that we gave the likely general shape of the OBE ("Out of Body Experience") curve, from many experiments, both our own and those in the literature, as well as giving detailed philosophical reasons. We described a shape like that of the Verhulst equation. A sigmoidal curve like that is characteristic of many natural processes, such as those of complex system learning curves, which exhibit a progression from small beginnings that accelerates and approaches a climax over time. When a detailed description is lacking, a sigmoid function is often used. Now in reference (61) we did plots and equations showing Mantra chanting effects and similar disturbances which might arise at the upper flat part of the curve..

So at a short distance from the artificial hand, the OBE effects are well known to arise from the perception of local effects like touch - even banging the experimental table has been said to have a useful effect. At these short distances there are particularly clear results from the work of Zopf (62).

Particularly at longer distances (63) the by now well known avoidance effect arises very frequently. That is to say, even where it is well known the subjects are taking part in an 'out of body experience' experiment, an interaction like a perceived external threat like a revolving fan or a slicing or stabbing knife provides a real and very measurable physical reaction. In this brief essay I will not describe other external implications.  Video gaming has already been discussed by me (64), and there is clearly much more to be said about all these matters, for example in the important work of Angelica Ortiz de Gortari (65). Clearly we are entering a new arena for the human life and soul (if any).

Sometimes the avoidance effect may dispel the OBE altogether, but otherwise the OBE may just tend to come back .

(b) Calculation of the Avoidance Effect

In (66) we mention a "hybrid" theory of Systems Biology and Computational Biology. Lawrence (67) describes the method and gives his own software (68). Here we use the "hybrid" idea to separate the mathematics for the avoidance effect from the earlier sigmoidal area of the graph.

So we assume a potential well - I first thought of using a Dirac delta function but probably that is not complex enough at this time for our model. We actually used a square well potential and that can be varied readily in terms of depth and length.

Griffith's (69) equation 2.169 is useful here, to provide equation 1 here, as in Fig2.


T is the transmission coefficient, Vo is the well depth,  and E is the total energy of the particle (our subject) being considered. The well is transparent when the sine function in equation 1 is zero. So equation 2 (Fig3) follows , for perfect transmission; n is an integer.


Clearly, now we need to consider the Ramsauer-Townsend effect which seems to occur which almost looks like the opposite to what we want - i.e. transparency for certain values of energy. Those are the select cases where the particle (qua our subject) can go straight through the well without changing. This will mean that the effect of the knife blade or the rotating fan will go unheeded - indeed maybe even un-noticed in this model. People who recall Dan Simons's "missing gorilla" experiment will appreciate that such lack of attention can readily happen (73). And for OBE experiments, that may not be considered by some as a bug, but as a feature. It helps psychologists of doubtful sincerity to pretend that some observations are just "illusions"

If our model is detailed enough, this will imply that the subject will note the knife without experiencing physical sensations of avoidance - he will be like the alleged Buddhist Monk, totally enured to ill effects in this matter from the outside world. "The fruit is of the same quality as the action" it says in the Hindu holy work, the Mahabharata (70). Or in Washburn Hopkin's words (71), "The fruit is of the same quality with the action, and good or bad there is no destruction of the action". The Mahabharata almost seems to be an anticipation of the work of J.J. Gibson here. We must remember that the Mahabharata is not simply a work with attempts at godly presumption or assumption, in Western Christian terms, but a serious attempt to explain the structure of the universe. And copies in Sanskrit (a language in many ways similar to modern Tamil), have been available through verbal learning for thousands of years. In simple terms, the Mahabharata need not be considered in the light of being a "Diktat" by a God, which we are obliged to follow, but as a serious philosophical and scientific work. The God-Diktat idea would seem to be an immediate flaw in both Christian and Islamic studies - which could reasonably allow for their disregard. Not necessarily (72) of course, but I fear that is generally true in modern Western society.

(c) Ramsauer-Townsend Effect

No good explanation for the Ramsauer-Townsend effect existed until the introduction of quantum mechanics, which explains that the effect results from the wave-like properties of the electron. A simple model of the collision that makes use of wave theory can predict the existence of the Ramsauer-Townsend minimum. Bohm presents one such model that considers the atom as a finite square potential well.

It has to be stressed that whilst we find a 1D model sensitive for our purposes here, the use of the Ramsauer-Townsend effect for gases needs a 3D model, and this is explained in Appendix 2 here. This phenomenon (using de Broglie waves here) is identical to that which occurs in light optics and is the basis for the operation of the Fabry-Perot interferometer

Interestingly, (74), the de Broglie-Bohm methods are still used to calculate the Ramsauer-Townsend Effect, just as they can be for Black Hole studies (75). As Gamboa and Mendez (76) points out for Black Holes "a similar phenomenon occurs in nature for the scattering of electrons by inert atoms where, for some values of the energy, there is not scattering for s-waves, a phenomenon known as Ramsauer-Townsend effect. Thus, our calculation shows that the quantum scattering of particles with 3 D extremal BH is always governed by a kind of Ramsauer-Townsend mechanism".

Holography, black holes and implicate order are three terms which also are now important in some way. There are definitely matters to examine.

The use of the JME McTaggart A and B series has already been discussed in detail  in that connection, and referred to throughout this blog and in a book. At this time, suffice it to say that an eternalist B series style universe model will always have problems, which is be helped out with an A series model in addition.

(d) Graphing the Avoidance Effect

When T=1, there is perfect transmission, and - in the current basic model - the subject, like the Buddha, ignores or does not see the unliked stimuli. We would like to ask ourselves, what is E - for the subject and for the experiment ?

Well we may be able to gain some understanding of what E is by seeing how the subject behaves, and relating that to Figure 4 below, which is just a graph of Equation 1 (77).


We can also consider the matter in terms of de Broglie waves directly, as in Figure 5 which follows (79).


(e) How to use a Fabry-Perot interferometer modified for de Broglie waves in a Grof Shaman Experiment to eventually define the Implicate Order

Consider threats such as an attempted knife hack or involvement of a body part with the blades of a rotating fan.

We want the subject to be totally enured to such threats, and yet to continue to consider themselves to be involved within the out of body scenario.

The reason is to quantify and understand the psychological and physical involvement. And this will also help to establish the level of validity of the model.

Now we want to use the methods of the Fabry-Perot interferometer directly here. We know the process there to be identical to the process involving the use of de Broglie waves (68).

So we apply a "shock" to the subject, which we will describe here as S1. This could be a knife threat, a rotating fan threat, or one of many other threats such as those described in the "virtual Milgram" experiments of Slater (80).  And discussed and applied by Yates (81,82).

Now, if we are fortunate, the subject may already act like a Buddhist Monk. This can be determined by the usual questioning techniques and use of other techniques such as Galvanic Skin Response measurements and the other methods mentioned in earlier blogs (83) and throughout the literature. By such means, a reasonably accurate estimate can be made, to the point of being acceptable as veridical for our purposes.

If the subject is not at the Buddhist Monk level with respect to S1 - we give him or her a further "shock" which we call S2. The reason is given in Griffith's book (69), page 407-8, Problem 11.5 . That is, S1 will produce a phase shift. That may be enough to give transparency in the S-Matrix, and produce a Buddhist Monk position in our subject. If not, we may wish to repeat the experiment and/or provide further shocks S3, S4, and so on. This is almost an inverse-Milgram experiment.

Unfortunately, so far our experiment is more like that of an Etalon use rather than of a full scanning Fabry-Perot interferometer. Slick methods like those of Zopf (62) should readily alter that successfully.

Satisfactory results for this experiment should allow further phase changes to move the subject even further to other states. And boredom, hatred, contempt, dislike and refusal to participate may well result. As mentioned above and in reference (83), at each stage we need to seek veridicality, to allow us to proceed further. And to interpret results as we proceed. Of course we do not wish to "do a Zimbardo" (84) of the benefits implied by Section (6), Reference (81). This can allow us to begin to think like God, and one may say, at last allow us entry to the Implicate Order.

If all this does not work, we simply alter it till it does - S-matrix methods have very wide applications. For example, we could go to the 3D case (only 1 peak there so far), we could change potentials and potential levels etc. We should also note the Ramsauer-Townsend approach is only one effect. The overall approach will still hold.

There are also, of course, important psychological factors. For example, boredom could quickly arise and sufficient variations or different subjects are needed. Or eventually build it all into a video game - this could allow different definitions of the S-matrix etc. But such games are already in their own level of banality - a simple basic but almost veridical experiment which could see if other subjects can be brought easily into the Buddhist Monk state might be easier and will also allow additional experimental data. And how many shocks will be needed to produce anything but long term nominal boredom ? There is a lot to think about but there is an approximate design here, and the simple version may work quickly, just as Kuramoto got early success with very simple synchronisation. I give the URL for videos (99) which show the synchronisation of 50 fireflies using a local dynamic Kuramoto model. Reference (100) gives a brief explanation also. The point is, the Kuramoto model can immediately describe real fireflies that are synchronising, and the mathematics displays the synchrony only. There is clearly an enormous scope for further useful work here for Grof style Shamanism and the Implicate Order. We really are getting closer to Astral Projection. Historically, the first aeroplane took hundreds if not thousands of years to devise. We are moving much quicker than that with our Astral Projection techniques. And we have already gone far with OBE experiments.

(f) The Implicate Order

How do we now get to the implicate order ?  We have already (85) discussed the implicate order in some detail.

We know already that there are a great nomination of definitions of the human attributes like space, time, and so on. The concept of time in particular has been made subject to many definitions and some kind of eternalism seems to be in effect the most favoured one at present. But clearly if we wish to examine the implicate order, eternalist time in a simple way will leave us very restricted. The ideas of  Everett or other style multiple universes, brane theory (86) and other methods, does not really help. Because up to a point, we still are under the thumb of Leibniz and simple eternalist time. I go back to JME McTaggart and have written at length about the need to use both the A series and the B series of JME McTaggart.

We need to use both A and B series and cannot rely only on one of them.

A simple way to look at this is to consider the Sorites Paradox. There have been many papers written on the Sorites Paradox, but a couple of typical ones are (87) and (88). They both agree that you have to take a stand on a viewpoint. And whilst it is then very easy to turn away from the Sorites Paradox on such grounds as vagueness - the fact remains that people still write volumes on it ! Obviously, something there !  Another even clearer example occurs in the novel "Eliza" (89). Eliza's husband brings home a little book of conundrums and asks Eliza to use the book and suggest a conundrum to him - which he says he will immediately solve. The conundrum she gives is "What did the lady say when she fell over on the steps outside St. Paul's cathedral". He ponders over this and even asks his friends their views as to an answer. However, no answer is found and by then the book is lost. Eliza says "I made up the conundrum myself and assume you would be smart enough to make up the answer". So much, one may say, for old Greek philosophers and their odd sayings. In fact, if you read the book, the Implicate Order could give you the answer - although it was never given anywhere. The conundrum occurred from a knowledge of Eliza's life style. So what is the implicate order ?

Many other people - including David Bohm himself (90) - have talked about the Implicate Order but have so far made no real effort to describe it in a way which will immediately lead to results. In my opinion, talk is cheap, and there is probably too much talk but little action on the Implicate Order. Two points immediately come to mind. The first is that most people (90-98 etc.) have either simply commented on or have tried to pursue Bohm's own approach as outlined in (90) but not carried it out in detail. For example, in the comments made by Weber (91), we note that Bohm's comments do not seem to take us further than Bohm himself had gone. That is not surprising for results based on such a hard to fathom bleeding edge technology, and does not reflect badly on Bohm. Also, the mathematics I have seen to date (90-98 and many others)  has not helped either. The second point is the one I have already made, innumerable times, both here and elsewhere, about the need to bear in mind JME McTaggart's paradox and realise that a simple mathematical answer based on eternalist views will not completely succeed. Here, we certainly use mathematics veridically, but in a way which will help us explain human matters

In Bohm's book (90), the well known example of rotating cylinders and ink is given. Bohm does carefully point out that this is only an illustrative example of how the implicate order might work. In a somewhat similar way, we are only using our "modified Fabry-Perot interferometer" method as something a little more than an analogy - but also as a detector and creator. The subjects who use the detector will hopefully eventually be able to slip away from the humdrum normal world. At least to a state of contemplation, and eventually much more - hopefully to soar to the realms of creation and understanding - but not in the way of David Koresh or St. Paul (91).

(g) Current work (101) on the interface between condensed matter physics and and biology suggests "an entirely new and universal mechanism of conductance in biology very different from the one used in electrical circuits". Indeed. And bearing in mind, for example, the many years of intensive work on Hartree-Fock and like calculations which have been involved simply to reach the present status in such efforts as (101), it can be suggested that a more holistic approach like that implicit in the current work, involving ecological psychology, may help us to look at newly discovered ideas.
(D) How we have a simple definition of Consciousness using the MBI

The B series according to McTaggart (104) defines the idea of earlier than and later than. In short it is an ordering designation. The A series designates present moments. This is a very simple way of designating things. Much more has been said and defined in this connection, often importantly (103,106). Extra details are almost endless.

In my mind, I tend to think of the A series as being like a lot of bubbles floating freely, each of which representing a person or sentient object (or perhaps we could doubtfully aspire to a conglomeration of persons and objects), and his or her past, present and future at some time, and we could hopefully index the persons in the bubbles. But will each conscious object really just have its own bubble ?

As presented above, the A series has a "future" along with each "present" and "past", in the individual bubbles. This is only a model and not a metaphysical description of the universe. It is however by the nature of the model, likely to be many worlds in structure if mathematical attempts are made.

In the MBI (Many Bubble Interpretation), the many bubbles of time, each with its own past, present and future, are as real as the person or conglomerate observing them, and only exist in a model of the A series. The A series itself, in some metaphysical sense at least, can be taken to exist.

We could consider our A series bubbles corresponding to different values to be linked
to one another by a spider web of gossamer chains. The practical point of view is essentially ‘first-person’ (‘subjective’) - for a bubble: it assumes knowledge of who I am, where I am , what time it is . The theoretical point of view is essentially impersonal (‘objective’). It doesn’t require this first-person knowledge. So the A-series/B-series distinction is a case of the distinction between these two points of view, the practical and the theoretical.

So in a sense we have provided a definition of consciousness - BUT ONLY IN THE A-SERIES - which we may try to map onto the B series or a pseudo-A or pseudo-B series.

Chalmer's zombies (102), if such constructs do exist, are probably harmless. They would really only amount to A series bubbles which we cannot reach. In fact, they may turn out to be useful in a zombie detection system. It will help if we can find a few. "Pseudo-Zombies" might also turn out to relate directly to psychotic behaviour, as frequently indicated in my notes (102,104). If the bubbles are all zombies, we may tend to be back to solipsism (105). An alternative might be that we are all in the same bubble. But that seems impossible as we all have our own pasts, presents and futures. Thus the A series seems to roughly define consciousness.

At the moment we are using the A series for tests and research.

O’Regan and Noë (107) importantly argue that the senses are to be distinguished by the different patterns of sensorimotor contingency by which they are governed. Their position is compatible with Bach-y-Rita’s work (108) on tactile-vision substitution systems, which suggests that it is possible to “see” or experience the world “visually” through sensory systems other than vision. This also may fit in with our present results on Out of Body Experience, as these results importantly involve touch.

Conclusion of Paper

We have devised a way to use the S-Matrix method to increase human understanding and to arrive at new realms of perception. We have begun to further their use (52,59) and are using practical methods for OBE research as explained in (52) .

Appendix 1

This excerpt from a Television program given in "Social Psychology for Dummies" (5) illustrates just how easy it is for anecdotal or questionnaire types of 'proofs' to be misleading, to the point where such work is often regarded as unacceptable for proofs. References like (5) and elsewhere contain many more such instances. Social scientists are often aware of these problems - or should be - and unworldly physical scientists must bear them in mind also. And they also must bear in mind the many other sensible points made in reference (5). I could change just a few words here, to indicate the problems which one may easily found in ancdotal 'proofs'.

(1) Television version

Lies, damned lies and questionnaires

The public usually think of questionnaires as a way to find out what people think. But clever
and  unscrupulous  questioners  can  get  the answers that they want to find all too easily.
A favourite illustration comes from the UK TV show, "Yes, Prime Minister". In one episode, two civil servants discuss the Prime Minister’s plan to reintroduce National Service, where young people work in the military for a year after leaving school. The Prime Minister’s keen on the idea, his inexperienced civil servant Bernard Woolley says, because a survey revealed that
the  voters  are  in  favour  of  it.  Sir  Humphrey replies that in that case they should just carry
out another survey to show that the voters are against it and he shows Bernard how.

    Humphrey:  You  know  what  happens:  nice young lady comes up to you. Obviously you want to create a good impression, you don’t want  to  look  a  fool,  do  you?  So  she  starts asking you some questions: ‘Mr Woolley, are you worried about the number of young people
without jobs?’

    Bernard: ‘Yes’

    Humphrey: ‘Are you worried about the rise in crime among teenagers?’

    Bernard: ‘Yes’

    Humphrey: ‘Do you think there’s a lack of discipline in our Comprehensive schools?’

    Bernard: ‘Yes’

    Humphrey:  ‘Do  you  think  young  people welcome some authority and leadership in their            lives?’

    Bernard: ‘Yes’

    Humphrey: ‘Do you think they respond to a challenge?’

    Bernard: ‘Yes’

    Humphrey: ‘Would you be in favour of reintroducing National Service?’

    Bernard: ‘Oh, well, I suppose I might be.’

    Humphrey: ‘Yes or no?’

    Bernard: ‘Yes’

Humphrey: ‘Of course you would, Bernard. After all you told her you can’t say no to that.  So  they don’t mention the first five questions and they publish the last one.’

    Bernard: ‘Is that really what they do?’

    Humphrey: ‘Well, not the reputable ones no, but there aren’t many of those. So alternatively          the young lady can get the opposite result.’

    Bernard: ‘How?’

    Humphrey: ‘Mr Woolley, are you worried about the danger of war?’

    Bernard: ‘Yes’

    Humphrey:  ‘Are  you  worried  about  the growth of armaments?’

    Bernard: ‘Yes’

    Humphrey: ‘Do you think there’s a danger in giving young people guns and teaching them            how to kill?’

    Bernard: ‘Yes’

    Humphrey: ‘Do you think it is wrong to force people to take up arms against their will?’

    Bernard: ‘Yes’

    Humphrey: ‘Would you oppose the reintroduction of National Service?’

    Bernard: ‘Yes’

    Humphrey:  ‘There  you  are.  You  see Bernard? The perfect balanced sample.’

(2) Illustration of our Problems

Obviously such situations will clearly differ in many circumstances.  We could probably explain a lot better, but we are just making a point

Lies, damned lies and questionnaires

Humphrey:  You know what happens: nice young lady comes up to you. Obviously you want to create a good impression, you don’t want to look a fool, do you?  So she  starts asking you some questions: ‘Mr Woolley, are you worried about the lack of care for the elderly ?'

    Bernard: ‘Yes’

    Humphrey: ‘Are you worried about the waste of money by the Government ?'

    Bernard: ‘Yes’

    Humphrey: ‘Do you think that too much money is being spent on research which has                      produced no results ?'

    Bernard: ‘Yes’

    Humphrey:  ‘Do you think the Government should help the elderly now rather than spending         money on schemes which have produced no results ?'

    Bernard: ‘Yes’

    Humphrey: ‘Do you think that studying matters like NDE, which has produced no practical           results whatever, should be abandoned ?'

    Bernard: ‘Yes’

    Humphrey: ‘Would you be in favour of laughing at the idea of NDE ?'

    Bernard: ‘Oh, well, I suppose I might be.’

    Humphrey: ‘Yes or no?’

    Bernard: ‘Yes’

    Humphrey: ‘Of course you would, Bernard. After all you told her you can’t say no to that.  So       they don’t mention the first five questions and they publish the last one.’

    Bernard: ‘Is that really what they do?’

    Humphrey: ‘Well, not the reputable ones no, but there aren’t many of those. So alternatively          the young lady can get the opposite result.’

    Bernard: ‘How?’

    Humphrey: ‘Mr Woolley, are you worried about the danger of death ?'

    Bernard: ‘Yes’

    Humphrey: ‘Are you worried about the growth of denial of people dealing with what                      happens after death?'

    Bernard: ‘Yes’

    Humphrey: ‘Do you think there’s a danger in ignoring what happens after death ?'

    Bernard: ‘Yes’

    Humphrey: ‘Do you think it is wrong not to consider what happens after death ?'

    Bernard: ‘Yes’

    Humphrey: ‘Would you say you believe in dealing with NDE ?'

    Bernard: ‘Yes’

    Humphrey:  ‘There you are.You see Bernard? The perfect balanced sample.’

Appendix 2

"The Ramsauer-Townsend effect may be thought of as a diffraction of the electron around the rare-gas atom, in which the wave function inside the atom is distorted in just such a way that it fits on smoothly to an undistorted wave function outside (30)"

The well-known model of a 1-dimensional scattering problem (30), solved in many elementary quantum mechanics texts, is often put forward as exhibiting the essential features of wave mechanical behaviour that one observes in the Ramsauer-Townsend effect. The 1-D model bears a relation to the real 3-D scattering problem that is similar to the relation which the problem of the energy levels of a particle in a 1-D box bears to the 3-D problem of the hydrogen atom, i.e. suggestive, but fairly distant as far as numerical agreement is concerned. In the 1-D scattering problem, one finds the transmission coefficient has maxima at a series of discrete energies for both positive and negative potential wells, whereas in the 3-D case there is only one maximum, and that only for an attractive potential.


(1) Hawking S., (2011), "The Grand Design", examples of book reviews at
770f334416ee&sponsor= ,

(2) Yates J., (2011),"Time Travel in Theory and Practice", page 2, IFS Foundation; http://amzn.to/zHtsxy Amazon ; http://bit.ly/xR8FgF details ; http://bit.ly/A2eaOe reviewers, free PDF

(3) Hobbs A., (2014), "Hawking vs Aristotle", https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SuHw1teEMuU

(4) Pepper,  S.  C.  (1942/1972), "World  hypotheses:  A  study  in  evidence", Berkeley,  CA:  University  of  California ; or for a very quick an inefficient part summary http://www.jeffbloom.net/docs/StephenPepper-WorldHypoth.pdf   or http://www.clarku.edu/faculty/jlaird/World Hypotheses as Psychological Variables.pdf

(5) Richardson DC., (2014), "Social Psychology for Dummies", page 72, John Wiley & Sons, Chichester

(6) Greyson is the major author of papers involving NDE: Sleutjes A.,et al ,(2014), "Almost 40 Years Investigating Near-Death Experiences", J Nerv Ment Dis 2014;202: 833 – 836)
recent work: Greyson B., (2015), https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=en-3Bz1RMig ; transcript at http://www.scienceformonks.org/SciencePrograms/MonasticGraduates/Conference/CosmologyAndConsciousnessI/Resources/Text_Is_Consciousness_Produced.pdf

(7) Robert and Suzanne Mays R., Mays S., (2012), "The Future of NDE and Consciousness Research: Using the transcendent content of NDEs to fathom the mysteries of reality",  http://selfconsciousmind.com ; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GgelyOlaNGo , Presented at the IANDS 2012 Conference, Aug. 31-Sept. 2, in Scottsdale, AZ

(8) Kelly E., et al, (2009), "Irreducible Mind", Rowman & Littlefield Publishers ; brief videos of Chapter 9 concerning Alfred North Whitehead & FW Myers at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qtbRvHgMYt8 and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uwss-cMQiQk

(9) Yates J.,(2013) http://ttjohn.blogspot.in/2013/03/slime-002-preview-brief-video-of.html see
Appendix 2 of that work. And similar views taken in Yates J.,The Slime Mold Collective, (2013) on 'Dr. John Yates's Page', http://slimoco.ning.com/profile/DrJohnYates at http://slimoco.ning.com/profiles/blog/list?month=05&year=2013 and at Yates J.,(2013), http://ttjohn.blogspot.in/2013/05/physarum-experiment-using-evm-i-first.html

(10) McGilchrist I., (2009), "The Master and his Emissary", Yale.

(11) Yates J., (2014), http://ttjohn.blogspot.in/2014/06/out-of-body-experience-brief-current.html

(12) Braithwaite, J.J., & Dewe, H (2014). Occam’s chainsaw: Neuroscientific nails in the coffin of dualist notions of the near-death Experience (NDE). The [UK] Skeptic magazine, (25) 2, pp24-31;  http://www.academia.edu/10060970/Occams_Chainsaw_Neuroscientific_Nails_in_the_coffin_of_dualist_notions_of_the_Near-death_experience_NDE_

(13) http://www.birmingham.ac.uk/schools/psychology/news-events/2014/22Dec-paper-investigates-near-death-experiences.aspx

(14) http://www.skeptiko-forum.com/threads/dualist-nails-in-the-coffin.1815/

(15) Koleva S., Haidt J., (2012), Psychological Inquiry, 23: 175–178, 2012

(16) Lazebnik Y., (2002), "Can a biologist fix a radio?", Cancer Cell. 2002 Sep; 2(3):179-82 ; also note simplified explanation at http://mappingignorance.org/2014/07/02/biologists-cant-understand-biology/

(17) Cardelli L., (2007), "Can a Systems Biologist Fix a Tamagotchi?"
http://www.molneuro.mbb.ki.se/uhlen/downloadable/CardelliMicrosoft2007.pdf  or from Bertot et al., (2009), "From Semantics to Computer Science: Essays in Honour of Gilles Kahn", article 23, Cambridge University Press.

(18) https://golem.ph.utexas.edu/category/2010/01/going_to_singapore.html ; from post 'David Corfield on January 17, 2010' and elswhere in this section

(19) Stafford T., (2015), http://mindhacks.com/2015/02/10/you-cant-play-20-questions-with-nature-and-win/

(20) Newell A., (1973), Visual Information Processing: Proceedings of the Eighth Annual Carnegie Symposium on Cognition, Held at the Carnegie-Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, May 19, 1972. Academic Press;
http://repository.cmu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3032&context=compsci ;

(21) Yates J., (2014), http://ttjohn.blogspot.in/2014/07/current-consciousness-astral-projection.html

(22) Wells AJ., (2002), "Gibson's affordances and Turing's theory of computation", Ecological
psychology, 14 (3). pp. 140-180

(23) Heft H., (2001), "Ecological Psychology in Context", Psychology Press (476 pages)

(24) Heft H., (2013), http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k4fKBqu-Ris

(25) Yates J., (2014), http://ttjohn.blogspot.in/2014/08/our-repetition-of-haans-experiment.html and
Yates J., (2014), http://ttjohn.blogspot.in/2014/03/even-journal-nature.html

(26) Yates J., (2014), http://ttjohn.blogspot.in/2014/05/n-equation-after-style-of-maxwells.html

(27) Baez JC., (2012), "A Noether Theorem for Markov Processes", arXiv:1203.2035

(28) Yates J., (2014), Yates Equation for OBE experiences and Axel Cleereman's Results (I) http://ttjohn.blogspot.in/2014/07/yates-equation-for-obe-experiences-and.html

(29) Yates J., (2014), Yates Equation for OBE experiences and Axel Cleereman's Results (II) http://ttjohn.blogspot.in/2014/07/yates-equation-for-obe-experiences-and_12.html

(30) Yates J., (2015), http://ttjohn.blogspot.in/2015/01/the-bonfire-of-doorways.htm

(31) Yates J., (2015), http://ttjohn.blogspot.in/2015/01/dead-salmon-all-way-down.html

(32) Yates J., (2015), http://ttjohn.blogspot.in/2015/01/evan-thompson-and-his-enactive-approach.html

(33) Thompson E., (2014), http://www.tricycle.com/interview/embodied-mind

(34) Nefsky J., (2015), https://philosophynow.org/issues/51/A_Logical_Vacation ;
In my opinion, so much could be said. Here is an example of a real problem with loops - loops are the lifeblood of computers and mechanistic ideas:

Mr Barnard: “I’ve told you, I’m not allowed to argue unless you’ve paid.”
Customer: “I just paid!”
Mr Barnard: “No, you didn’t.”
Customer: “Look, I don’t want to argue about that!”
Mr Barnard: “Well, you didn’t pay!”
Customer: “Aha! If I didn’t pay, why are you arguing? I’ve got you!”
Mr Barnard: “No, you haven’t.”
Customer: “Yes I have. If you’re arguing I must have paid!”
Mr Barnard: “Not necessarily. I could be arguing in my spare time.”

(35) Baars B., (2003),"Commentary to Morten Overgaard: Foundations for a Science
of Consciousness", Journal of  Anthropological Psychology No. 13, 2003. (ISSN 1902-4649)

(36) Yates J., (2015), "Science and Scientist - 2015", Buddha Hall, Sushil Kedia Vishwa Bharati, Kathmandu, Nepal. The reviewers have accepted this paper for presentation in the Third International conference Science and Scientist 2015 being organized at the Buddha Hall Sushil Kedia Vishwa Bharati, Kathmandu, Nepal during 17-18 April, 2015.

(37) Jennifer Nagel and Kaija Mortensen, (2015),  "Armchair-Friendly Experimental Philosophy",
in Justin Sytsma & Wesley Buckwalter (eds.), "A Companion to Experimental Philosophy", 
Blackwell (forthcoming) ; http://philpapers.org/archive/NAGAEP.pdf

(38) Yates J., (2014), http://ttjohn.blogspot.in/2014/11/current-work-on-ramsauer-townsend.html ; Yates J., (2014), http://ttjohn.blogspot.in/2014/09/start-of-use-of-detailed-methods-like_14.html ; and much more

(39) Lessing L., (1956), "Man of high fidelity; Edwin Howard Armstrong, a biography", Philadelphia, Lippincott

(40) Whitehead JR., (1950), "Super-regenerative receivers", University Press. see Hanif reference for a recent account of the subject.

(41) Hanif K., et al, (2009), M.Sc. Thesis,

(42) Baars BJ., Gage M.,(2013), "Cognition, Brain, and Consciousness", second edition, page 254, Academic Press

(43) Harris FW., (2010), "Crystal Sets to Sideband", Rev 12, Chapter 14, page 22,  www.qrparci.org/wa0itp/csts_book.pdf

(44) Dehaene J., Changeux J., (2003), "Neural Mechanisms for Access to Consciousness", http://www.nyu.edu/gsas/dept/philo/courses/consciousness05/Dehaene2.pdf

(45) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CitevFwa3TE

(46) Sittig KA., (2012), "An Affordance-Inspired Tool", http://dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/handle/1721.1/85500/871002879.pdf?sequence=1

(47) Gold K., (2013), "Learning to Efficiently Pursue Communication Goals on the Web with the GOSMR Architecture", Proceedings of the Twenty-Seventh AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence

(48) Gold K.,et al.,(2013), "Modeling How Thinking About the Past and Future Impacts
Network Traffic with the GOSMR Architecture", Proceedings of the 12th International Confer-
ence on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AA-
MAS 2013),

(49) Baars B., (2003),"Commentary to Morten Overgaard: Foundations for a Science
of Consciousness", Journal of  Anthropological Psychology No. 13, 2003. (ISSN 1902-4649)

(50) Crick, F., Koch, C., (2003), 'A framework for consciousness', Nature Neuroscience, Vol. 6, No. 2

(51) Jennifer Nagel and Kaija Mortensen, (2015),  "Armchair-Friendly Experimental Philosophy", in Justin Sytsma & Wesley Buckwalter (eds.), "A Companion to Experimental Philosophy",  Blackwell (forthcoming) ; http://philpapers.org/archive/NAGAEP.pdf

(52) Yates J., (2014), "X-phi, Anton syndrome, blindsight, and the Pinocchio paradox", http://ttjohn.blogspot.in/2014/12/x-phi-anton-syndrome-blindsight-and.html

(53) Ramachandran VS., (2004), "Anosognosia ",The 5th Neuro-Psychoanalysis Congress, Rome 2004 on Splitting, Denial and Narcissism: Neuropsychoanalytic Perspectives on the Right Hemisphere, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MDHJDKPeB2A

(54) Christopher A. Fuchs, David Mermin, and Rudiger Schack, (2014), "An Introduction to QBism with an Application to the Locality of Quantum Mechanics", arXiv:1311.5253v1  [quant-ph]  20 Nov 2013

(55) Yates J., (2014), abstract, "Husserl's "Pure Phenomenology" and further adventures in time", Toward a Science of Consciousness - The Tucson Conference 20th Anniversary - April 21-26, 2014 ; page 193 , number 266 ; http://www.consciousness.arizona.edu/documents/FinalCCS_BOOKofAbstracts_2014-2.pdf

(56) Yates J., (2014), poster, "Even the journal "Nature" and David Mermin are beginning to grasp that theoretical physics is becoming a pathological science", Toward a Science of Consciousness - The Tucson Conference 20th Anniversary - April 21-26, 2014 ; http://ttjohn.blogspot.in/2014/01/how-physics-has-become-pathological.html ;

(57) Yates J., (2014), http://ttjohn.blogspot.in/2014/12/the-churchland-and-baars-discussion.html

(58) Brian N. Pasley, and Robert T. Knight, "Decoding Speech for Understanding and Treating Aphasia" Prog Brain Res. 2013; 207: 435–456 ; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4043958/

(59) Yates J., (2014), http://ttjohn.blogspot.in/2014/10/astral-projection-at-home.html

(60) Yates J., (2014), http://ttjohn.blogspot.in/2014/08/noethers-theorem-neuroplasticity-obe.html

(61) Yates J., (2014), http://ttjohn.blogspot.in/2014/09/start-of-use-of-detailed-methods-like_14.html

(62) Zopf R, Savage G, Williams MA (2010) Crossmodal congruency measures of lateral distance effects on the rubber hand illusion. Neuropsychologia. 48. (3): pp. 713–725.

(63) Slater M., González-Franco M., et al, (2010), "The Contribution of Real-Time Mirror
Reflections of Motor Actions on Virtual Body Ownership in an Immersive Virtual Environment",  http://diposit.ub.edu/dspace/bitstream/2445/53296/1/634185.pdf

(64) Yates J., (2014), http://ttjohn.blogspot.in/2014/05/two-book-reviews.html

(65) Angelica Ortiz de Gortari : http://playersexperiences.wordpress.com/2014/08/11/gtp-adventures-do-not-shoot-the-camera/

(66) Yates J., (2014), http://ttjohn.blogspot.in/2014/09/ways-to-do-mathematics-for-obe-using.html

(67) "Hybrid discriminative-generative approaches with Gaussian processes" in S. Kaski and J. Corander (eds) Proceedings of the Seventeenth International Workshop on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, JMLR W&CP 33, Iceland http://jmlr.org/proceedings/papers/v33/andradepacheco14.pdf

(68) https://github.com/SheffieldML/GPy

(69) Griffiths DJ., "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics (2nd Edition)"

(70) Mahabharata, xii.291.2

(71) http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=5765048&fileId=S0035869X00034821

(72) Not necessarily: For example, "Temporal Modalities in Arabic Logic" by Nicholas Rescher is a fine work and I can mention many others.

(73) Detailed comments and video link available here: http://bigthink.com/videos/missing-the-200-pound-gorilla-in-the-room

(74) Bassalo JMF., et al, "The Ramsauer-Townsend Effect and the de Broglie-Bohm quantum mechanics", arXiv:0904.1216v1  [quant-ph]  7 Apr 2009

(75) "Gravitational Aharonov-Bohm effect due to noncommutative BTZ black hole" arXiv:1408.4481v1  [hep-th]  19 Aug 2014

(76) Gamboa J., Mendez M., "Scattering in three dimensional extremal black holes", arXiv:hep-th/0006020v3  18 Dec 2000

(77) Reference 10, page 82 .

(78) http://web.mit.edu/8.13/www/JLExperiments/JLExp07.pdf

(79) Burkhardt CE., Leventhal JJ., (2008), "Foundations of Quantum Physics", page 119,  Springer

(80) Slater M., et al, (2006), "A Virtual Reprise of the Stanley Milgram Obedience Experiments", DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0000039

(81) Yates J., (2014), http://ttjohn.blogspot.in/2014/09/how-man-is-believed-to-think-like-god.html

(82) Yates J., (2014), http://ttjohn.blogspot.in/2014/02/time-travel-and-embodied-cognition.html

(83) Yates J., (2014), http://ttjohn.blogspot.in/2014/05/methods-to-use-for-yates-equation_15.html

(84) http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/fulfillment-any-age/201307/the-rarely-told-true-story-zimbardo-s-prison-experiment

(85) Yates J., (2014), http://ttjohn.blogspot.in/2014/10/shamanism-and-implicate-order.html

(86) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brane_cosmology

(87) http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/sorites-paradox/

(88) http://www3.nd.edu/~jspeaks/courses/2007-8/20229/_HANDOUTS/sorites-solutions.pdf

(89) Barry Pain, "Eliza", http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/23783

(90) Bohm D., Hiley BJ., (1993), "The Undivided Universe", Chapter 15, Routledge.

(91) Weber, R. (1986), "Dialogues with scientists and sages: The search for unity", London: Routledge & Kegan Paul

(92) Dabrowski I., (1995),  http://www.units.miamioh.edu/aisorg/pubs/issues/13_dabrowski.pdf

(93) Sheldrake R., (2013),  http://www.sheldrake.org/files/pdfs/A_New_Science_of_Life_Appx_B.pdf

(94) Storoy P., (2014), http://www.scienceandnonduality.com/david-bohm-implicate-order-and-holomovement/

(95) Dror IE., (2005), "Cognitive Technologies and the Pragmatics of Cognition", Volume 12, page 117 et seq.

(96) Vimal RLP., (2009), "Samadhi state and dual-aspect optimal framework", https://sites.google.com/site/rlpvimal/Home/Vimal-Samadhi-LVCR-2009-III.I.pdf , at 2009-Vimal-Samadhi-LVCR-2-3.pdf

(97) Miller I., (2003), http://holographicarchetypes.weebly.com/ etc…

(98) Bohm D., (1990), "A new theory of the relationship of mind and matter", Philosophical Psychology, 3: 2, 271 — 286

(99) mathematical fireflies: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hzRhdUkZc-s ;  real fireflies http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lluWT6XU0Yg

(100) http://nldlab.gatech.edu/w/images/6/66/Firefly_Final_Presentation.pdf

(101) Vattay G., Salahub D., Csabai I., Nassimi A., Kaufmann SA., (2015), "Quantum Criticality at the Origin of Life", arXiv:1502.06880v1  [cond-mat.dis-nn]

(102) Chalmers D, "Why is Consciousness so Mysterious?", https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hTIk9MN3T6w ,
http://rudar.ruc.dk/bitstream/1800/15573/1/The Hard Problem (FINAL EDITION).pdf ,

(103) Yates J., http://ttjohn.blogspot.in/

(104) Plato, Stanford http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/mctaggart/

(105) There are really so many jokes about solipsism it almost becomes a zombie style argument.
Professor Alvin Plantinga went to meet a solipsist and was treated well. On the way out one of the man’s assistants said, “We take good care of him because when he goes we all go.” It seems we need more proofs if we are to take solipsism seriously.

(106) Yates, J. (2008), "Category theory applied to a radically new but logically essential description of time and space", http://cogprints.org/6176/ , PHILICA.COM, Article number 135.

(107) O’Regan, J. K., Noë A., (2001), "A sensorimotor account of vision and visual consciousness", Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24(5).

(108) Bach-y-Rita P., (2002), "Sensory Substitution and Qualia", in "Vision and Mind", editors Noe A., Thompson ET., Chapter 20, Bradford Books

(109) Yates, J. (2014), "Shamanism and the Implicate Order",  http://ttjohn.blogspot.in/2014/10/shamanism-and-implicate-order.html

Information about this Article
This Article has not yet been peer-reviewed
This Article was published on 15th March, 2015 at 11:11:24 and has been viewed 4618 times.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 License.
The full citation for this Article is:
Yates, J. (2015). Minds with or without Bodies. PHILICA.COM Article number 465.

<< Go back Review this ArticlePrinter-friendlyReport this Article

Website copyright © 2006-07 Philica; authors retain the rights to their work under this Creative Commons License and reviews are copyleft under the GNU free documentation license.
Using this site indicates acceptance of our Terms and Conditions.

This page was generated in 0.4143 seconds.