In nonlocal space there is no time and no space in a physical sense, which means that events that are separate in real time and real space remain simultaneous in the nonlocal space of the particles related to the event. In other words, the context of an event or effect in real spacetime has a simultaneous effect retained in nonlocal space, which infers that an instrument taken to measure a quantum event becomes part of the context of that event. Less obvious is the role the dispassionate observer plays in that context driven measurement. What we need to recognize is that the mind is not what takes the measurement; the mind is our awareness of the measurement while the role is played by the dispassionate observer in everyday conscious and unconscious events such as thinking and decision making.
In nonlocal space there is no time and no space in a physical sense, which means that events that are separate in real time and real space remain simultaneous in the nonlocal space of the particles related to the event. In other words, the context of an event or effect in real spacetime has a simultaneous effect retained in nonlocal space, which infers that an instrument taken to measure a quantum event becomes part of the context of that event. Less obvious is the role the dispassionate observer plays in that context driven measurement. What we need to recognize is that the mind is not what takes the measurement; the mind is our awareness of the measurement while the role is played by the dispassionate observer in everyday conscious and unconscious events such as thinking and decision making.
Clocks are systems for measuring frequency, velocity, duration and numerical order ntttt.......,, 210 of physical events. Time t obtained with clocks is not a forth dimension 4X of space, time t is only a component of tciX ∗∗=4. This view of clock/time as a measuring system sees physical phenomena running exclusively in space and not in time. This view is supported with several experiments which confirm that time t of physical event can be zero. Time is not part of space; time is run of clocks in space. Past, present and future exist as a psychological time in the mind only not in the universe. We experience motion i.e. change in the space through the frame of psychological time. We “project ” linear psychological time “past-present-future ” into the space, however it is not there. Observer who distinguishes between space-time, physical time and psychological time is aware that in quantum measurement he only measures physical events in space and not in time. Clock/time is merely a measuring device. With this understanding observer’s observation, measurement and experience of quantum phenomena are closer to their real nature. Stream of numerical order of quantum phenomena ntttt.......,, 210 runs in space only and not in time. Stream of quantum phenomena has no duration on its own. Duration is result of measurement.
Two principle concerns prompt some theorists to link quantum mechanics and theories of mind or theories of consciousness. On the one hand, it is commonly thought that conscious minds play some important role in processes of quantum measurement and that any good theory of mind ought to explain how a mind can play such a role. On the other hand, a few people think that the framework of classical physics is not, by itself, sufficiently powerful to explain the myriad remarkable properties of minds and that a good explanation must rely on some special features of quantum mechanics. Usually, these features include either state vector reduction-the collapse of the wave function-or special capabilities, often computational or super-computational ones, allegedly displayed by physical substrates while existing in hypothesised coherent states of linear superposition. Two questions summarise the author's misgivings about both the above motivations for linking quantum mechanics and theories of mind. First, does the process of quantum measurement really require a conscious observer? Second, does quantum mechanics underwrite any special effects in, say, intraneuronal protein lattices, which could play a role in instantiating consciousness in biological systems? It turns out that the particular character of the negative answer suggested for the first question also prompts a negative answer for the second. He summarises these negative answers after describing briefly some popular attempts to forge quantum theories of mind.
In this paper we will address important considerations for the structure of a physical theory and the need and implications for the conscious observer and creator. Complementarity and reciprocity are dominate in the sttucture of the Quantum \'Vorld. It is clear that one's meaningful existence directly involves one's intent and acdon both mental and physical in consequence. Hence, it is vital ro undersrand what intemional will is, the manner in which it arises, as it relates to one's ethical responsibility the meaning of their life may also be considered in the context of intentional will and may be described and understOod. We investigate the role of conscious intention in the physical and mental world. In this paper, we examine the theoretical constructs of the properties of observational intention and their local and nonlocal effects on mind and matter. One begins by sensing a physical or psychic input and then becoming consciously aware of it as perceptions and thoughts which result in concepts developed for memories, reasoning and feelings. Then a thought and decision will be made and imention are carried into action in the physical and mental world. We proceed by investigating the role and action of the thought of intentional will and its role in quantum mechanics, its structure of the theoty and manner in which it appears ro demand a role for consciousness. In order to proceed with our investigation will present some of the basic tenants of quantum mechanics, the structure of the theoty and manner in which it appears ro demand a role for consciousness in quantum measurement and its non local intentional interaction. The quantum theory gives us two inescapable conclusions: J) we are intimaly linked ro the world as participatory observers, and 2) nonlocal remote connections and interactions are shown to be parr of our world process. Discoveries, and/or creations of new concepts in physics lead ro the observer/participant issue. Quantum mechanics, the theory of atomic microcosm, is a description that may imply that the observer has an impact on the observed, that rhe observer has an effect on what is observed. The relativity theory scems to imply that the state of the observer affecrs his interpretation of what he sees. In the context of quantum theoty and relativity, we may be able to shed light on the relationship of discovery as well as creation and irs validation of the properties of an external reality. In quantum physics, as well as in the structure of n-dimensional relativistic models, the implication for a fundamental remore connection of events is deeply implied by the structure of these models and their experimental test and we can use this property for our experimental models of the properties of consciousness. The structure of physical theoty, its very fabric, is pointing towards a world view that speaks of concepts which have been considered external to the body of science but yet may be implied by modern physical theoty itself.
Quantum nonlocality is described in the context of a subjective duration that has a period of unconscious simultaneity of potentials that are reduced to an actual observably-identical mixed state of consciousness that deposits time and duration at the end of the mental state. Quantum microgenesis involves the observer as the agent of experience, which is a single continuum from depth to surface in the genesis of the mental state, repeating prior states of the individual. Microgenesis is generalized as prior becomings going back to the inception of the Universe. Synchronicity is the fundamental principle of Mind, Self, and consciousness. Mind is always One, which cannot be multiplied. Synchronicity is beyond any process of inanimate quantum nonlocality. It is outside of the physics, as Mind is based on the actualization of the mixed state of the human mind rather than the single quantum eigenstate given by the physics. Consciousness is thus a process of an irreducible and indivisible Mind in ourselves and the acausal realm of synchronicity. The mental-physical process evolves from the unconscious subjective time in the period of simultaneity, proceeding to the actuality of the mixed state of consciousness through synchronicity in its operative role as manifestation of Mind. Periods of unconscious duration and simultaneity exist as potential and only become actual at the synchronous moment of conscious observation at the end of the cyclical mental state.
This article advances the idea that nonlocality is a central and defining feature of the Universe. Long held at arm’s length and often ignored and loathed whenever it is encountered, nonlocality has re-emerged time and again to vex physicists all throughout the history of scientific endeavor, but far from making science impossible or incomprehensible, nonlocality may provide the scaffolding that brings the comprehensible universe into being in the first place. It is against such backdrop of procedural interconnectedness, that the case is made for rudimentary and not so rudimentary forms of awareness between all things, which abstract as they are, might nonetheless form the basis of reality and an answer to the seeming disorder and apparent randomness of the Universe.