Axis Mundi X discussion

What is consciousness and where does the mind reside? These are two of the questions this surreal novel poses to the reader. The ancient Greeks believed that the mind resided near the area of the stomach. There are a lot of obese people for whom that may be true. Naturally, they could be said to be living unconsciously. Personally, I think “mind”, whatever it is, resides somewhere lower because it has a tendency to slip down my pant leg and into my shoes.

If you like weird comic book worlds, psychotic biker gangs tripping on new chemical highs and theories of consciousness and sideshow freaks this book is a great read and a lot of fun

(Budump bump) But, seriously folks, where does that pesky think called mind reside anyway?

Todd! Such a question for a restful Sunday morning!

I enjoyed Orson Scott Card's "Alvin Maker" series, in which Alvin's brother Calvin was able to put his consciousness into a "doodlebug" which he is able to project at will into anyone, anywhere.

I believe consciousness mainly resides in the heart, and therefore throughout all of the body via the energy contained within the cells of blood flowing outward. I think consciousness utilizes the brain with all of its functions, but more like sitting in the driver's seat. After all, the body can still be alive without a fully functioning brain, but if the heart is gone so is everything else.

“Heart is consciousness, I is Baba.” ~ Sri Sathya Sai Baba

There are so many references to the heart being the resting place of the soul in history, and I guess that's what I see consciousness is. Not necessarily in a religious point of view, but more from the 'more than the mortal realm' view. Consciousness is the eternal energy of the universe, and it's temporarily contained within these physical bodies while we're here. That's just how I see it.

As a note, there is a really interesting project going on (yea, it's kinda New Agey with New Science interspersed in it) called HeartMath (under the Global Coherence Project), where they measure the magnetic resonances of the heart against the emotions that a person or group are going through, and what measured affects these emotions have on the body as well as the environment. They are also studying the fluctuations in the earth's magnetic fields to see if they may correspond to large, emotionally charged events that happen.

Their findings showed a surprisingly large fluctuation in the few hours preceding the 9/11 attacks, as well as other significant findings at key times in our recent history.

If you're interested in these kind of scientific studies, check this out: http://www.heartmath.org/templates/ih...

Cool Link!

So, Sherrie, does that mean when someone has a heart transplant they get a new center of consciousness?

I tend to go with the idea that consciousness (the true "I am") is infinite, and that any division or reduction thereof is merely the construct of what we know as "ego" (a very limited, walled up "I am").

But I'm not really sure of anything. I just recall falling into the abyss once in a great while and getting the distinct impression of an infinite non-duality. Know what I mean, Vern?

That study sounds very interesting, though.

Threads like this make me long (a little bit) for the old "bhong hit" days of my youth. :)

Heh - me too Larry, me too. My personal feeling, although I have no way of proving this, is that we are going to find that "mind" and/or "consciousness is much larger than our brains or our body for that matter. There are some studies I have heard of that postulate that "memory" is not entirely stored in our brains or our bodies. Perhaps, something akin to Jungs collective unconscious.

I can 'feel' my consciousness....it is in my brain somewhere.....and if it was in your heart, and you were braindead, then you would still be conscious....yes? My heart is just a pump.

There's the school of thought that says all things eminate from the physical, biological, chemical reality that is quantifiable/observable. Then there is another point of view that believes there is another reality, the source of all spiritual energy, but which cannot be seen or measured, wherein consciousness resides.

In a lot of ways the "location" of consciousness is a metaphorical or even metaphysical proposal. Certainly brain death signals the end of conscious awareness as we presently understand it. So both Debbie and Larry have interesting ways to look at this question.

The Resurectionist postulates that just because a person is "brain dead" or in a deep coma doesn't mean that it may not be the end of consciousness. The person may never return to us or wake from their coma, but their consciousness exists somewhere.

Purgatory?

Purgatory is in southern Utah.

Knowing the American penchant for weird town names....I won't laugh!

I am pretty sure southern Utah is actually a hell realm.

Actually, Todd, it's like the line from Hotel California: "This could be Heaven, or this could be Hell."

Heh! :-)

I lived near Purgatory (it's where the county jail is located) for 2 years, and there were times I wasn't sure.

My grandma lived in Southern Utah (Greenville) and I found it quite quaint whenever I visited. So, I'm not sure if it qualifies as hell or not. Maybe it only is if you have to live there fulltime.

I guess when I said that I believe the heart is the seat of consciousness I didn't mean to be so literal. I do think that consciousness is a fluid thing, something that is connected to every kind of energy in the universe, and it uses the heart and the brain as vehicles to interact with this physical reality. I do believe in Jung's collective unconsciousness, and that the ego is something of an instinctual nature that comes with these mortal bodies. I think that whatever consciousness is, it is more like an energy that exists on a cellular level in this world, but certainly isn't tied to the physical body in the strict sense. I also wonder if this dimension is more of a playground or experiment for our consciousness, but that we forget this while we're here in these linear-grounded forms.

I find it curious, though, that there are stories out there (I'd say studies but I can't pinpoint any specifically) about transplant patients having memories that can be correlated with the donator's life.

Also, I've read some about the development of the pineal gland in an embryo, which takes about 49 days, and the hypothesis of DMT production which has been associated by some as the development of consciousness. I'd love to see some serious research into this to see what is found.

My primary consciousness definitely resides in my head. But I discovered that I have several other consciousnesses that reside in other parts of my body. If I pay attention I find that different parts of my anatomy have very different points of view about things. So... perhaps, consciousness... merely... resides.

Hmmmmm...merely, resides. Interesting! I like that

It just IS.

I am going to check on the pineal gland research. Ineresting....I wonder if consciounsess is both a biochemical process and a metaphysical process (I know how that sounds, but I am lacking a better way to describe it at the moment.)



Sherrie wrote: "My grandma lived in Southern Utah (Greenville) and I found it quite quaint whenever I visited. So, I'm not sure if it qualifies as hell or not. Maybe it only is if you have to live there fulltime.
..."

Southern Utah is just jam packed with natural beauty. In the 2 years we lived there, we made several good friends, too. The desert climate attracts me greatly. I'm still quite concerned about the rate of growth there, though, and the future of the water supply to sustain that growth.

I firmly believe everyone should, if at all possible, take their consciousness (wherever it resides) to Zion National Park, Bryce Canyon Nation Park, Cedar Breaks National Monument, and the the Escalante National Monument -- not to mention Grand Canyon, both North and South Rims.

Go! Go!

Hi Sherry:

Have you seen this? Richard Strassmen and his research into DMT and the Pneal Gland.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pDLGJJ...

It is interesting to note the references to the pineal gland in the mystical literature of the East...i.e. third eye, crown chakra etc. etc.

Yup, Todd, that stuff is very interesting for me as well.

If you want to take your consciousness travelling, why not visit NZ? Lots of natural, unspoilt and uncrowded beauty, and a spare room at mine to allow your consciousness some rest.

If we could just get that astral projection thing to work ....

I promise I am not pointing fingers and naming names here, but I've always wondered why when the religious nuts show up in a GoodReads thread they get jumped on, laughed at, and covered in hot air poured out of Bertrand Russel's teapot, but when the conversation turns to mystical mumbo-jumbo like the "location" of consciousness (an empirical postulate, presumably), magnetic fields (governed by five simple laws well-known since the nineteenth century) and "spiritual energy" (I wonder if that can be transformed into spiritual mass?), everyone nods knowingly and takes every quackery and voodooism at face value, as if something real were being said. Is it simple animosity towards establishment religion? Or is there really such a profound disconnect between people's perception of what religion states versus a personal metaphysics?

Todd, I've read a bit about Richard Strassmen but haven't seen the youtube vids. I'll check them out. Thanks.

Isaiah, a very astute observation and I can't refute this happenstance. However, I've never had anyone in the mystic-mumbo-jumbo field attempt to browbeat me into believing in their rules, and in my personal research I haven't found anything that contradicts my personal freedoms in my daily life. Now with religion, that's a whole 'nother story.

But, as far as what people choose to believe, I'm the first one to say that it's all equally as much crap as the next idea/dogma/belief. There quite possibly is nothing beyond this life after we die, as well as the possibility of a Big Bearded Guy in the Heavens ready to judge us before we get to play harp on an etheral cloud, or even that the world is governed by the spirit of a Great Mother who will welcome us all back into Her Blessed Bosom. I just like the mystic-mumbo-jumbo the best and I think quantum physics is pretty darn cool. For me, it's just much more fun to talk about.

I can see where you're coming from, Sherrie. And it sounds like, indeed, animosity towards establishment religion is part of your impetus. And I can hardly blame you for that. I guess I just wish people were more fluent at differentiating between religious ideas and religious institutions. If they were, I think the metaphysics of Abrahamic religions would get a lot more respect.

As someone formally trained in quantum mechanics, it is also a pet peeve of mine when the more troublesome aspects of the theory are commandeered in support of some outrageous mystical nonsense. I would never, of course, say that there is no metaphysic philosophy to be gleaned from physical theory -- quite the contrary. Rather, it's just that I'd prefer if the philosophizing was being done by those that understood the theory first-hand. But, again, I don't mean to recriminate because of my personal peeve. I usually stay out of that sort of thing because -- as you rightly point out, it's fun to talk about, and I'm not such a boor that I can't realize that.

Isaiah... since the entire universe is comprised of quantum mechanics, isn't it true that we all understand the theory first-hand? In as much as we are IN the quantum universe experientially.

No. That's the kind of notion makes me squint.

First of all, quantum effects are not directly observable. They require, in most cases, elaborate experiments which then provide evidence of certain implied rules. As far as daily sensory evidence is concerned, the universe is Newtonian.

But that's not even the point that I was making. What I was trying to get at was that people don't seem to realize that the interpretation of a physical theory is secondary to that theory itself. In other words, quantum mechanics is first and foremost a mathematical description of apparently causal phenomena. Any time you try to say what that mathematical framework "means," you are exerting interpretive gesture that must be justified by reason.

This extends not just to mystical mumbo-jumbo, but really any intelligible non-mathematical claim whatsoever. For example, one might say that quantum mechanics establishes that "light can behave both as a particle and a wave." But that's not quite true, is it? What quantum mechanics says, is "when the Hamiltonian or other observable operates on a wavefunction representing a photon, the result is an eigenvalue of the observable multiplied by that wavefunction."

In that case, of course, it's a fairly easy, and convincing step from the one to the other. But on the other hand, it's very hard to see how one follows from the other unless you are acquainted with the mathematical theory. And if you aren't acquainted with the theory, it is easy to misinterpret an idea like "the wavefunction collapses into a particle," which is more like shorthand for a mathematical statement than it is a statement about the operation of the physical universe.

Huh... interesting. Yes, I get what you are saying.

However, just because physicists learned about the quantum nature of the sub atomic universe via experimentation and mathematics, it doesn't change the essential information such as the finding that, while we experience matter as solid, it is actually made up of very little actual "matter", but is instead comprised mostly of energy fields. Or the finding that matter and energy are ultimately interchangeable, given the right circumstances (E = mc2). Or the finding by Schrodinger that you cannot observe something without effecting it. Or the finding that what we call "matter" seems to be actually a set of relationships.

These findings are mathematical, certainly. However, for some of us, they are also intuitive. The quantum nature of the universe doesn't belong only to the realm of mathematics. As the chaos theory and fractals show us, mathematical patterns can describe extreme complexities which seem at first random and chaotic. But those very same patterns shape our selves, our minds. We are part of that mathematical universe, at one with it. But mathematics is not the only way to understand it.

I like your explanation Char. Even in Newtonian science, we didn't need to really understand Gravity to experience it in our everyday lives. I do believe that our misunderstanding of how the universe works can affect our lives, in that, if we are continually unconscious in the way we affect the world around us then we have no control over what happens. But, if we are attempting to understand these things, from whatever perspective we are capable (and I believe the different persepctives are important as well), then we are able to participate in the workings and outcome of our world much more. This is how we can be more in tune with our consciousness, rather than being unconscious.

The area that fascinates me with quantum physics is the idea (and I will concede that this may only be a theory within the field) that our perception and our intent can affect these patterns, can directly affect the underlying energies of our world, even though we may not truly understand what it is we may be affecting or why. For me, and from many things I've been reading of late, this does touch on things of a spiritual nature. I simply see science as a way to explain many of the experiences that humans have had for centuries, call them mystical or psychological. It shouldn't negate these experiences, just explain them more fully. And it really won't surprise me if/when the quantum field of study continues to unveil more and more data that supports what many religious/spiritual thought has been describing for so long.

For my world, what it comes down to is that 'belief' affects the physical world. I don't think it matters what you believe in, be it mystical, physical, psychological, or dogmatic even, but that you firmly believe in something that allows you to move forward in your life. I know this probably sounds a bit disjointed from quantum physics, but I think it is all interrelated. Focus your intent and see what change you can affect with that intent. Learn to use your consciousness in any way you are able.

I am up way past my bedtime, but has anyone ever heard of the loss of two grams of weight upon death? I have no idea how this was tested (if it ever really was tested) But this thread made me think of it...

It may simply be the electrical charge of the body dissipating when life function ceases; at any rate I thought I would throw it out there to see what fish I pull in.

Does electricity have a weight? and is it plasma?

Disreguard my last I should just delete it... electricity is a force, not plasma... I was laying in bed trying to sleep but it was nagging the hell out of me keeping me awake.

So I went back in time via my metaphysical traversing mechanism and came to the conclusion that electricity is a force not mass... it has no weight, the particles charged by it do... I think I might be making this all up... I'm going to bed enough of this.

So the 2 grams is......?

http://www.snopes.com/religion/soulwe...

You're not making it up, Nick SSH. The snopes article describes the entire experiment and it's results. Unfortunately it seems the experiments were too small of a sampling frequency to have any definitive results. But apparently something happens at the moment of death that can be measured in loss of weight. But it appears inconsistent.

It's interesting but also a little like angels dancing on the head of a pin. I suppose for the purely empirically minded having some kind of measurable proof of the existence of the soul would be pretty important.

It's a good question though: Does electricity have mass? I would imagine it has some mass. Maybe Richard Feynman's writings on QED would have some insight into this.

after my much needed sleep I believe I was right the second time, electricity doesn't have mass, it is a force[charge:] so in itself it doesn't have mass.

The two grams thing struck an interest with me because well, everything must occupy something right? so if you have a soul/consciousness, when you die there should be a change. (if there is an after life, or some other demention that we slip into).

I am leaning toward the brain makes little sparks; we think/feel/memorize/prioritize and follow through with programed responses. To each and all their ideas seem to fit their "personality" but really it is just their life experiences have formed certain unique responses to certain situations.

I know a drab way of looking at it but it seems plausible to me. So I'll throw another fishing line out; what are your thoughts on genetic memory?

If that is the case, how come newborn babies can have such different personalities and responses? Do you think experiences inside the womb will have already shaped some of these?
I love the idea that the 2 grams might be 'soul'.....but I am in no hurry to find out where it goes!

Hmmm.... well, I found this, for what it's worth. I find the whole idea intriguing.

http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasci...

"Before considering whether something has weight, you must first know what
weight is. Weight is a force. Weight is how much gravitational force an
object feels. On the Earth, your weight is how hard the Earth pulls on you
by means of gravitational force.

You must also know what mass is. Mass is a measure of how much material an
object is made of. Any object far away from any planets or stars will have
mass but not weight. It is not possible to have weight without mass. If
something felt a force (such as gravity) but had zero mass, the object would
experience infinite acceleration.

Before continuing, consider something. Think of a real-life example of
electricity. Then ask yourself just what gravity would be pulling on. In
most cases, the answer turns out to be the electrically charged particles
that feel and exert the electric force. Quite often, electrons are the
particles involved. "Electricity" flowing through a wire is not actually
electricity. It is a set of electrons flowing through a wire, often called
electric current. Static electricity on a balloon or on a wall is not
electricity. It is too many or too few electrons, causing a build-up of
electric charge. When a set of electric charges are close enough to notice
each other, true electricity is the pushing or pulling between these
particles due to their electric charges. The particles have weight, not the
force between them."

Dr. Ken Mellendorf
Physics Instructor
Illinois Central College

super cool Sherrie. Thank you!

My pleasure, Miss Char. :D

I dunno debbie, that is why I threw it out there, I never really thought about it in any depth, so I was fishing for ideas thoughts and perspective about it.

Nick... I am a big fan of genetic memory. I actually think it's more plausible than reincarnation. It makes sense if only simply from the level of evolution. Every living thing has a code for certain things written into it's genes. I carry the mitochondria of my maternal line all the way back to the first woman. I've had the experience myself of cellular memory. So I think genetic memory makes perfect sense.

I have heard that Neanderthal man had tribal memories...is that the same? And how did you know it was cellular memory? Is it like deja vu (and does it explain it)? I really want to know what your experience was.....

It was not memory from someone else's life, it was memories from my early life that were released in acupuncture and acupressure. Believe me, it was not a terribly pleasant experience. I do NOT recommend it.

Aaaah...thanks. Distinction between cellular and genetic memories now duly noted!

I think genetic memory is plausible because through out history we see reoccurring thoughts springing up in different parts of the world at the same time...


A man see's an enemy; man picks up large blunt stick to pummel the threat. Why? he doesn't have an understanding of physics, he doesn't know that the sticks mass will increase the damage of his strike.[lame example I know but...:]

I think genetic memory is the culprit. Survival sticks in our brains; things related to survival and self preservation get imprinted into our genetic code so they are passed on to our offspring... So if person (a) lives on an island that has no predators then their gene line will not have the trait's related to predator evasion and counter attack. where as person (b) who lives on a large land mass with all sorts of predators. Their genes tell them to duck hide, be quiet. Grab that stick.

If genome (a) were to decide to build a boat and float to the home of genome (b) genome (a) would have to learn and learn fast to hide or arm it self. once this is known it is automatically imprinted and thus passed on to offspring; either by the newly imprinted genome (a) or from the parent of genome (b).


Again I have nothing to back this up, just brain storming.

very Darwinian, Servius.