Science of Consciousness 2019 Harald Atmanspacher (noncommutative phase logic) youtube: Hameroff cites my Blue India Dieties Serotonin connection!!

enjoy!!

For the Hameroff blue skin Indian gods quote:

about 1 hour 10 minutes

This is thought to remain internal in the system, rather than being radiated. We don't appear blue although it's interesting that Hindu deities often appear blue so maybe they're generating more... but these are in the optical range.

Quantum Dipole Oscillations - blue light - microtubules!!

We simulated Quantum Dipole Oscillations or coupling....in tubulin.... at ambient temperature....a common mode peak....

products and consumers? The Taoist Yoga: alchemy and immortality "school" doesn't sell anything. So do you consider "dragon" and "tiger" to be part of a school? I consider them to be principles that transcend even China - the dragon was most likely originally the crocodile from ancient China and so connects to India and even Egypt.

Only the Octave, Perfect Fifth and Perfect Fourth are found in ALL human cultures. So the Octave is the  Emptiness and Yang is the Perfect Fifth and Yin is the Perfect Fourth. Those are the basic principles of the oldest philosophy of India as well - the "three gunas" - and also from Pythagorean teaching. These principles go back to the original human culture, the San Bushmen, from even before human language had spread to different dialects!!

So the  San Bushmen intentionally use gibberish words in their healing songs just as qigong master Yan Xin did mass healings in many parts of China where they could not understand his dialect!! So then we can understand the principles without even needing to understand the language. That is the beauty of music as meditation.

Harald Atmanspacher talks on noncommutative consciousness - lecture starts around 50 minutes in

 Zizek was "hip" in the early 90s when my high school best friend was hanging out with Zizek at University of Minnesota (where he was a guest professor). I did directed research with the chair of the cultural studies program at University of Minnesota and the chair told me that when Zizek was there then Zizek was just real pompous. So I spent a few years studying Zizek and I wrote a critique of him in 1996, with my manifesto called, "The Fundamental Force." I mailed it to Zizek and he responded with a postcard in summer of 1996 stating that "After a quick glance it looks very interesting and I will read it and get back to you." So instead of responding directly to my lengthy detailed critique of Zizek, he made me the "strawman" of his next book published in 1997 called - "The Plague of Fantasies" - if I remember that title. Yep - I remembered it correctly. So if you read that book, he zeroes in on the same issues I wrote about - specifically music theory in the context of Platonic philosophy and also ecofeminism and supposed "New Age" beliefs in the paranormal or spiritual energies, etc.

As for you view of "Nature always changing" and that the Anthropocene is "egocentric" - well all I can say is just do more study in this area. My undergraduate degree at UW-Madison was in a "new option" of International Relations, focused on "sustainability" - so a third of my degree was in biology related classes like ecology, ornithology, limnology and environmental economics. But I also did a semester in Costa Rica with the School for Field Studies, completing a certificate in sustainable development and conservation biology in 1992. So then my master's degree was in Liberal Studies (which is really an old aristocratic degree) but I focused on "radical ecology." My 2000 master's thesis included much of my same critique of Zizek as I had sent him in 1996 (as that manifesto was a main reason I was accepted into graduate school).

First of all Zizek tries to cling to cutting edge science for his radical views but the problem is that he is not scientific enough! Although I was just thinking of Zizek before I read your comment, as I read an op-ed critiquing a new book about anti-racism, exposing a supposed "tautological" error that the author made. It would seem the reviewer has not read Zizek's points about tautologies and racism. So I certainly agree that Zizek is worth the time of reading and studying, as I said, I devoted several years in doing so. I also devoted several years in reading and studying Noam Chomsky and I corresponded with Chomsky in a much more friendly manner around 2001.

In the end though we need to move beyond the limitations of both Chomsky and Zizek - and my 1996 "manifesto" was a step in this direction. Since then I have zeroed in my analysis and I have also corresponded more with actual scientists, mainly quantum physics professors. In my first year of college I took quantum mechanics from Professor Herbert Bernstein who teaches at Hampshire College. So he emphasized that science studies need to study quantum mechanics FIRST before classical physics since quantum physics has been the foundation of science since the beginning of the 20th century. Unfortunately Zizek is still stuck in the classical physics realm of science without enough study of quantum mechanics.

But as Professor Basil J. Hiley has emphasized even most quantum physics professors are not willing to realize the truth of nonlocal reality at "zero" time before any measurement is made. Aharonov's recent research - Yakir Aharonov of the Aharonov-Bohm Effect - his recent empirical research using "weak measurements" on the double slit experiment have newly corroborated the de Broglie pilot wave model that Bohm had rediscovered. So I highly doubt that Zizek is even aware of this new science. I'm certainly not going to be "held back" by waiting for Zizek to get off his "fame" pedestal and then hunker back down to re-wiring his hard-wired neuron delusions. haha.