Expose of Decoherence and the Need for Recoherence [Peter Mutnick, prev., prev.] I believe it is more correct to say that quantum matter is mid-way between classical matter and spirit, although by spirit I just mean the thought attribute as opposed to the extension attribute in Cartesian philosophy. This is a technical issue, but I believe it is a better terminology, as I will explain. [Claude Rifat, prev.] What are the attributes you give to "spirit"? [Peter Mutnick, prev.] Classical Matter as Actuality is in a physical sub-world within the classical order. Quantum matter as Potentiality is in the etheric sub-world of the same system of sub-worlds. [Claude Rifat] By "etheric", do you mean the quantum vacuum? [Peter Mutnick, NOW] No, I mean that if you start with classical Matter, as Henry Stapp did in his explanation, and then talk about quantum matter as somewhere between classical Matter and classical Spirit, then you have not superseded classical matter as the reality of the physical world. The quantum matter you are defining is NOT physical, but rather etheric or mental and astral, and it is still in relation to classical Matter as the actuality. The idea of the quantum revolution, according to the Copenhagen Interpretation, is that the quantum laws of unitary development supersede the classical laws as a description of the *physical* world, but this defines an entirely different order than the classical order in which classical Matter and classical Spirit exist. [Peter Mutnick, prev.] The same Quantum matter conceived as Possibility is in the mental and astral sub-worlds of the same system of sub-worlds. [Claude Rifat] Can you clarify what you mean by mental and astral sub-worlds and how are they linked? As to me, the "astral" sub-world is synonymous with the endoworld that we perceive in ordinary or conscious dreams (wrongly called, sometimes, "OOBE" in the anglophone literature). This is a tiny semi-local subset of an immense global non-local world. [Peter Mutnick, NOW] OK, we can call your "astral" the seat of conscious awareness in general, to which we only add external physical reality when we are awake. I call your "astral" the "emotional". It is my second world in the ontological system of worlds, which can also be called the quantum explicate order. What I am talking about here are sub-sub-worlds of the physical sub-world of the seventh or meta-physical world in the ontological system of worlds. It other words, it is something rather deep in the interior reality of the essentially classical Observer. [Peter Mutnick, prev.] Classical Spirit as Reality contains the S-matrix of the higher spiritual sub-worlds, including the causal, of this system of sub-worlds. [Claude Rifat] I do not catch the meaning of this sentence. Can you clarify? [Peter Mutnick, NOW] Quantum matter defined as Potentiality and Possibility in the context of classical Matter defined as Actuality is not the only or truest definition of quantum matter relative to classical Matter. The Cartesian categories of extension and thought are actually classical and quantum. In other words, classical Spirit is actually quantum matter. It is most certainly the seed of quantum *thought-like* matter. The proper description of this seed is the interactionist viewpoint of the S-Matrix. From this standpoint, the whole is not described as some circumscribed state of existing matter, which is really nonsense, but as the sum total of things brought into being by the interaction of other things. It is the bootstrapped reality of the totality, not a circumscribed totality of pre-existing matter in which the circumference goes to infinity, which is NOT an *ultimately* meaningful definition in the first place. [Peter Mutnick, prev.] Spirit is not, however, featured in the classical order, which is anchored in the classical concept of Matter as the physical reality. ONE MUST TRANSCEND ENTIRELY THIS CLASSICAL ORDER IN ORDER NOT ONLY TO REALIZE THE TRUE DOMAIN OF SPIRIT BUT IN ORDER TO REALIZE THE DOMAIN IN WHICH THE *QUANTUM* CONCEPTION OF MATTER IS THE PHYSICAL ANCHOR OF NOUMENAL REALITY. THIS domain is the quantum explicate order or the ontological system of worlds of quantum measurement theory according to the Copenhagen Interpretation. [Claude Rifat] Sounds okay to me. [Peter Mutnick, prev.] The skin-encapsulated ego, which in my deconstruction of von Neumann, is the abstract "ego" of the classical Observer, must achieve self-transcendence by realizing the absolute or pure phenomenologically reduced consciousness of Descartes and Husserl and the transcendental ego associated therewith. [Claude Rifat] I think that, presently, more and more people start to realise that the notion of classical Observer is a fallacy. [Peter Mutnick, NOW] No, it is a phallussy. It is the essence of the male psyche. The abstract "ego" looks out through the psychic apparatus of ANIMA, SHADOW, and PERSONA at the phenomenal object (which is female). In the female psyche, there is no conversion to a quantum based physical reality, i.e., there is no quantum revolution. This is what Murray Gell-Mann calls the "modern approach" to quantum mechanics, but it as actually the neo-classical approach. In that approach, decoherence takes the place of measurement. The reason this approach works as a quantum theory is because the quantum implicate order of the Mind of the Observer is attached to the classical order of the Observer himself. The consistent histories interpretation of Gell-Mann attempts to describe the whole, not an intentionally chosen isolated part. The whole is the quantum implicate order, but it must be conceived in terms of the classical structures we have been discussing, of classical Matter and quantum matter, which are physical, astral, mental, and etheric. Quantum coherence pertains to this etherically conceived aspect of the quantum implicate order. Decoherence is the algorithm that the allows for the reduction of the quantum implicate order to the classical order, i.e., for the complete undoing of the quantum revolution, for the return to classicality and the minimizing of quantum effects. As John Bell had pointed out, this interpretation is essentially a lie. The Wave Function of the Universe, as a now ultimate spiritual reality, still exists, along with an unreduced Density Matrix. The decoherence argument is that we are limited by our human nature to coarse-grained descriptions and descriptions of macroscopic matter involving only collective variables. Quite frankly, it is only archetypal woman, Eve from the Garden of Eden, who is so limited, along with perhaps her fallen mentor, Satan. It does indeed boggle the human mind to comprehend how a Master like Babaji can dematerialize his body and rematerialize it at will. He must seemingly have a knowledge of every parameter of every neuron, molecule, and atom. But the fact is that God does have this kind of omniscient knowledge and power, and by God I do not mean any attribute or power that is not accessible to the fully enlightened human being. If we want to begin to understand this reality of God and the God's Eye View, we can begin by considering what an interactionist description in terms of the S-Matrix will do to the decoherence argument. My information is that the S-Matrix description transcends the decoherence argument and provides the means by which we can demonstrate what John Bell knew intuitively to be the truth. The S-Matrix description, as an interactionist perspective, is of course compatible with the other interactionist theory of Heisenberg, namely the radically unified quantum field theory. These interactionist theories of Heisenberg are the key to RECOHERENCE. Phenomenologically speaking, one who is not able to achieve *recoherence*, in fact if not in theory, has a 0 Intelligence Quotient. Recoherence is the source of all sentient intelligence. God, who is the absolute master of recoherence, has an infinite intelligence. One who is fully attuned to God has approximately an IQ of 2000 by human standards. [Claude Rifat, cont.] By the way, Henri Laborit, in his neuroscientific works, gives indications on why such a notion is uncorrect but I am not sure this has filtered to the anglophone world. "The" Observer is not a monad but a mosaic of Others arranged in a specific way, during the waking state form of consciousness, which gives the illusion that he is monadic. Any Observer is a subset of a system of interconnected Observers. [Peter Mutnick, NOW] I agree in the sense that the abstract "ego", which is the observer of last resort in the von Neumann *phenomenal reduction*, is just the necessarily classical region of the brain, but I disagree that it is not a monad. The attempt to deconstruct the "ego" is in fact black magic and witchcraft of highest order - it is the attempt to destroy the human being and his very identity. The goal is to substitute the identity of the female persona, achieved through decoherence, for the identity of the male "ego". But since decoherence is essentially a lie, this strategy is one of absolute evil. Nonetheless, the deconstructed male "ego" can find its reconstruction in the recoherence of God's omniscient knowledge and power. This is perhaps the purpose of evil, to lead to this freedom from the limited human perspective, even the truthful but limited human perspective. This is the message of the Book of JOB in the Bible. [Henry, cont.] But how can that possibly be? It seems at first inconceivable that anything could lie between mind and classically conceived matter: the two seem too utterly different to be combined. [Claude Rifat] Not if you visualise reality as a Space filled with omnidirectional waves. [Peter Mutnick, NOW] What is an omnidirectional wave? I take it that you do not mean just a spherical wave. The problem is our limited human perspective, stemming from our embodiment. It is the perspective of the Observer that must become omnidirectional to overcome the decoherence argument. [Henry, cont.] Indeed, it was only with great difficulty that this new idea of the nature of the physical universe was hammered into the minds of physicists by the incessant beating of the empirical data. [Peter Mutnick, prev.] This, BTW, is an entirely revisionist account of the history of science, IMHO, motivated by positivism and physicalism. It was said of Bohr by those who knew him that all the ideas he later employed in his physics and philosophy were with him from boyhood, long before he ever became an experimental physicist. [Claude Rifat] I understand this as, in my case too, I developed ideas which were here, in fact, all the time. "Si tu te fais ver de terre, ne te surprend pas si on t'écrase avec le pied." KANT |