Dear Dirk

Please excuse me if i seem not completely attuned to the subjects - i have been hovering around your work but have merely seen the 1 paper this morning.

As william james remarked - ''experience includes both particulars and relations between those particulars''. Thus apparently speaking for sense data's requirement to enact mutations the mind. For your good self affects consequences and scale invariance presumably, as forms manifest universal archetypes for minds to contemplate. Perhaps this state can arrive to human consciousness in all but name a tabla rasa representation relativistic to its perceived 'sameness'. From here minds change forms which perpetuate sameness in many ways. Although any single tiny difference simply unseen in fractal microcosmos shall potentially be every difference. Therefore sometimes we have to ask a definition of invariance if nature truly will be determined to ensure that each repetition of an archetype contains an iota of difference. As such are invariances from the point of view of any solitonic forms being paradoxical in infinite field terms?. Perhaps they need to be as the potential of interpretation among endless humans is required when it comes to the phenomenology of the mind. Humans may encounter a breakdown from subconscious archetype to unconscious stereotypes but with a vast probability that each human pathway to collective consciousness is likely to have manifold variety in terms of the sequences by which our neural pathways digest subconscious and unconscious phenomena before as groups we can recognise matter this fine experientially.

Structured fields need not be primed to create synchronicity, that would assume is that criticality is loaded to unleash itself at set points in holographic space time. Rather our minds readiness to embrace greater difficulties in conceptualisation surely might cause the criticality - 'synchronicity' could in some way be defined as the wiring in of our ever increasing implicit awareness to such an explicit structured field.

Of course, there is a short bridge from invariance to self similarity, which can be unbound from that similarity. If so we certainly can ask if this shall be the way by which 'the self' can be defined as you infer ( it appears to be evolutionary and of an emotional intelligence quality & so on ? ). It just seems that scale invariance concepts can interface in cognitive neuroscience more easily if we have the means to assume for instance that a fractal needs individual character or a critical point of differentiation. If true then in quantum terms this is surely a huge difference in similarity considering the juxtaposition of scale involved.

Ofc we'd not perceive it from a macrocosmic position and it is speculative as matters stand. But do infinite numbers of ( again say fractals ) - seem likely to be absolutely identical once they are no longer computational constructs?. When they are proposed as actual energies in a field is a reasonable question - though i digress and am aware the more poignant focus is soliton phenomena which scale invariance oriented forces may imprint upon minds here rather than than medium they might be invoked from.

Your model seems very like one i have worked on for many years where most essentially they both consider the nervous systems to integrated with the mind. Perhaps my model has self organised criticality where yours has an event horizon and its ZPE so on. They both appear to propose or infer the physical brain is not conscious - ( does yours ? ). That 'consciousness' itself is quantum thus the brain is merely a chemical sampling instrument advising on probabilities linked to explicit sense data. Id using a cross-over process to convert chemical results over to quanta, resultant solitons being processed in the subconscious. In this way a human has an identity in a field of the self - a naturally selected differentiation. In many ways then, it could be worth considering a tentative first step toward an axiom concerning scale invariance, forms, and phenomenology. As aforementioned, all seemingly identical forms containing a minute mathematical SOC. Perhaps such a breakdown point in this instance decays into solitons where it cause is the quantum minds growing understanding of subconscious symbolism as a building block of learning coherence. For consider, in order for minds to be receptive to the explicit thus instil the implicitly derived awareness, such process cannot reasonably remain subconscious and unconscious. The conscious mind itself is the place which nature designed these phenomena to avoid in the lucid frame of references. Here too is a sense that endless forms can pass by the unconscious and subconscious unchallenged by any breakdown into criticality by a conscious effort unless we exert determination which shall in turn agree with the theory of evolution. From there - just what mesoscopic level sampling is required before further criticality and quantum neurotransmission occurs is clearly open to much debate.

Is it impossible to miss an instalment of 'Infinity'?. In this sense it is almost as though while each sequence can only be unique in cosmic terms, nature finds ways to re-issue archetypes so abundantly that streams of self similar invariances ( as it were ) reasonably are perpetual. Though updated by the tiniest fraction possible perhaps, in fact holographic forms need to be competing for our attention endlessly in these concepts. Successful decays into Solitons might also be in competition when we consider paradigms like cognitive dissonance.

However this ostensibly in order to remark that such research in whatever specific form or model certainly has the potential you suggest imho

Regards

The concept of coordination of reflection and action, as well as network synchronicity for conscious states, aligns well with the Interactive Universe Theory (IU Theory). Here’s how I see it through the lens of IU Theory:Coordination of Reflection and ActionIn IU Theory, consciousness is viewed as the fundamental fabric of reality. This field processes and integrates information continuously, which allows for the coordination of reflection (awareness) and action (responses). The dynamic nature of this field ensures that conscious states are not just static phenomena but are continuously evolving and adapting based on interactions within this field.Network SynchronicityThe idea of network synchronicity is crucial for conscious states. IU Theory posits that everything in the universe is interconnected through the consciousness field. This interconnectedness ensures that information is synchronized across different scales, from the microscopic to the macroscopic. This scale-invariant nature of consciousness supports a universal information matrix, akin to what you described as the implicate order.Field-Receptive Resonant WorkspaceIU Theory suggests that the brain, while a crucial interface, is not the sole repository of consciousness. Instead, it interacts with the broader consciousness field. This resonates with the idea of a field-receptive resonant workspace, which is associated with, but not reducible to, the brain. This workspace allows for the integration of transpersonal conscious states, providing a framework for understanding phenomena that go beyond individual experiences.Deep Connection with the CosmosIU Theory emphasizes the deep connection between humanity and the cosmos. By seeing consciousness as the underlying fabric of reality, it highlights our intrinsic connection to the universe. This perspective underscores the importance of our actions and decisions, not just for individual well-being but for the future of our planet and the cosmos at large.Responsibility and Conscious EvolutionRecognizing this deep connection places a significant responsibility on humanity. Our conscious evolution and the choices we make are pivotal in shaping the future of our planet. By understanding and integrating these insights, we can align our actions with the broader consciousness field, promoting harmony and sustainability.I believe IU Theory provides a comprehensive framework that aligns with and expands on the concepts you've highlighted. It integrates physical phenomena with the metaphysical aspects of consciousness, offering a unified understanding of reality.

Thank you so much for your considerations that fully support our concept of an Acoustic quantum code of resonant coherence that seems to guide the fabric of reality in a scale invariant manner. Indeed a crucial aspect of decoherence is mirroring this pattern as the ying and ysng if creation mirtors

Have you any insight into the level of falsifiability concerning your concepts Dirk ? I feel the definition of falsifiability has changed along with the potentials of quantum computing. Such answers should be years away, but in a fashion that strikes no fear in the heart. The ability to patiently gather good data seems essential to these days when essentialist metaphysics are taking over objective / empirical science.