Father Jerome's COMMENTS,
on the state of modern secular brain/mind research.

"Attention, Intention, and Will in Quantum Physics", an online paper by Henry P. Stapp, of Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, which may be viewed at:
In this paper, Professor Stapp does admirably express his regrets concerning both the extent to which the Quantum community has progressed as well as those factors yet holding it back. He feels (and KNOWS, within himself, without necessarily saying so) that most of his colleagues are on the right track, but they just haven't got it yet (MY interpretation). He also belabors those, and that, which hinder the effort (such as the classical Newtonian physicists).


"The dominant contemporary approaches to the problem (of mind vs matter) attempt to resolve this conflict by clinging to the classical concepts, and trying to explain away our misleading intuition......it is necessary to use the more basic princples of quantum physics, which bring the observer into the dynamics, rather than to accept classical precepts that are profoundly incorrect precisely at the crucial point of the role of human consciousness in the dynamics of human brains. Adherence to the quantum principles yields a dynamical theory of the mind/brain/body system that is in close accord with our intuitive idea of what we are" Page 1
Admirable statement here. However, it suggests (as his further comments bear out) that he, like most of his colleagues, have not as yet encompassed the possibility that human consciousness might EXIST OUTSIDE OF, and beyond, the human brain. He, and his colleagues, seemingly, are yet attempting to describe consciousness as an integral component of brain function, rather than as an INTERFACE component, of something BEYOND the corporeality of that brain.

"(Newtonian physicists are attempting to)...discredit our misleading intuition by identifying it as a product of human confusion, rather than recognizing the physical effects of consciousness as a physical problem that needs to be answered in dynamical terms. That strategy of evasion is, to be sure, about the only course available within the strictures imposed by classical physical theory." Page 2
He does have it correct here. Newtonian mechanics IS avoiding reality!

"The presumptive essential correctness of the idea of the physical world foisted upon us by the assumptions of classical physical theory..." Page 3
Ibid (my previous comment)!

"Dennett speaks of the Spectre of Creeping Exculpation: recognition of the growing tendency of people to exonerate themselves by arguing that it is not "I" who is at fault, but some mechanical process within: 'My genes made me do it!'; or 'My high blood-sugar content made me do it!'" Page 3
Here we have verification, of the non-responsibility of the populace, due to their beliefs in classical physics, as a "factor" of the Luciferian Complex (Satan's influence upon us). See my comments in my Research Report, "An Evolutionary Maturity of the Human Mind".

"For powerful thinkers have, for three centuries, been attacking this problem (mind vs matter) from every angle within the bounds defined by the precepts of classical physical theory, and no consensus has emerged." Page 3
The limitation of classical physics: NO solution (to the mind/brain "problem").

"On the theoretical side, there is a growing group of physicists who believe almost all thinking on this issue (brain/mind) during the past few centuries to be logically unsound, because it is based implicitly on the precepts of classical physical theory, which are now known to be fundamentally incorrect." Page 3
Says it all! "fundamentally incorrect".

"It is now well known that the precepts of classical physical theory are fundamentally incorrect. Classical physical theory has been superceded by quantum theory." Page 4

(Wigner, 1961): "The laws of quantum mechanics cannot be formulated...without recourse to the concept of consciousness." Page 5

"According to the precepts of Idealism, our ideas, thoughts, sensations, feelings, and other experiential realities, are the only realities whose existence is certain, and they should be taken as basic." Page 5

(Einstein) "But the 'macroscopic' and the 'microscopic' are so inter-related that it appears impracticable to give up this program [of basing physics on the 'real'] in the 'microscopic' alone." Page 6
So don't!

"Orthodox quantum theory is pragmatic: it is a practical tool based on human knowings. It takes our experiences as basic, and judges theories on the basis of how well they work (for us) without trying to attribute any reality to the entities of the theory, beyond the reality (for us) that they acquire in their success in allowing us to find rational order in the structure of our past experiences, and to form sound expectations about the consequences of our possible future actions." Page 6-7
This statement expresses the limitations of orthodox quantum theory: it does NOT bring the past, the present and the future together, as a unified field of dynamic function, as QUFD does.

(Heisenberg-1958) "...we may say that the transition from the 'possible' to the 'actual' takes place as soon as the interaction of the object with the measuring device, and therefore with the rest of the world, has come into play; ..." Page 7
AS the unitary field(s) of QUFD do also so produce.

"von Neumann introduced the measuring instruments and the body/brains of the community of human observers into the quantum state, which is quantum theory's only representation of 'physical reality'" Page 7
i.e., the ONLY "physical reality" (in quantum theory) IS the observer, and the observer MAY BE as subjective/objective as such may be.

"the underlying commitment here is to the basic quantum principle that information is the currency of reality, not matter: the universe is an informational structure, not a substantive one." Page 8
i.e., matter (physicality) is NOT the stuff of which reality is made!

(Tittel-1998) "...even in the face of knowledge that the classical idea of matter is now known by scientists to be profoundly and fundamentally mistaken, and mistaken not only on the microscopic scale, but on the scale of meters and kilometers as well..." Page 8
i.e., the micro- and the macro- are ONE!

Next Page

DICTIONARIES, on this Website! Choose from the following:




