Postulating a Deep Layer of Mind-matter Interconnection


Due to its basic indetermination, quantum mechanics is unable to account for meaningful processes—such as, for example, an anomalous event triggered by an intention, as in a conscious psi experiment involving an influence (PK) on biological matter (plants, bacteria…), called bio-PK. And yet we know that meaning is deeply connected to psi, in the form of an intention (as above), of feelings, of interconnections with loved ones, etc. This shouldn’t take us backward into discarding the framework of quantum physics to explain nonlocal consciousness and psi. Due to the fact that only quantum physics can support the kind of space-time anomalies shown by psi events, the way backward is blocked. The only possibility is to move forward, farther into layers where consciousness and energy and matter must be deeply interconnected to the point of merging or fusing. Indeed, if meaning cannot be explained at the quantum physics level (of particles), then we must assume a deeper layer of reality in which mind and matter are so fundamentally intermingled and fused as to become a single substance: consciousness-energy. This deep level of reality, the dimension of consciousness-as-energy, is the semantic dimension, and syg-energy (semantic energy) is the energy of this dimension, having the characteristics of both consciousness and very subtle energy.

The semantic dimension presents a totally new set of properties pertaining both to consciousness and energy. It’s at least a 5-D manifold, with one (or more) dimension of consciousness, one dimension of time, and three dimensions of space (normal 3-D). The semantic dimension is thus as much of a metadimension to space-time as 3-D is to 2-D.

Thus syg-energy is organized by consciousness itself; it is steered by meaning and intention or, more precisely, by the act of creating meaning. This consciousness-energy has nothing whatsoever to do with energy waves carrying information. Here, the syg-energy itself is the embodied meaning.



Hidden Variables?

At this point, a question arises: does adding a dimension of deep reality mean endorsing some sort of hidden variables? The assumption of Albert Einstein, in proposing hidden variables, was that some hidden causal factors are at work in what appear as random events at the quantum level, bending them toward specific effects, and that these factors, presently impossible to assess, could nevertheless be unraveled one day. Hidden variables were supposed to be sets of causes leading to deterministic effects. The idea of Einstein, in proposing hidden variables, was to save the concept of a deterministic universe: “God doesn’t play dice,” he said against the new and formidable concept of pure indetermination proposed by Werner Heisenberg, Niels Bohr, and the “orthodox,” or Copenhagen, school of quantum physics. Physicist David Bohm, in his implicate order theory, is in accordance with the concept of hidden variables.* This implicate order posits a deeper layer, annulling space. Bohm, however, saw physical reality (the explicate order) as totally determined by the implicate order: no free interactions or two-way influences, but rather a deep level of causes from which the physical reality itself unfolds in a deterministic way.

Let’s consider the question anew: does, then, a dimension of deep reality endorse hidden variables? The answer is no. The deep reality layer, as we will see, is neither deterministic nor indeterministic. Its reality lies in a novel framework nearer to synchronistic acausal events proposed by Jung and Pauli than to either of the two schools of quantum physics (the orthodox posing pure indetermination and the hidden variables based on a deterministic framework).

———————————————

* David Bohm, Wholeness and the Implicate Order.

(Read more on this subject in The Sacred Network, chapter 13.)

Live from Chris

Psi, QM and space-time singularities


Many scientists still refuse to acknowledge laboratory research on psi capacities, because it is at odds with classical physics. Yet the phenomena involved in psi, such as retrocausality and nonlocal correlations, are bedrock processes for quantum scientists. In terms of scientific proof, precognition is the least questionable phenomenon. In a typical psi experiment, the lab first creates a pool of images (or target pool). In telepathy experiments, an image is chosen randomly out of the pool by a computer (through a sophisticated random number generator) and is automatically displayed on the sender’s screen. The sender then proceeds to mentally send this image (called the target) to the receiver (or subject). The receiver (after a relaxation period) then describes aloud any and every image that passes through his or her mind, and all he or she says is recorded; at the end, four randomly selected images (one of which is the target) are displayed on the receiver’s screen, and he or she has to choose the target. At the end of an experiment, the statistics of hits and misses from all subjects are calculated.

In PRL, sometimes the descriptions were so precise that a subject, for example, would describe a tiger or cheetah running, while the target showed exactly that. The protocol is called double-blind because both the subject (receiver) and the experimenter don’t know the target. Nevertheless, the skeptics will try to argue that subtle cues could have been given to the subject; that is, they will invoke fraud and leaks in the lab to explain the positive results. In contrast, precognition experiments (perceiving a future target) do not allow the skeptics to invoke information leaks to the subject (whatever the manner), because the target is randomly selected only after the subject has described what he thought was the target. So that during the experimentation per se, nobody and not even a computer possesses the information (this is called triple blind). This is why researchers consider precognition as the least questionable psi capacity: whenever an experiment obtains positive results, it can’t be easily explained away. In precognition, it seems the mind can access a future time in great detail, as if the mind either annuls space or travels along a reverse time axis, from the future toward the present. This amounts to a kind of tinkering with time. As for clairvoyance (acquiring information about distant events without the medium of the physical senses or technology), it shows a clear-cut tinkering with space. While the space-time dimension of the physics of Newton (and the electromagnetic, or EM, spectrum) clearly fails to support psi, quantum physics, on the contrary, has laid the ground for its theoretical possibility, at least in terms of space and time singularities. Processes such as particles moving from the future to the past, or a particle being informed about the state of another one at a distance through “nonlocal correlations” (also called entanglement) are central in quantum physics. These processes can account for precognition (information from the future) and telepathy (information between two systems). Because a particle has a statistical probability to be anywhere in the universe, quantum physics could account for space anomalies (and psi researchers have thus proposed several theories of psi based on quantum physics). Yet, the great pitfall is meaning. Quantum events are purely indeterministic, and despite the fact that quantum physics posits nonlocal processes, in no way can it explain how such nonlocal processes could be directed according to the intention or the will of a person—that is, it would be responding to a deep and meaningful psychological process. (At the very moment when I finished typing responding, following the text I had written a month and a half ago, a strange psi phenomenon occurred, which we will analyze in another post.*)

Quantum events follow statistical rules; they are perfectly indeterministic. In such a framework, meaning—what makes sense for an individual (mind-body-psyche)—cannot be accounted for, because meaning is the absolute antithesis to randomness and indetermination. If, as quantum physics shows, the influence of consciousness on the physical world can be neither ignored nor evaluated within the quantum physics framework, then in order for a theory of the universe to be complete, it must include a theory of consciousness. Therefore, we are in need of a global theory that would account not only for the organization of matter at a deep level, but also for consciousness and its most important feat: the constant creation of new meaning—creativity, invention, psi capacities, understanding and learning, and the constant transformation of our intellectual and artistic life. Bearing this in mind, I elaborated Semantic Fields Theory (SFT) and hoped to achieved a framework that would fill the gap.



———————————————

* See label 17 ‘Synchronicity, psi’ : An outstanding synchronicity + PK

(Read more on this subject in The Sacred Network, chapter 13.)

Scientific Articles & Download


  • ·    My most important articles may be downloaded (in Word) from the webpage http://hardy.christine.free.fr
  • ·    To download, first check the list of articles available for download (below). Go directly to the page:
  • http://hardy.christine.free.fr/page2PapDwl.htm
  • ·    In order to download, click on the column on the right (showing the weight of the file in K.)
  •   To come back to the Blog, use your browser’s arrow at the top. 


Articles published in scientific refereed journals 

8.  2005. Sens et réseaux (Meaning and Networks). Dans: AGIR, Revue de Stratégie (Paris), N° 20-21 (pp 56-63). Thème : La société de l’information. (Janvier 2005). Abstract en anglais.

7. 2004. Hardy, C. & Grès, S. (2004). Anticipation: Humans Versus Machines. In INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF COMPUTING ANTICIPATORY SYSTEMS (IJCAS) 2004.

6. 2003. Multilevel Webs Stretched across Time: Retroactive and Proactive Inter-Influences. SYSTEMS RESEARCH AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCE, vol 20, N° 2 (pp 201-215). (Special Issue on:  Systems Thinking for Social Responsibility.)

5. 2001: Self-organization, self-reference and inter-influences in Multilevel Webs: Beyond causality and determinism. JOURNAL OF CYBERNETICS AND HUMAN KNOWING. Imprint Academic, UK. Vol.8, no.3. (pp 35-59). July 2001.

4. 2000. Campos semánticos y psi: Sugerencias para un modelo teórico. REVISTA ARGENTINA DE PSICOLOGIA. Publication en espagnol (Argentine) de: Hardy, C. (1998) Semantic Fields and mental processes.

3. 2000: Psi as a multilevel process : Semantic Fields Theory. Published in JOURNAL OF PARAPSYCHOLOGY.  Vol. 64, March 2000 (pp. 73-94)

2. 1997: Semantic Fields and meaning: A bridge between mind and matter. WORLD FUTURES, Newark: Gordon & Breach. Vol 48 (pp161-170)

1.    1996: Théorie des champs sémantiques: Dynamiques de l'interprétation et de la création de sens. BIOMATH, Vol. 34, N° 135. Paris, 3ème semestre 1996.
 
List of articles on Semantic Fields Theory
to download from chris hardy’s webpage

Click on the link: http://hardy.christine.free.fr/page2PapDwl.htm
Then click on the column at the far right (that of the weight of the file in k)
(Beware that the list below is just a jpeg photo, you cannot access the articles from it.)

                             All Articles and Papers on Semantic Fields Theory

55. 2013. The link psyche-matter, and synchronicity. Lecture at The Free University of Brussel (ULB)– module C.G. Jung. March 19, 2013.

54. 2012. Pensée jungienne et énergie de la conscience. Congress: Quantum Therapy / forum. Reims, France, Nov. 17-19.

53. 2012. The way opened by Jung: The double conjonction masculine-feminine and ego-Self at the collective level. Lecture at The Free University of Brussel (ULB)– C.G. Jung module. Oct 23, 2012.

52. 2012. La transformation des consciences : vers le champ sémantique planétaire. Congress on C.G. Jung, Nice, Sept 15.

51. 2012. La prédiction de Jung : la métamorphose de la terre. Lecture at L’entrepôt, Paris, March 15.

50. 2012. La prédiction de Jung : un saut quantique dans la conscience collective. Conférence pour la sortie de l’ouvrage La prédiction de Jung.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2nHU7MGfe4

49. 2011. La portée révolutionnaire de la théorie de Jung en science - notamment sciences cognitives, parapsychologie, imbrication esprit/matière. » Paper at Journée Jung, A-IMI Paris, Oct. 29.

48. 2010. Vers une conscience collective harmonisée? Systèmes dynamiques complexes liés à la cognition anomale. AFSCET, Paris, 8 mars 2010.

47. 2009. Le psi dans la théorie cognitive des champs sémantiques  (TCS): L’esprit comme réseau d’interconnexions non-locales. Conférence à l’IMI, Paris. 2 octobre 2009.

46. 2008. Formalizing rare complex dynamical systems linked to anomalous cognition with Semantic Fields Theory's framework. Présentation à la Society for Chaos Theory in Psychology and Life Sciences (SCTPLS), conférence annuelle, Richmond, VA, USA.

45. 2006. The dynamics of intuition viewed through a cognitive systems theory. Presentation at Faculdades Integradas, biannual international conference. April 21-24, Curitiba, Brazil.

44. 2005. Meaning and Networks. Panel presentation: The Information Society - Strategic stake. Organized and moderated by Carine Dartiguepeyrou and Michel Saloff-Coste, January 25, 2005, UNESCO Paris.

43. 2005. Network-strategies and Sci-Fi : Managing the interaction with exo-civilizations and artificial intelligences. European Systems Science congress. Paris, 18-22 Septembre 2005.

42. 2005. Sens et réseaux (Meaning and Networks). In AGIR, Journal of STRATEGY (Revue de Stratégie, Paris), N° 20-21 (pp 56-63). Theme : The Information Society. (January 2005). Abstract in English.

41. 2004. Dynamique-réseau et nouveau mode de gouvernance. AFSCET Transdisciplinary symposium. Andé 2004. Theme: Governance – individual & collective : systemic viewpoints.

40. 2004. Hardy, C. & Grès, S. (2004). Anticipation: Humans Versus Machines. In INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF COMPUTING ANTICIPATORY SYSTEMS (IJCAS) 2004.

39. 2004. Synchronicity: Interconnection Through A Semantic Dimension. Presentation at Faculdades Integradas, biannual international conference. April 21-26, Curitiba, Brazil.

38. 2004: Tackling the mind-matter problem from a consciousness perspective. In Storm, L. & Thalbourne, M. (Eds). NJ: McFarland.

37. 2003. Intuitive Dynamics and Chaos. Presentation at the Society for Chaos Theory in Psychology and Life Sciences (SCTPLS), annual conf., Boston.

36. 2003. Hardy, C. & Grès, S. Anticipations : Human Versus Machines.  Presentation at CASYS 03 Conference  (Computing Anticipatory Systems),  Liège, Belgium, August 11-16, 2003
,

35. 2003: Complex Intuitive Dynamics in a Systemic Cognitive Framework. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Society for the Systems Sciences (ISSS), Crete, 7/7-11. Published in the CD-rom of the Proceedings of the 47th annual meeting of the International Society for the Systems Sciences (ISSS).

34. 2003. Multilevel Webs Stretched across Time: Retroactive and Proactive Inter-Influences. SYSTEMS RESEARCH AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCE, vol 20, N° 2 (pp 201-215). (Special Issue on:  Systems Thinking for Social Responsibility.)

33. 2002. Multilevel Webs : Proactive influence on markets. In RES-SYSTEMICA, Vol. 2, Actes du V° Congrès Européen de Systémique, Octobre 2002, Crète. (Res-Systemica.org)

32. 2002. Multilevel Webs : Proactive influence on markets. 5th European systems science congress. Heraklion, Crete, 10/16-19 2002. (Satellite conference on Systems Management.)

31. 2002: Logical Fields and the dynamics of change: From conflict to cooperation. China, 8/2-6. Published in the CD-rom of the Proceedings of the 46th annual meeting of the Intern. Soc. for the Systems Sciences (ISSS).
                               
30. 2002: Logical fields: The informing patterns of collective thinking. Sixth multi-conference on Systemics, Cybernetics and Informatics (SCI), Orlando, Florida, USA. 7/14-18

29. 2001: Multilevel Webs stretched across time: Retroactive and proactive inter-influences. Annual congress, OR 43: University of Bath, UK, 9/3-6.

28. 2001: Multilevel Webs as non-deterministic complex systems. Presentation at the Society for Chaos Theory in Psychology and Life Sciences (SCTPLS) annual conf., Madison, WS. 8/3-6.

27. 2001: Self-organization, self-reference and inter-influences in Multilevel Webs: Beyond causality and determinism. JOURNAL OF CYBERNETICS AND HUMAN KNOWING. UK: Imprint Academic. Vol.8, no.3. (pp 35-59). July 2001.

26. 2000. Campos semánticos y psi: Sugerencias para un modelo teórico. Revista Argentina de Psicología. Publication in Spanish (Argentina) of Hardy, C. (1998) Semantic Fields and mental processes.

25. 2000: Self-organization, autopoiesis, and the breakdown of causality in complex cognitive systems. World congress of the Systems Sciences & ISSS, Toronto, Canada, 7/16-22. Published in the CD-rom of the Proceedings of the 44th annual meeting of the International Society for the Systems Sciences (ISSS).

24. 2000: Psi as a multilevel process : Semantic Fields Theory.  Published in JP, Journal of Parapsychology. Vol. 64, March 2000 (pp. 73-94)

23. 2000: Two types of memory-as-process in a dynamical networks’ view of the mind. Presentation at the SCTPLS annual conf.,  Philadelphia, NJ, 7/20-23.

22. 2000. Apprendre un art: un réseau multidimensionnel. In Revue Spectre, Paris. Traduction Luc Fafournoux.

21. 1999: Semantic Fields and collective consciousness. Euro-PA convention,  Chartres,  France, 10/1-3.

20. 1999: Psi as a multilevel process : Semantic fields theory. Presentation at the PA 42d annual Convention, Standford Univ., CA, 8/4-8.

19. 1999: Mind as a lattice of dynamical networks. Presentation at the SCTPLS annual conf., Berkeley, CA, 7/22-27.

18. 1999: Complex semantic systems: Understanding mind-in-the-world. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Internarional Society for the Systems Sciences (ISSS), Asilomar, CA, 6/27-7/2. Published in the CD-rom of the Proceedings of the 43d annual meeting of the International Society for the Systems Sciences (ISSS).

17. 1999: Acquiring an artistic skill: A multidimensional network. In Roy Ascott (Ed.) Reframing Consciousness. Exeter, UK, and Portland, OR : Intellect. (pp248-252)

16. 1998: The Value of the Irrational, with Bill Sulis (McMasters Univ.), and Robin Robertson (Psychological Perspectives). Panel at the SCTPLS annual conference at Boston, MA. 7/31-8/2.

15. 1998: Synchronicity: A transpersonal dynamical process. Presentation at the Society for Chaos Theory in Psychology and Life Sciences (SCTPLS) annual conf., Boston, MA. 7/31-8/2.

14. 1998: Semantic Fields and mental processes. European Meeting of the Society for Scientific Exploration (SSE), Valencia, Spain, 10/9-11.

13. 1998: Réseaux cognitifs: du cerveau à la terre. Presentation at the COB conference, Consciousness of the Earth. Bruxelles, Belgium, 5/2-4.

12. 1998: Memory as a dynamical-network organization and process. Annual conf. of the Italian Society for Chaos and Complexity (SICC). Rome Intern. Univ., Rome, Italy, 10/21-23.

11. 1998: Acquiring an artistic skill: A multidimensional network. Presentation at the CAiiA conference, Consciousness Reframed II. Univ. of Wales, Newport, UK. 8/18-22.

10. 1997: Semantic Fields and meaning: A bridge between mind and matter. World Futures, Newark: Gordon & Breach. Vol 48 (pp161-170)

9. 1997: Modeling transitions between states of consciousness: the concept of Nested Chaos. Presentation at the Society for Chaos Theory in Psychology and Life Sciences (SCTPLS) annual conference at Milwaukee, WS. 7/31-8/2.

8. 1996: Théorie des champs sémantiques: Dynamiques de l'interprétation et de la création de sens. Biomath, Vol. 34, N° 135. 3d semester 1996.

7. 1995: Semantic Fields and meaning. Presentation at COB Coloquium: 'The cognitive methodology of integrated science', Padua, Italy, 10/2-5.

6. 1994: Une théorie des champs sémantiques. Presentation, GREC-B seminar, Versailles, France, 4/10.

5. 1994: Meaning as interface between mind and matter. Poster presentation, ‘Toward a scientific basis for consciousness', Tucson I, Arizona, 4/12-17.

4. 1994: L'imbrication conscience/matière: l'événement comme constellation éco-sémantique. Presentation, Lisbon convention, Portugal, 4/27-30.

3. 1994: Le regard crée du sens: les synergies sémantiques. (Semantic synergies). Le 3ème Millénaire, N° 31, Mars 1994.

2. 1993: Les trames sémantiques (Semantic lattices). Presentation, Congress “Les niveaux de communication”, Vichy, France, 9/10-12.

1. 1992: Meaning and PK. Presentation, Euro-PA convention, Melun, France, October.

----------------------------------------