|
|
2009-09-22
First a few words about the work and then some links.
In brief, in 2000 I intuitively received a vision of the nature of
reality that re-oriented my world-view. Other than a knew way of
understanding, it mainly expressed itself in my mind as a form of
mathematics, which I came to understand through the framework of
information and system theory, mystic metaphysics, quantum mechanics
and virtual reality simulation.
This evolved over time into a project that could be described as
"laying down the mathematical foundations of a unified holistic
science" and "using this foundation to shed light on and
unify both ancient and modern wisdom". The work also involves
self-enquiry; observation of, and participation in, the evolution of
collective consciousness; and the navigation of a paradigm shift in
our collective world-view.
To give some insight... Imagine that this physical universe could
be thought of as a virtual reality simulation, within which we are
evolved sentient virtual beings. It would all seem to us to be
physical and in no way different from how it currently does. In this
analogical context what I address is not the objects, people, places,
events, sights, sounds, shapes, qualities, etc within the VR
universe.
What I try to describe and model is the computational process, the
logic of the simulator, the simulation process in action, the
structure of the model that is animated, the low-level virtual
processes and forms that arise within the VR, how these integrate and
evolve into complex systems, how the behaviour of these gives rise to
the principles of physics, how some of these complex systems may
attain sentience and enquire into the nature of their situation, how
they can most effectively achieve this, what they will find when they
do and how does this whole situation relate to mystic wisdom and what
it describes about reality.
What these virtual beings eventually realise is that ultimately
they are not physical beings in a physical universe with individual
identities, they are motions of a cosmic whole that is non-dual,
non-physical, non-local, non-temporal, imperceivable, all pervading
and the animating essence of all things.
Furthermore, there is a persistent cognitive habit that causes
them to perceive and experience things from a dualist perspective.
When this is recognised and its dominance over the mind is overcome,
then reality can be apprehended clearly. Although it is not
perceptible to their senses, it can be intuitively apprehended in no
uncertain terms because it is the inner most essence of their being.
This underlying reality, beneath the film of appearances can be
modelled mathematically and understood scientifically, thus providing
a solid foundation for a unified holistic science/spirituality.
First see this memetic map of areas of interest.
Here is a general
introduction, it's a bit dated but it paints an overall picture
of my line of research. Here is a CV or rough chronological list of primary influences.
Here are various overview articles.
The main results
so far and the main essay
describing the world view implied by the results.
Here are a few brief articles... More >
|
|
|
|
2009-09-01
Simulacrum: Something that replaces reality with its representation, which is not a territory, a referential being, or a substance. Simulation is the generation by models of a real without origin or reality: a hyperreal. It is not imitation, nor duplication. It is substituting the signs of the real for the real. The simulacrum's function lies in the derealization of the whole surrounding world of everyday reality.
Paraphrased from Definition: Simulacrum.
|
|
|
|
2009-08-28
Below are extracts from the Lankavatara
Sutra that are related to naïve realism, information theoretic metaphysics and self-realisation.
All that is seen in the world is devoid of effort and action
because all things in the world are like a dream, or like an image
miraculously projected. This is not comprehended by philosophers and
the ignorant, but those who thus see things, see them truthfully.
Those who see things otherwise walk in discrimination, they cling to
dualism. The world as seen by discrimination is like seeing ones own
image reflected in a mirror, or ones shadow, or the moon reflected in
water, or an echo heard in a valley.
People grasping their own shadows of discrimination become
attached to this thing and that thing and failing to abandon dualism
they go on forever discriminating and thus never attain tranquillity.
By tranquillity is meant Oneness, and Oneness gives birth to the
highest Samadhi which is gained by entering into the realm of Noble
Wisdom that is realisable only within ones inmost consciousness... More >
|
|
|
|
2009-04-25
The distilled essence of my input to a
conversation on the forum of the Society
for Scientific Exploration (SSE), which is still continuing so this will grow.
Within the latest SSE newsletter there is an article called
"Signs
of an Emerging Paradigm Shift", which is about naive
realism. The newsletter can be read at:
http://www.scientificexploration.org/explorer/explorer_22_3.pdf
The relevance of these issues for SSE is that naive realist
assumptions are the foundation of the wall of denial that is
maintained by established science. Thus by overcoming these
assumptions that wall is falling apart. This has profoundly
revolutionary consequences for the whole of civilisation, and SSE
is in a prime position to be at the vanguard of the paradigm
shift if it chooses to be.
Warning: This discussion explores an alternate paradigm
that is radically different from the established paradigm. For
many people the established paradigm is intrinsic to the familiar
world that they have known most of their lives and within which
their ego has found its comfortable and secure niche. So be
warned that this subject matter can elicit an unconscious
irrational ego defence mechanism within your mind. To keep an
open mind one must exercise self-awareness and from this much can
also be learnt.
|
|
|
|
2009-03-21
I have been very busy lately and not posting much at all so here
is a quick update...
I recently wrote an article for The Explorer, which is the
newsletter of the Society for Scientific Exploration. The newsletter
has yet to be published but you can read the article here: Signs
of an Emerging Paradigm Shift.
I am also writing a book. It is a detailed explanation of the core
principles of my work. In style, the book is somewhere between a
popular science book, an introductory textbook on advanced
mathematics and an introductory treatise on abstract metaphysics.
Part one is complete and the last part is coming soon. You can read
part one here: System
Science of Virtual Reality: Toward the Unification of Empirical and
Subjective Science.
Right now I am mostly involved in a fascinating online
conversation about naïve
realism, its ramifications, its role in the global systemic
crisis and how to overcome it for the sake of us all... If you have
an interest in this subject then check out STAR
for some background information.
The essay Changing
How we think for the sake of all describes my input to that
conversation. The comments have been arranged and edited into a
single essay that expresses the vision that I am sharing in the
conversation.
|
|
|
|
2009-03-18
Before I start I will mention that this explanation has been
simplified into common sense (naïve realist) language hence it
doesn't accurately convey what I think but it is adequate. The points
are not random but develop in sequence. More >
|
|
|
|
2009-01-11
Let us begin with the proposition that:
Consciousness is fundamental and universal.
The individual self is not unitary.
The world is not an illusion as in 'unreal' but is an
illusion in that it is not as it appears to be.
Clarification of (1 and 2): Many millions of people have
successfully performed the experiment of deep meditation and attained
the realisation that everyday consciousness is a complex
self-propelling system of thoughts, emotions, day-dreams and so on
which self organise into a personality, but beneath this there is a
level of pure awareness that is often called the watcher or the seer.
This deeper level transcends the individual personality and has its
source in an underlying universal consciousness.
It is this level of consciousness that is proposed to be
fundamental and universal. Let us call this level of consciousness
pure-awareness
and the more complex levels of consciousness can be called mind.
Think of pure-awareness as a thread of consciousness and mind as a
complex dynamic knot of pure-awareness.
Clarification of (3): Whilst the world appears within the mind as
objects and events within space and time, these are the appearances
of things but not their deeper reality. As the many streams of
pure-awareness interact they produce in each other the contents of
consciousness (phenomena) and thereby each stream of consciousness
experiences a phenomenal world. But that world is an interpretation
of the contents of consciousness whereas the actual reality is a
field of interacting pure-awareness that are part of a single unified
process.
This sounds rather counter-intuitive to many people who are
habituated to a common sense realist (naïve
realist) world-view – however it does make sense. Furthermore,
given its explanatory power and ontological simplicity Occam's razor
would fall in its favour.
Is there some comprehensible model or analogy through which we can
make sense of these propositions? We cannot use models involving
objects and events in space and time so are there any other known
models we can use?
How about virtual reality – not the current technology of VR
where a physical human is tricked into perceiving a virtual world,
but rather a simulated universe within which simulated systems exist
and experience that universe from within. I will be considering a
particular type of reality generative simulator called SMN.
The idea that reality may be virtual is growing in acceptance and
becoming a compelling world-view, hence here we look at its spiritual
implications. For an introduction to the scientific approach to the
subject see the article God
Is the Machine and A
Cybernetic Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics. More >
|
|
|
|
2008-11-30
Some comments inspired by two fascinating essays written by David
Chalmers, The Puzzle
of Conscious Experience and Facing
Up to the Problem of Consciousness.
The “hard problem of consciousness” is the issue of why is it
that we experience anything at all, or why is it that there is
something that it is like to be something? The reason why this
problem is intractable to empirical science is because in its
philosophical foundations empiricism
takes the contents of experience (phenomena)
to be the foundation of its ontology,
upon which all its later knowledge depends.
However it is impossible to use the contents of experience to
construct a theory of experience because, in a causal sense,
experience precedes the contents of experience. Empirical science
studies phenomena, their perceivable attributes, behaviours and
functional relationships hence it can explain much of the functional
aspects of consciousness such as how do we integrate information from
many sources into a coherent knowledge base or how can we verbalise
our internal states (the easy problems of consciousness) but it
cannot explain experience itself (the hard problem).
However, empirical science is not the whole of science. There are
rationalist
methods which, as quantum physics shows, can be very accurate
(quantum physics is by far the most accurate science ever developed
and it has rationalist rather than empiricist foundations).
Rationalist approaches must eventually connect with, and be verified
by their correspondence with the objects of experience, however these
are not their starting point. They take a rational theoretical model
as their ontological foundation and only when this foundation later
connects with experience are they considered to be verified. It is
conceivable that a rationalist theory could overcome the limitations
of empiricism and provide a scientific explanation of conscious
experience. More >
|
|
|
|
2008-11-10
Lately my focus has been primarily on inner work hence there has
been very little published for a while. But below are some links to
some recent work.
Unification
of Science: A brief outline of the path towards unifying
introspective science (Eastern spirituality) and empirical science
(Western science).
Roots of
Meaning: an essay on meaning, conditioning and misunderstanding - proposes a
way to overcome entrenched misunderstanding.
Perception,
Cognition & Communication Ontology: to help clearly reason about what we experience, think and say.
Exploratory Analysis of Naive and Unified Realism: uses the PCC ontology to clearly explain the difference between naive and unified realism.
SMN Latest Version: Introduces the latest version of the SMN general system simulator.
How Does SMN Work: Introduction to the details of how the SMN algorithm works.
SMN Ontology: An ontology showing the logical structure of the SMN algorithm.
SMN System Modelling Using Ontologies: A tutorial introducing the idea of using ontologies to create system models that can be immediately simulated in SMN.
STAR: STriking at the Roots - a proposal for a project to identify the root causes of systemic social dysfunction throughout history and work towards rectifying the situation.
I have also brought an end to the experiment with public
discussion of these issues, it has not been successful, hence there
are no more public comments on this blog. If you wish to discuss
these things then email me.
|
|
|
|
2008-08-13
|
Before joining the conversation, please read and accept this Invitation to a Conversation.
Seven Steps To Unified Metaphysical Awareness
On the night of the 12th / 13th of August
2008 whilst living in Mcleod Ganj in the Himalayas, I received an
intuitive 'download'. This is now in the process of being studied, analysed, tested, re-expressed, refined and applied.
Hence this document will evolve.
The essence of the download was a sequence of seven steps toward unified metaphysical awareness.
Summary of the Seven Steps
Step 1 (Rosetta Stone): Use a carefully designed table of
correspondences as a conceptual Rosetta stone, i.e. study the parallels
to discern the underlying pattern and be able to translate between conceptual
frameworks (paradigms). The table gives
parallel descriptions of the same fundamental aspects of reality. Subtly interpolate between the
concepts to develop a non-conceptual grasp of each fundamental
aspect of reality (conceptual annealing).
Step 2 (Structural Model): Given this non-conceptual grasp
of each of the fundamental aspects of reality, arrange the aspects
into an interconnected network of interrelations. Then apply another
process of conceptual annealing to allow the non-conceptual grasp of
each fundamental aspect to dissolve and flow through the network and
reform into a structural model of the unified context.
Step 3 (Non-Conceptual Model): Keep up this process of
conceptual annealing. This subtly deepens the non-conceptual grasp of
the fundamental aspects and we also come to know the topology of the
interplay between them. Thus we get a feel for which aspects resonate
with which in order to manifest the higher-level aspects. This
results in a complete non-conceptual model of the unified context.
Step 4 (Dynamic Model): Then study a detailed model of the
inner dynamic of the existential process (e.g. SMN) so that we can
clearly see how each aspect arises from the interplay of the
lower-level aspects. Starting from the most fundamental we can trace
the whole process of emanation from the lowest-level to the
highest-level. At each level we can define exactly what is happening,
how that level was created by the interplay of the lower-levels and
how it results in the creation of the next higher-level.
Note that the lower levels (of complexity) are at the top of the table, and vice-versa.
Step 5 (Dynamic Understanding): Through visualisation or
imagination this complete dynamic model can be set running as a
cognitive process. We then have a microcosmic simulation running
within the mind and we can create cognitive realities into which we
have an omniscient perspective. This then evolves into a dynamic
understanding.
Step 6 (Penetrative Insight): This dynamic understanding
can be compared with observed experiences to refine it, and used as a
cognitive lens with which to look deeper into our experiences. These
two processes resonating together (experiential annealing) result in penetrative insight
into the world presented by our experiences.
Step 7 (Unified Awareness): This penetrative insight
deepens and clarifies, thereby evolving into a constant state of
penetrative insight, which becomes a permanent state of awareness of
the unified context.
Example of the Seven Steps
Rather than purely discuss these steps in the abstract, this article gives a particular example of the process, to illustrate how it works. The non-conceptual understanding / awareness that these example steps lead to is known to me from previous intuitive downloads and related work. More >
|
|
|
|
2008-08-11
Before joining the conversation, please read and accept this Invitation to a Conversation.
Contexts of Understanding
In relation to any 'reality' there are always two apparent
contexts. A few examples are that one cannot have a story without a
book being read, or a movie without a movie reel in a projector, or a
virtual reality without a computational process. In each of these
examples the first is an empirical context (objects, places and
events) and the second is a transcendent context (that which creates
and sustains the empirical context).
There is also a unified context, which is the context that
contains both apparent contexts. For example, a room containing both
a book and a reader with an imagination is the context in which the
reading of the book operates (transcendent) and the imaginative
experience of the story manifests (empirical). These are all just
simple worldly examples to illustrate some aspects of the situation.
In the case of our own reality and world-experience things are more
subtle but still manifesting an apparent empirical and transcendent
as well as a unified context. The two apparent contexts are just
different perspectives on the one unified context, hence they are not
actually separate contexts, but only appear to be separate.
Although there is one unified context and two apparent contexts,
when contemplating the nature of our reality most people are unaware
of the unified context and fixate on only one of the apparent
contexts and assume that it is the only context. Some are grounded in
one apparent context and deny the other, thereby only understanding
half of the situation, and some attempt to mix both apparent contexts
into one and thereby get very confused.
Below is a simplified map of the contexts and a brief commentary
using the VR
analogy. More >
|
|
|
|
2008-07-21
Before joining the conversation, please read and accept this
Invitation
to a Conversation.
Naïve Realism, Empirical Science
and Transcendent Science
Naïve
realism has a tendency to trap our minds within the empirical
world of the senses but we can overcome the cultural effects of this
in a rigorous scientific manner. The main topics covered in this
article are:
Semiotic nature of language and thought, Overcoming the
limitations of empiricism via abstraction, Transcendent
conceptual languages, Transcendent scientific methodology More >
|
|
|
|
2008-06-21
Before joining the conversation, please read and accept this Invitation to a Conversation.
Is there a world beyond the mind?
Your body, other people, places, objects, planet Earth, the
physical universe, the sciences, the perennial wisdom, all the
traditions old and new and the whole of history and future hopes, do
you not experience them or come to know of them only through the
mind? Could you ever know these things other than through the mind?
You may believe there is a world beyond the mind or someone or some
text may say there is, but that belief, person and text, are they not
only experienced through the mind? If you realised who you truly are
here and now, would the contents of the mind still enthral you?
Without understanding the mind can you truly understand anything?
If you unconsciously assume that there is a world beyond the mind
and you also unconsciously assume that you are an individual being
within that world. Given these assumptions, questions such as those
above cannot be seen as anything other than solipsism.
But what if there is no world beyond the mind and you are not the
worldly being that you have assumed that you are? What if there is
only an unconsciously intersubjective
co-creation
of a collective 'dream' that gives rise to occasions
of experience by seemingly individual, ego-oriented
conscious minds? Naïve
realism leads us to assume the unequivocal reality of the world
that is portrayed by the contents of the mind, but if we do away with
this naïve assumption and remain truly sceptical, what can we
know about the world? The most direct way is to come to know yourself
because that is the only part of reality that you have direct access
to. Hence “Who looks outside, dreams. Who looks inside, awakes.”
(Carl
Jung). This is the path of yoga and all forms of mysticism. But
there are other approaches... More >
|
|
|
|
2008-06-19
Before joining the conversation, please read and accept this
Invitation
to a Conversation.
Thoughts on the Outline of a Unified
Science
Firstly, what does “unified science” mean?
Unified: (1) formed or united into a whole ... (2)
operating as a unit; e.g. "a unified utility system" [1]
Science: (from the Latin scientia, 'knowledge'), in the
broadest sense, refers to any systematic knowledge or practice...
The word science comes through the Old French, and is derived from
the Latin word scientia for knowledge, which in turn comes from scio.
'I know'. The Indo-European root means to discern or to separate,
akin to Sanskrit chyati, he cuts off, Greek schizein, to split, Latin
scindere, to split. From the Middle Ages to the Enlightenment,
science or scientia meant any systematic recorded knowledge. Science
therefore had the same sort of very broad meaning that philosophy had
at that time. In other languages, including French, Spanish,
Portuguese, and Italian, the word corresponding to science also
carries this meaning. [2]
Thus “unified science” refers to “any systematic
knowledge or practice” that is “formed or united into a whole”
and “operating as a unit”.
How does this relate to empirical science? More >
|
|
|
|
2008-06-17
Before joining the conversation, please read and accept this
Invitation
to a Conversation.
Virtual Reality Analogy Alongside Science and
Mysticism
For some background context see the articles: Computational
Metaphysics and Vedic Metaphysics, Hiranyagarbha,
Scientistic
Heresy, Reclaiming
Genuine Religion for Humanity, Thoughts
on the Outline of a Unified Science and also see Metaphysical
Context.
I very briefly describe some aspects of the virtual reality
analogy and then give quotes from sources of scientific and mystic
wisdom that can be seen in a new light when interpreted through this
analogy. I will leave the interpretation up to you. More >
|
|
Page: 1 2 Older entries >> |
|
|