IUBio Biosequences .. Software .. Molbio soft .. Network News .. FTP

The Neural 4-Space [was Re: Consciousness]

k p Collins kpaulc at [----------]earthlink.net
Fri Jan 2 10:35:07 EST 2004

Hi Wolf.

"Wolf Kirchmeir" <wwolfkir at sympatico.can> wrote in message
news:jbysxveflzcngvpbpna.hqtwta2.pminews at news1.sympatico.ca...
> On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 15:24:24 GMT, k p  Collins wrote:
> >I discussed it rather-thoroughly [giving a Complete Maths
> >analysis] in comp.ai.philosophy, where you were 'in attendance',
> >last year.
> No, I just followed up on posts to multiple NGs - I don't monitor all the
> NG's listed in any one post.
> >The Maths was in a little "Compton Refraction" QBASIC program
> >that I posted in comp.ai.philosophy and elsewhere.
> >
> >Basically, the analogous thing can be done with respect to =any=
> >replicable experimental result, which is what I'm usually doing
> >when I'm not online.
> >
> >So, if you have an experimental result that's of particular interest
> >to you, post it, and I'll discuss the wave<->wave view from the
> >perspective of that experiment.
> Oh, for the sake of argument, I'll accept your word for it that you have a
> consistent mathematical treatment of your p.o.v. So what? Mathematical
> consistency doesn't prove anything.
> Do you have any predictions, supported by experimental results, that
> distinguish between your model and the standard model?

Yes. I started discussing them, in bionet.neuroscience, in the recent

Thare's a large 'class' of such predictions that are relatively easy to
confirm in accelerator experiments.

All of the members of this 'class' have the form of reducing to
experimental instances in which there's a fleeting 'refactory period'
during which no further 'action' can be detected.

The most-fundamental members of this 'class' are already common-
place Observable.

These pertain to observations that have been invoked to 'substantiate'
the 'existence' of so-called "quarks".

Accelerator folks bombard 'protons' with accelerated 'bullets'.

Tapered Harmony's position is that both the 'protons' and whatever
accelerated 'bullets' are employed are 'just' SSW<->UES
compression<->expansion harmonics - quantities of energy
'trapped' as harmonic Spherical Standing Wave interaction with
their locally-surrounding 'portion' of the Universal Energy Supply.

Tapered Harmony holds that all observables result =solely= from
the fact that the ratio of the 'volume' to surface-area of a sphere
varies nonlinearly as the 'volume' [in TH, the quantity of energy
'trapped within' an SSW<->UES harmonic] undergoes cpmpres-
sion and expansion. This is easily verified to be True [I've posted
little QBASIC apps that provide this verification, including the
"Compton Refraction" app to which I've referred]. As a sphere
undergoes compression, for instance, if the initial 'volume' of the
sphere is treated as a 'constant' quantity of 'trapped' energy, and
then that 'trapped' energy is forced to remain within a decreasing
geometric Volume, the ratio of the 'trapped'-energy 'volume' to
the geometric surface-area heads, in a rapidly-accelerating way,
toward infinity.

There's an analogous, but more-abrupt, acceleration toward
infinity in the expansion [or "shelling"] phase of the harmonics,
as the expanding 'volume' of 'trapped' energy slams-up-against
the SSW<->UES harmonic's local UES, which occurs as a
spherical "shell" of compression.

All of this stuff is completely Verified to be True in the "Compton
Refraction" app.

Experimentors have observed that, when they bombard 'protons',
as above, they 'see' "three things in there" - no more, no less - so
they've presumed that there are literally "three `subatomic` particles
within the so-called 'proton', and they have named these 'three
things' "quarks".

In Tapered Harmony's view, however, all that's being observed
derives in the spherical compression<->expansion harmonics'
fleeting nonlinear accelerations.

If a target SSW<->UES harmonic is getting really-small really-fast,
then it's only possible for geometrical "conjunctions" to occur,
observably, during fleeting portions of targets' and projectiles'
compression<->expansion phasing.

During the rest of the targets' and projectiles'
compression<->expansion phasing, because the energy 'trapped
within' the SSW<->UES harmonics is nonlinearly relatively un-
compressed, projectiles pass right through targets without there
being sufficient energy density to enable observation of target
and projectile interaction [but see below - this is where all of the
predictions in the large 'class' that I'm discussing are Testable].

This is =why= the experimenters consistently observe 'only
three things in there'.

At the energies employed, the compressed phases of the target
and projectile SSW<->UES harmonics's nonlinearly-accelerating
compression<->expansion dynamics are only commensurate with
fitting three energy<->energy interaction 'events' in-there - be-cause,
during the remainder of the harmonics' phasing, the energy 'trapped
within' the compression<->expansion harmonics is too-rarified for
interaction 'events' to be observed.

It's 'just' an energy-flow =thresholding= dynamic that's conformed
to spherical Geometry, as above.

Get it?

[Athough the Geometry inherent is much more rich, all of nervous
systems' thresholding dynamics reduce to analogous stuff, BTW.
The analysis is, basically, the same, but has to be carried out with
respect to the neural Topology [the Geometry of entire neuronal
extents, and, further, the Geometry of neuron-collections.]

All of this is Proven in the little QBASIC apps that I've posted.
[A groups Google[tm] on "compton refraction" or "QBASIC apps"
should give some hits linking to this compter code.]

It's all right-there in the Spherical Geometry.

Anyway, Tapered Harmony predicts that, as accelerator energys
are increased, further analogous observations will become
possible, and =all= such observations will conform rigorously
to the nonlinear compression<->expansion dynamics discussed

=All= the 'members' of the large 'class' of predictions to which I
referred above have one thing in common. They all have
'refractory' periods during which target-projectile interactions
will be unobservable, and =all= of these 'refractory' periods
reduce rigorously to the spherical harmonics discussed above.

This is as it is be-cause the 'refractory' periods consist of the
non-'trapped' UES "extreme fluid" just flowing in accord with
local WDB2T - which correlates to a local 'speed of light'.

Going back to the 'three things in there' stuff that experimenters
have presumed 'substantiates' the 'existence' of so-called "quarks",
it is this 'refractory' period that Determines the number of
observables that are 'in there'.

So, overall, in the 'refractory' period one can literally observe the
UES-flow [the so-called "dark energy" - which is 'dark' be-cause
it's just the UES extreme-fluid, flowing in rigorous accord with

I posted some more-explicit [with respect to a specific proposal
for experimental design] discussion in the not-too-distant past
[in b.n], but, when I looked for it just a 'moment' ago, could not
find it on my PC. I'll look more, later. [Just got 'disconnected'
in a way that my INet software did not detect :-]

I can describe the necessary experimental design to Test what's
here with respect to any observable phenomenon, and those
Tests [all of them] will disclose observables that have, to date,
been, supposedly, "invisible".

K. P. Collins

More information about the Neur-sci mailing list

Send comments to us at biosci-help [At] net.bio.net