Ce diaporama a bien été signalé.
Le téléchargement de votre SlideShare est en cours. ×

Put your Hands on the Plough: And Never Look Back

Publicité
Publicité
Publicité
Publicité
Publicité
Publicité
Publicité
Publicité
Publicité
Publicité
Publicité
Publicité
Put your Hands on the Plough:
And Never Look Back
By
Peter Anyebe
0.0 Preamble
I shall be sixty, 60 in September of 2016. ...
You are consciousness itself and whichever point of view you are
experiencing at any giving point of time and place, every...
involved. Reason, properly used, results in intellectual insights that are certain, and the objects of
these rational insi...
Publicité
Publicité
Chargement dans…3
×

Consultez-les par la suite

1 sur 14 Publicité

Put your Hands on the Plough: And Never Look Back

Télécharger pour lire hors ligne

Given a paradigm shift in which there are four, 4 realms of existence that include spirit, soul, mind, and matter rather than the current one, 1 realm that includes only matter; the possibility of causal openness and closure become apparent.
Thus energy exists in all four, 4 realms, but in different forms, to describe an open system that allows the free movement of energy between the realms.
In the spirit it is an idea, in the mind it is objectivity, in matter it is procedure, and in the soul, power.
But the system is also closed, to the extent that it obeys reciprocity, continuity, and conservation, for maturity.

Given a paradigm shift in which there are four, 4 realms of existence that include spirit, soul, mind, and matter rather than the current one, 1 realm that includes only matter; the possibility of causal openness and closure become apparent.
Thus energy exists in all four, 4 realms, but in different forms, to describe an open system that allows the free movement of energy between the realms.
In the spirit it is an idea, in the mind it is objectivity, in matter it is procedure, and in the soul, power.
But the system is also closed, to the extent that it obeys reciprocity, continuity, and conservation, for maturity.

Publicité
Publicité

Plus De Contenu Connexe

Diaporamas pour vous (20)

Publicité

Similaire à Put your Hands on the Plough: And Never Look Back (20)

Plus récents (20)

Publicité

Put your Hands on the Plough: And Never Look Back

  1. 1. Put your Hands on the Plough: And Never Look Back By Peter Anyebe 0.0 Preamble I shall be sixty, 60 in September of 2016. Between 1974 and 1988 I went in and out of the university four, 4 times, to acquire a first, 1st degree and three, 3 masters degrees. Since then in the last twenty-eight, 28 years I have applied this background to research how to create value, PoF and then to reduce same to make wealth, ROI. Along with this rather modest experience, I hold the following four, 4 nuggets close to heart, as the motivators that got me unto and kept me on this path: Money is only an idea to represent how much value you have provided for others Money will come from attuning to your soul’s wisdom, Serving others, and putting the energy around you into a higher order, Greater harmony and a more beautiful state Higher intelligence and higher life are meant to be preserved and sustained, Usually by lower life If you want to rise in position and power, You must rise in intelligence and wisdom All conditions in life are created by consciousness You manifest exactly what you perceive You free yourself by being emotionally detached from choices You trap yourself when you are attached to choices When you are attached, you are in a state of wanting or lacking When you are detached, you are in a state of being desireless Enlightenment is about knowing why detachment gets you your desire Letting go of all attachments is the way to end all suffering Incidentally, all of these nuggets come from Enoch Tan. This does not mean that we are agreed on all counts, especially with regard to his bit about reality as follows: Physical reality is an illusion created by consciousness to rediscover itself Agape Consultants 8, De-Bangler Street Gboko, Nigeria +234(0)703-430-2486 anyebepeter@yahoo.com
  2. 2. You are consciousness itself and whichever point of view you are experiencing at any giving point of time and place, everything else around you is a projection from you You are more than just the particular person that you are. You are the entire universe itself I agree with Immanuel Kant that the history of mankind can be seen, in the large, as the realization of nature’s secret plan. This means that every person who was ever born has a definite role, which determines their contributions to the attainment of the universal purpose. The greatest debt that anybody owes themselves would therefore be, to find this role and fulfil it. To find the role, answers to the „what‟ question. And to fulfil it, answers to the „how‟ question. The first, 1st would be a reference to the choice of motives, as in big-C. And the second, 2nd would be reference to objectivity, as in small-c, which would involve the capacity to reconstruct the standard procedure for the performance at task in approximation of the natural order, N-O. The rest of this work attempts to explore how these would be so. It attempts to point to the following: Due to the effect of gravity that has resulted in a curved space-time, there is a difficulty with the perspective of reality that people present, which can be noted to be warped and distorted. In addition and more as a consequence, relativity presents an infinite number of alternatives from which to choose, which further complicates the problem of reconstructing reality. How has this problem been resolved? And if not, how may it be incorporated into the concepts of knowledge, learning, and performance; to optimize the person, the organization and other institutions, and therefore society at large? 1.0 Platonian Forms and Objects Plato presents a theory of knowledge in his discussion of the image of the divided line and the myth of the cave. In the image of the divided line, Plato distinguishes between two levels of awareness as follows: Opinion and Knowledge. Claims or assertions about the physical or visible world, including both commonsense observations and the propositions of science, would only be opinions. Some of these opinions may be well founded and some may not be; but none of them counts as genuine knowledge. The higher level of awareness is knowledge, because there reason, rather than sense experience, is
  3. 3. involved. Reason, properly used, results in intellectual insights that are certain, and the objects of these rational insights are the abiding universals, the eternal forms or substances that constitute the real world. The myth of the cave describes individuals who are chained deep within the recesses of a cave. They are bound, so that vision is restricted and they cannot see one another. The only thing visible is the wall of the cave upon which appear shadows that are cast by models or statues of animals and objects that are passed before a brightly burning fire. Breaking free, one of the individuals escapes from the cave into the light of day. With the aid of the sun, that person sees for the first time the real world and returns to the cave with the message that the only things they have seen heretofore have been shadows and appearances, and that the real world awaits them if they are willing to struggle free of their bonds. The shadowy environment of the cave symbolizes for Plato the physical world of appearances. Escape into the sun-filled setting outside the cave symbolizes the transition to the real world, the world of full and perfect being, the world of forms, which is the proper object of knowledge. Forms have greater reality than objects in the physical world both because of their perfection and stability and because they are models, resemblance to which gives ordinary physical objects whatever reality they have. Everything in the world of space and time is what it is by virtue of its resemblance to, or participation in, its universal form. Then the ability to define the universal term is evidence that one has grasped the form to which that universal refers. Ultimately therefore, the theory of forms is intended to explain how one comes to know and also how things have come to be as they are. In philosophical language, Plato‟s theory of forms is both an epistemological (theory of knowledge) and an ontological (theory of being) thesis. 2.0 Contradictions The contradiction is a philosophical concept that has trailed the attempt to understand being, but which may not have been clearly connected with the scientific concept of relativity, as made popular by Einstein. For Hegel, knowledge is not obtained in the position of the subject-object split, in which the object is grasped as something separate from, and opposed, to the thinker. In order to know the world, the person has to make the world their own. People and things are in a constant transition from one suchness into another; hence "a thing is for itself, only when it has posited (gesetzt) all of its determinates, and made them moments of its self-realization; and is thus, in all changing conditions, always “returning to itself". In this process "entering into itself becomes essence." This essence, the unity of being, the identity throughout change is, according to Hegel, a process in which "everything copes with its inherent contradictions, to unfold itself as a result." "The essence is thus as much historical as ontological. The essential potentialities of things realize themselves in the same comprehensive
  4. 4. process that establishes their existence. The essence can 'achieve' its existence when the potentialities of things have ripened in, and through the conditions of reality”. Hegel describes this process as “the transition to actuality." For Aristotle however, A is A. In his Law of Identity, everything that exists has a specific nature. Each entity exists as something in particular, and has characteristics that are a part of what it is. And identity is the concept that refers to this aspect of existence; the aspect of existing as something in particular, with specific characteristics. This concept is important because it makes explicit that reality has a definite nature. Then since reality has an identity, it is knowable. And since it exists in a particular way, it has no contradictions. The seeming conflict arises because both philosophers make reference to different aspects of the same phenomenon. While Aristotle is interested in the character of phenomena which is in-situ, Hegel is concerned with the process by which the phenomenon is formed, which is becoming. Recall the conclusion from physics that there seems to be no single mathematical model or theory that can describe every aspect of the universe, and with each additional theory or model, the concepts of reality and of the fundamental constituents of the universe have changed. Instead, there appears to be a network of theories, to explain the different angles of the same thing. Because of this relativity, the number of models could be a myriad. Indeed, relativity would be a reduction of contradictions, into a form that can be measured. Then the challenge would be how well the numbers are managed. 3.0 Indeterminacy and the Sum over Histories In describing Einstein‟s general relativity, Hawking makes reference to Platonian duality when he talks about watching an airplane flying over hilly ground. Thus although it follows a straight line in three-dimensional space, its shadow follows a curved path on the two-dimensional ground. Similarly, the mass of the sun curves space-time in such a way that although the earth follows a straight path in four dimensional space-time, it appears to us to move along a circular orbit in three dimensional space. Einstein made the revolutionary suggestion that gravity is not a force like other forces, but is a consequence of the fact that space-time is not flat, as had been previously assumed. It is curved, or warped, by the distribution of mass and energy in it. Thus bodies like the earth are not made to move on curved orbits by a force called gravity; instead, they follow the nearest thing to a straight path in a curved space, which is called a geodesic. A geodesic is the shortest (or longest) path between two nearby points. For example, the surface of the earth is a two-dimensional curved space. A geodesic on the earth is called a great circle, including the equator and the longitudes, and is the shortest route between two points. As the geodesic is the shortest path between any two airports, this is the route an airline navigator will tell the pilot to fly along. In
  5. 5. general relativity therefore, bodies always follow straight lines in four-dimensional space-time, but they nevertheless appear to us to move along curved paths in our three-dimensional space. This is a classic explanation of the distinction between forms and appearances. It is also a graphic presentation of indeterminacy and uncertainty. The human perception is warped by appearances, making it difficult or close to impossible, to predict phenomena accurately. It is jaundiced, distorted, prejudiced, and biased; and can only be accurate when forms are discerned. Then the difficulty that relativity and gravity present would have been resolved. Although Kant argued that noumena cannot be known, the resolution of the difficulty with the definition of the boundary conditions of the universe opens up the black box, to point to noumena, or the natural order, N-O. For instance, it is the combination of quantum mechanics with general relativity that introduced a new possibility that did not arise before; to the effect that space and time together might form a finite, four-dimensional space without singularities or boundaries, much like the surface of the earth, but with more dimensions. This paved the way for the resolution of the uncertainty and indeterminacy in curved space-time. The uncertainty principle of quantum mechanics implies that certain pairs of quantities, such as the position and velocity of a particle, cannot both be predicted with complete accuracy. Quantum mechanics deals with this situation via a class of quantum theories in which particles don‟t have well-defined positions and velocities but are represented by a wave. These quantum theories are deterministic in the sense that they give laws for the evolution of the wave with time. Thus if the wave is known at one time, it can be calculated at any other time. The unpredictable, random element would therefore be introduced only when the wave is interpreted in terms of the positions and velocities of particles. But that may have been the mistake. It was concluded that there may not be any particle positions and velocities, but only waves. This makes time irrelevant, and makes events the critical element in time-space. The events are evaluated in terms of Feynman‟s sum over histories. In this approach, a particle or event does not have just a single history, as it would in a classical theory. Instead, it is supposed to follow every possible path in space-time; and with each of these histories there are associated a couple of numbers, one representing the size of a wave and the other representing its phase or position in the cycle. The probability that the particle, say, passes through some particular point is found by adding up the waves associated with every possible history that passes through that point. The crucial issue is the wavelike nature of the event, with the associated amplitudes, which interfere with each other as they spread through space with their respective wave patterns, either reinforcing or cancelling each other out at various points. Then to sum over all the amplitudes of all the different paths, in a sum-over-histories, would allow the different amplitudes to reinforce or cancel each other in such a way that the only path that survives this interference process is the one that the particle actually follows. This path defines the natural order, N-O.
  6. 6. The chart below shows how the wave packet becomes increasingly localized with the addition of many waves in the superposition of several plane waves, to derive a common front, or perspective of reality. Severe technical problems are however associated with performing these sums. The only way around these has been the peculiar prescription to add up the waves for particle histories that are not in the real time that people experience, but take place in what is called imaginary time. To avoid the technical difficulties with Feynman‟s sum over histories therefore, imaginary time must be used. That is to say, for the purposes of the calculation time would be measured using imaginary numbers, rather than real ones. Recall that this has an interesting effect on space- time. The distinction between time and space disappears completely, to leave the event standing alone and naked. Imaginary time is a well-defined mathematical concept. Given any ordinary or real number, and multiplying it by itself, the result is a positive number. For instance, 2 times 2 is 4. But so is (– 2) times (– 2). The imaginary numbers however, give negative numbers when multiplied by themselves. Thus the one called i, when multiplied by itself, gives (– 1). This means that 2i multiplied by itself gives (– 4). Real and imaginary numbers can be pictured in the following way: The real numbers are represented by a line going from left to right, with zero in the middle. The negative numbers, like – 1, – 2, etc. on the left, and positive numbers, Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Sequential_superposition_of_plane_waves.gif
  7. 7. like 1, 2, etc. on the right. Then imaginary numbers are represented by a line going up and down the page, with i, 2i, etc. above the middle, and – i, – 2i, etc. below. Thus imaginary numbers are in a sense numbers at right angles to ordinary real numbers. To apply these principles to the definition of the boundary conditions of the universe, in relation to its beginning and its end, the sum of histories are pictured as being like the surface of the earth, with the distance from the North Pole representing imaginary time and the size of a circle of constant distance from the North Pole representing the spatial size of the universe. The universe starts at the North Pole as a single point. The circles of latitude at constant distance from the North Pole get bigger southwards. This corresponds to the universe expanding with imaginary time. The universe would reach a maximum size at the equator and would contract with increasing imaginary time to a single point at the South Pole. Note however that although the universe would have zero size at the North and South Poles, these points would not be singularities, any more than the North and South Poles on the earth are singular. They would not define a beginning and an end in the usual sense. The laws of science will therefore hold at them, just as they do at the North and South Poles on the earth, to establish a necessary condition for the definition of boundaries. The graphic similarity between a universe that is self-contained and without boundaries, and the earth, is clearly visible in the chart below: Recall that the no-boundary condition is operationalized in the N-O when the standard procedure for the performance at task is iterated, ad-infinitum; for as long as is required, when work is reduced into several smaller tasks. The standard procedure series, SPS is the analogue of the N- O. It would therefore obey the fundamental scientific laws of conservation and continuity. In addition however, with respect to thought, which is conceptualized as immaterial, the principle of reciprocity would also have to be obeyed. Then people would become self-contained like the universe, when the P-O is traded for the N-O. Source: http://www.fisica.net/relatividade/stephen_hawking_a_brief_history_of_time.pdf
  8. 8. 4.0 Duality By the principle of reciprocity, the intuitive craving of the human person for certainty requires a demonstration so convincing, as to leave no room for doubt. Given a position for instance, a precedent needs to be identified, along with two, 2 antecedents; so that the antecedents build on phenomena that occurred earlier in time, as evidence that the phenomena that follow, will ultimately occur in the future. As analogues, both the standard procedure series, SPS and the natural order, N-O are presented as units of reality. Thus a phenomenon would be adequately defined by the following four, 4 features: Antecedent1 Position Precedent Antecedent2 This format is analogous to the duality series in operations research, which has been adopted as the outline of the N-O as follows: Maxima Minimax Maximin Minima This would be equivalent to the reduction of all the different paths in a sum-over-histories, into four, 4. And it requires that people are sufficiently focused, Fc to scan all the possibilities, and also sensitive, Sn to distinguish these four, 4 items from the other options. This is done intuitively, Pc given the whole spectrum of alternatives from which to select. Then the selected content, C would have to be formatted as in the above series, to derive the standard procedure for the performance at task, √n, which formatting requires rationality, Rn. It is these capacities that are evaluated on the F-Scale, when the P-O is measured against the N-O to define the factor-f0. Serially: 3. Intuition, Pc Waves-Duality 2. Focus, Fc 6. Motives, f0b 1. Sensitivity, Sn 5. Personality, Fb 4. Rationality, Rn 3. Intuition, Pc Normality 2. Character, C 6. Objectivity, f0p 1. Performance, √n 5. Personality, Fp 4. Rationality, Rn
  9. 9. The distinction between f0p and f0b is based on another distinction, between big-C and small-c, much like the distinction between G and g for gravity in physics. Big-C represents an ultimate Choice, on which all subsequent choices depend, when the other decisions are made. The first, 1st Choice determines all the possibilities that can become available, from which to make the other choices. It is the choice of procedures, between the soul principle and what has become commonly referred to as the quantum jump. When the soul principle is chosen, the possibilities are derived from revelation. With quantum jumps however, the person concerned is the source of all the possibilities, according to the information they have been able to access. In both cases therefore, insight is drawn from a pool of knowledge, which represents the possibilities that are available. Then security and certainty would depend on the safety of the pool. In a twist that is characteristic of contradictions, the safety would be time sensitive, which time is supposed to have been disabled by the sum over histories. This restricts the sums to objectivity, f0p which would then be concerned with c; to locate them below motives, f0b which concern the higher matters of C. Then until motives are given, objectivity and the sum over histories would be redundant; despite that they apply to all motives, indiscriminately. Serially: Because this work is concerned principally with objectivity and not motives per se, the F-Scale also mimics the sum over histories when the scores on each of the four, 4 items is summed up; to find the average score on each item by dividing by ten, 10, which is the total score on all the items. Formally: Moreover, the mind that has adopted the N-O, to think in terms of waves-duality and reduce phenomena into the SPS has also been modeled to reflect the sum over histories. After it has analyzed the phenomenon intuitively to derive the four, 4 strategic items, it also synthesizes same, which capacity is evaluated as follows: 3. Precedents Decision 2. Certainty 6. Choice 1. Security 5. Motives 4. Antecedents 3. Motive Choice 2. Insight 6. Possibilities 1. Revelation 5. Soul Principle 4. Objectivity
  10. 10. 4 Pm + 1 = 2 (ΣPm ) + 1, m=1 Then, the identity kit, Id-K which measures the factors Pc, Rn, and √n, to describe the workforce; as well as the bill of health index, BHI which measures organizations to quantify business results, both pattern after the sum over histories. The scores on the 144 items that are measured on each of the three, 3 kits are summed up, to find the F-Ratio statistic and then the final score as follows: Score = 2 x F-Ratio - 1 For the BHI, it is the moving correlation coefficients, r that are evaluated, for the number of years for which data is available. Recall that the measure of r includes summations. To sum up all of these therefore, recall also that the coefficient of determination, R2 is a square function of r, for R = r2 . Indeed, the model of humans that is presented in this work is a form of this relation, for L = F2 . In its full presentation this would be, L = 1/A F2 , A → 1. And the growth model, L = 2F ± 1, is the differential of the same relation. While the mental ability for analysis is measured as L = 2F – 1, since something is lost, synthesis is L = 2F + 1, for the gain, as presented earlier above. Recall the dictum that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. 5.0 The Immaterial Mind So far in this work, an attempt has been made to show how the observed difficulties with gravity and relativity, with respect to their effect on the human perspective of reality, can be resolved at once with reference to Feynman’s sum over histories. This follows a reduction of the problem into Heisenberg’s uncertainty and indeterminacy concept. But another difficulty is created however. The mind has been commonly conceptualized as a material phenomenon, in the form of the brain and its nervous system. A conception of mind that invokes immateriality would therefore need special explanation. Recall the criticism with regard to how something totally immaterial could be expected to affect something totally material, to define the basic problem of causal interaction. Then an explanation would be required, as to how something without any physical properties has physical effects. Baruch Spinoza (24 November 1632 – 21 February 1677) for instance, who is known to have laid the groundwork for the 18th-century Enlightenment and modern biblical criticism, including modern conceptions of the self and the universe; came to be considered as one of the great rationalists of 17th-century philosophy, as well as one of Western philosophy's most important thinkers. To the question "What is?" he replied: "Substance, its attributes, and modes". Thus for him, the universal substance emanates both body and mind, and while they have different attributes, there are no fundamental differences between these aspects; which
  11. 11. formulation became a historically significant solution to the mind–body problem, known as neutral monism. Recall the following quote, which was backed up by Einstein: The universal laws of nature, according to which all things exist and are determined, are only another name for the eternal decrees of God, which always involve eternal truth and necessity. So that to say that everything happens according to natural laws, and to say that everything is ordained by the decree and ordinance of God, is the same thing This is how Einstein supported this position: I believe in Spinoza‟s God,” who reveals himself in the lawful harmony of all that exists, but not in a God who concerns himself with the fate and the doings of mankind The most beautiful emotion we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion that stands at the cradle of all true art and science. He to whom this emotion is a stranger, who can no longer wonder and stand rapt in awe, is as good as dead, a snuffed-out candle. To sense that behind anything that can be experienced there is something that our minds cannot grasp, whose beauty and sublimity reaches us only indirectly: this is religiousness. In this sense, and in this sense only, I am a devoutly religious man They were both thorough going materialists, which makes Spinoza totally opposed to Descartes' mind–body dualism. Following René Descartes (1641), the mind is a non-physical and therefore non-spatial substance. He clearly identified the mind with consciousness and self-awareness, as well as distinguished it from the brain as the seat of intelligence; to become the first to formulate the riddle of mind and matter in the form in which it exists today, together with all the associated problems. Davidson, for example, subscribed to Anomalous Monism, according to which there can be no strict psycho-physical laws which connect mental and physical events under their descriptions as mental and physical. But all mental events also have physical descriptions. And it would be only in terms of the latter that such events could be connected in law-like relations with other physical events. For him, mental predicates are irreducibly different in character, being rational, holistic and necessary; from physical predicates, which would be contingent, atomic and causal. Bottom line however, the following two, 2 difficulties have been crucial to the establishment of duality, with respect to the expected interaction between the material and the immaterial: First, 1st it is not clear where the interaction would take place Then there is the question of how the interaction takes place
  12. 12. Thus because the mind is assumed to be non-physical and by definition outside the realm of science, the mechanism which explains the connection between the mental and the physical would be a philosophical proposition as compared to a scientific theory. Specifically, the argument from physics is closely related to the argument from causal interaction. Many physicists and consciousness researchers have argued that any action of a nonphysical mind on the brain would entail the violation of physical laws, such as the conservation of energy. Such interactions would violate the fundamental laws of physics. In particular, if some external source of energy is responsible for the interactions, then this would violate the law of the conservation of energy. Dualistic interactionism has therefore been argued against, to the extent that it violates a general heuristic principle of science, which is the causal closure of the physical world. In general, two, 2 lines of arguments have been presented against these positions and in favor of duality, as summarized in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy and the Catholic Encyclopedia: First, 1st the mind may influence the distribution of energy, without altering its quantity Second, 2nd it could be denied that the human body is causally closed, as the conservation of energy applies only to closed systems But physicalists have objected that no evidence exists for the causal non-closure of the human body. And Robin Collins has responded to this objection that energy conservation objections misunderstand the role of energy conservation in physics. Well understood therefore, scenarios in general relativity violate energy conservation, and quantum mechanics provides precedent for causal interactions, or correlation without energy or momentum exchange. In this work, causal correlation is situated in an environment that is at once causally closed and open. The mind is presented as the link between spirit and matter, which requires that it interacts with both. It would therefore be necessarily characterized for this function, to have dual characteristics; like light that is at once particle and ray, being also at the boundary between spirit and matter. Mind would be at once analytic and synthetic; which would be synonymous with fission and fusion, respectively. In both cases, these are forms by which energy is released, albeit the seeming contradictions. When two, 2 balls collide for instance, as in fusion, energy is released. And when the atom is split, as in fission, energy is also released. In analysis, F1 the mind splits concepts, as in fission. And in synthesis, F2 it puts humpty dumpty back together again, as in fusion. Moreover, this dichotomy presents the unique possibility for evaluation. Analysis and synthesis would have to be consistent, for F1 = F2. Any observed inconsistency would be ascribed to mental immaturity, for F1 / F2 > or < 1. Immaturity would then be associated with the breach of conservation and continuity, which would usually be due to the breach of reciprocity in the first, 1st place. Reciprocity demands contemplation, which is immaterial and would culminate in a correlate form that is material. Then the idea that is contemplated would be equivalent to the source term in continuity; and the
  13. 13. correlate form would be the sink item. And for conservation, both would have to be related. In other words, thought, f0 would need to predict behavior, Po for f0 = 2Po – 1. The factor-Po measures the power, Po that is available to the personality, for responses to stimuli. Recall that f0 measures objectivity as the approximation of the N-O. In both cases, it is the number of essential components into which phenomena are reduced that is measured. Given a paradigm shift in which there are four, 4 realms of existence that include spirit, soul, mind, and matter rather than the current one, 1 realm that includes only matter; the possibility of causal openness and closure become apparent. Then energy, which would be the common phenomenon that links all four, 4 realms would be sourced in spirit, and stored in matter, which would then be the sink. And the mind would be required to tap into the source in the form of accessing ideas, which when reduced into procedures would release the energy by fission. Recall that ideas are unitary, holistic, and complete in themselves, much like the North Pole of the earth. The procedures synthesize the idea to derive its correlate form, which would be an object that is also holistic and complete, albeit continuous, and much like the South Pole. If the procedure corresponds to the localized wave that connects the two, 2 poles, it would be evident in its normality. This would be when the P-O approximates the N-O, as evident in the reconstruction of the standard procedure. Recall that performance has been evaluated at once as the factors f0 for thought and Po for behavior. While f0 is mental, Po is behavioral. Then behavior would be triggered by the procedures, which are stored in the brain. But the brain is material, and is only compatible with waves. The procedures would therefore need to have been derived by the waves-duality principle for compatibility of storage. It is de Broglie who asserted that every object in the universe is a wave. This followed Feynman‟s observation that the electron does anything it likes. It just goes in any direction, at any speed, forward and backward in time, however it likes, and then you add up the amplitudes and it gives you the wave function. This might explain the difficulty with turning what is known into what is done. Knowledge that translates into action may have been derived by the waves-duality model, and all the others would remain dormant. Waves-duality allows a spectrum of one, 1 to four, 4 items, for 1 ≤ Po ≤ 4, which determines the quality of the performance and therefore soul. The soul is conceptualized as the concatenation of all human activities, from the first, 1st breath at birth to the last breath at death. It would also be a mass of energy in storage, waiting to be put to work. Thus energy exists in all four, 4 realms, but in different forms, to describe an open system that allows the free movement of energy between the realms. In the spirit it is an idea, in the mind it is objectivity, in matter it is procedure, and in the soul, power. But the system is also closed, to the extent that it obeys reciprocity, continuity, and conservation, for maturity. The power to make wealth by any person, PoF would therefore be a measure of maturation, which could be evaluated as the forth, 4th power of soul or Po. Then thought would be the second, 2nd power, and idea, the third, 3rd . Serially:
  14. 14. Power to Make Wealth, PoF = Po4 - Matter Idea = Po3 - Spirit Conceptualization, f0p = Po2 - Mind Actualization, Po - Soul These relations have been investigated and found to be stable, as presented on the data below: F-Score = 1.09 for all four, 4 measures of PoF, including PoF, PoF‟, PoF‟‟, and PoF‟‟‟ on the table F(3, 64) = 2.75; 0.05% Bibliography 1. Wilson, D. L. (1999). "Mind-brain interaction and the violation of physical laws." In B. Libet, A. Freeman, & K. Sutherland (Eds.), The Volitional Brain (pp. 185–200). Thorverton, UK: Imprint Academic. 2. Mohrhoff, U. (1999). "The physics of interaction." In B. Libet, A. Freeman, & K. Sutherland (Eds.), The Volitional Brain (pp. 165– 184). Thorverton, UK: Imprint Academic. 3. Jaswal, L. (2005). "Isolating disparate challenges to Hodgson's account of free will." Journal of Consciousness Studies, 12(1), 43–46. 4. Clark, T. W. (2005a). "Hodgson's black box." Journal of Consciousness Studies, 12(1), 38–59. 5. Robinson, Howard, "Dualism", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy(Fall 2003 Edition), ed. Edward N. Zalta,http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2003/entries/dualism/. 6. Maher, Michael (1909) "The Law of Conservation of Energy", Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. 5, pp. 422 ff, http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05422a.htm. 7. Murphy, Nancy (2009). Downward Causation and the Neurobiology of Free Will. Springer. ISBN 978-3642032042. 8. Collins, Robin "Modern Physics and the Energy Conservation Objection to Mind-Body Dualism" The American Philosophical Quarterly, Volume 45, Number 1, January 2008, pp. 31-42

×