electromagnetic theories of consciousness

Well I'm suggesting there would be some sort of extra non-classical mechanism at work within the brains networks... it would allow matching spatio-temporal patterns to add-up non-classically, and interfere non-classically, where the networks were intersected by classical fields.

For a candidate, we would possibly be looking for some sort of highly conserved structure in nature that is shared. For instance, one of the possibilities might be the hydrophobic cavities within some proteins. In particular when proteins themselves connect up to form repeating structures, for example, things like Cilia, Basal Bodies, Centrioles etc.

But look, if someone in Sydney is in telephathic contact with someone in London, any electromagnetic signal will spend most of its time outside their brains, and we can reason about how much information it can carry without bothering about the details of cell structure.

As an electronics engineer, I struggled a lot with the question of propagation medium for thought. Nothing on the electromagnetic spectrum satisfied the requirements and the force propagation principles were not even in the ballpark. That is one of the reasons I became interested in virtual forces like torque, and then later, set theory. I find √-1 endlessly fascinating.

Although fifty years ago, I have a lot of math training because of my engineering degree. One of the concepts to keep in mind is that math is a modeling tool used to represent reality. It is not reality. How well it models reality depends on how clever the assumptions represent knowns. Much of the astronomical cosmologies we see are speculation based on those models, so it is safe to say that those cosmologies do not include nonphysical characteristics.

There are a few mathematical tools I find fascinating and that tickle my liminal perception. For instance, the Mandelbrot set compares rather well for nonphysical modeling I am experimenting with. See The Cosmology of Imaginary Space. Also, the general study of set and chaos theory has interesting comparisons to nonphysical concepts.

As it turns out, the idea of a field, defined as a set of elements sharing a common influence that is acting as an attractor is exactly how I define reality. Well, I model it as a nested hierarchy of fields--life fields--and their expressions.

I describe the fundamental expression of life as the creative process which produces an expression. It is attention on an imagined outcome with the intention to make it so. The elements of the creative process are attention, visualization, intention. You can model that any way you wish. The main point is that a field can be described as a set of expressions. For instance, my personal reality field can be modeled as a set of expressed objects (designated as physical) visualized as informed by my worldview.

Looking at psi as an expression, the active force is intention. Intention acts on concepts (imagined outcomes) to produce an expression. In Sheldrake's Hypothesis of Formative Causation, the brain is an expression, as are all of the other objects of reality we have come to designate as physical. He also uses the nested hierarchy of life fields (morphic field) as a model.

The above model is difficult to follow on first exposure. It has been described by others in very different terms but with the same general result. It is just more consistent with experience to describe consciousness as a field rather than as an EMF signal.

attention, visualization, intention

Don't you need to add experience/qualia to that list?

The inability to explain why physical processes experience anything seems to lie at the core of this puzzle.

I'll read your website in detail soon.

Don't you need to add experience/qualia to that list?

You are right. I have wandered around in the model so much that when I see visualization, I see the construction of an image based on worldview. In most models I have studied, worldview is at the core of who we are, what we perceive and what we express.

I define worldview as a sort of database containing memory, instincts and learned information. Even though our conscious self is the experiencer for personality the observer, we share worldview with our human during a lifetime. Importantly, it includes human instincts evolved in the physical and an instinct inherited from our personality in the form of an urge to gain understanding through experience. That also means worldview includes that gained understanding in various states of evolution.

Here, I should say that, even though I speak of these models as if they are fact, what I call the Implicit Cosmology model is just a way of organizing what I am learning about the Survival Hypothesis. It is neither composed by an expert nor vetted by experts. I should also apologize for being so longwinded. A good engineer knows that ignored details spoil the product.

The diagram illustrates how I think perception and expression are developed. It is designed as a black box solution based on reported experiences, popular paranormalist and New Age wisdom, and what little I know about ancient wisdom. Later, I discovered First Sight Theory and found that it provided the rule-set for the Perceptual Loop.

I developed this model because information from Instrumental TransCommunication is almost entirely ignored by parapsychologists, yet ITC gives us important clues about our out nature and our relationship with the other side. What we have learned from ITC and mediumship has given us a different perspective about metaphysical cosmology.

I describe environmental signals as conceptual in nature. They may be events or streaming, but they are always more a gestalt-like thoughtform than a single digital word-like packet. We know that the mind is always processing that information by comparing it with worldview to determine if it is important. If so, is it related to information in worldview, and based on that relationship, how should it be described? It is probably safe to say that all incoming information is modified by the perceptual process before it is expressed to conscious self. I refer to that as coloring ... the bane of mental mediums.

Expression is the product of perception. The output of the perceptual process is the expression of how the process managed to describe the information in conscious self language.