QUALIA LXVI: The Quantum Axion Particle of Consciousness: An Actual Quantum Particle, or Something Else? From the QUFD website, at: http://go.to/QUF D
Site hosted by Angelfire.com: Build your free website today!

QUALIA LXVI: The Quantum Axion Particle of Consciousness: An Actual Quantum Particle, or Something Else?


Exploring QUFD Principles,
from the QUFD website,
at: http://go.to/QUFD

By Father Jerome


  1. Perhaps I am getting into something radical here, but I'm being told that this is something that I need to say, so here goes.

  2. I will admit that, throughout all of my ponderings and discourse so far, with respect to the quantum axion particle of consciousness, I have, more or less 'unconsciously', used the term 'particle' (and even 'wave'), as though I were, in reality, referring to a 'physical' element or discrete quantity, when the realization is finally arriving, that relative to the actual 'reality' of that which I have described, in the true sense of QUFD Quantum Physics, such cannot be. The very name, as well, is, granted, a 'relativity', pending further actual scientific 'discovery', as per:
    (quoted from The QUFD Formulation, at: http://www.angelfire.com/ca/sanmateoissues/Qufd2.html)
    This Formulation uses CONCEPTS (actually realities) that are immensely ancient, in explication of the realities described herein. Such ancient realities-concepts were partially obtained by this author from the OA/OWB's Hall of Records, with appropriate Authorization therefor from OA/OWB Sacred Authority. (See the listing in Father Jerome's DICTIONARY for "OA/OWB Sacred Authority".) However, in the process of incorporating such concept-realities into this Formulation, I have, by necessity, "re-interpreted" the pertinent terminology of those ancient concept-realities, the necessity being that, the ancient records expressed such concept-realities in the terms of those ancient days (over 46,000 years ago), in the ancient Christian language of those days (of Christ's First Incarnation upon the Earth, NOT his latest, His Fifth Incarnation, as Jesus Christ), which, if used today, would be totally non-understandable by the secular humanity of today. So, in eliminating those ancient Christian-language terms, I have substituted modern, up-to-date, equivalents of those ancient terms, which we can all understand, because such terms have a modern reference. As an example, in defining the basic, fundamental quantum unit of consciousness, instead of the ancient term, I have substituted the modern equivalent thereof, the quantum axion particle. If, subsequently, the quantum axion particle is shown to be something other than the ancient "particle" which I was describing (and substituting therefor), it shall be of no matter of consequence to merely redefine the basic unit of consciousness in another modern term as should be more apropos thereto such modern particle's relativity to that ancient particle. Thusly, regardless of the "name", the concept-reality, AND particle-function, is the same as that described herein.
  3. In other words, the name, or term, 'axion', is the modern-day term that I have applied to that which I was describing. However, as we all know, that 'term' itself came from the Researcher/Scientist (I don't remember his name!) who was attempting to describe an aspect of his own hypothetical 'theorization' of a quantum particle which has not as yet, to this day, been shown to actually exist. Incidentally, as we all further know, the story goes that the scientist needed a 'name' for his new quantum particle, and since he was about to take a break from his research in order to do his laundry, he quite aptly decided to name the new particle after his laundry soap, a box of Axion soap. And so we now have the 'axion' particle, which, however, has yet to be seen!

  4. That takes care of this Researcher's discussion regarding the term 'axion', leaving it what it might be in the future as well as what we have now, which I will not quibble about! Such, however, has not been the intent herein to discourse upon the term 'axion' but instead, to analyze the term 'particle', relative to that 'entity' which I have so thoroughly described throughout this QUFD Textbook.

  5. Let me analyze this a bit further here. According to the dictionary, a 'quantum particle' is:
    º noun: (physics) the smallest discrete quantity of some physical property that a system can possess (according to quantum theory)
    º noun: a discrete amount of something that is analogous to the quantum in quantum theory
  6. The problem here is that neither is what I have described!

  7. The first of these dictionary definitions describes a quantity of "...some physical property", which, as QUFD quite thoroughly details, is not the case! The quantum axion particle of Consciousness is an 'entity' of Incorporeality, NOT Corporeality! Therefore, it is NOT 'physical', as anything corporeal would be! In fact, Consciousness itself is not and cannot, be 'physical'. The only physicality about Consciousness and Incorporeality, are those condensates of Corporeality that are A RESULT OF Incorporeality, and come FROM the overall condensate of Incorporeality, but are NOT part of it!

  8. Additionally, as to our dictionary definitions above, we have the term (physics), again implying a question relating to a physical property, which is not the case! In fact, as to the very 'state' or nature of Physics, relative to QUFD, I will be addressing that matter later herein this monograph. For now, let me first cover the essential 'entities', the 'particle' and such!

  9. 'Particle', it seems, is not only implying the smallest possible discrete quantity of a physical 'entity', but also implying that it is a 'part thereof' such 'entity', neither of which is the case! As I have quite adequately described the quantum axion particle of Consciousness, it is an 'entity'... (Okay, 'entity' might even imply 'physicality', but I think we can assume that such term is ambiguous enough to go beyond physicality, and to truly describe something that is... something BEYOND physicality!)... that extends throughout the entire Cosmos, having qualities that more truly describe it as 'everywhere' and 'infinite', among other 'realities'!

  10. So, first of all, I believe that we cannot even consider it to be 'part of' any discrete physical 'entity'. But, on the other hand, we can say that it's actions, or properties, or 'dynamics', can become 'part of' such localized phenomena as any localized-and-boundaried condensate of incorporeality, might so entail. So, as a 'particle' (or not!), it can be 'part of' an incorporeal condensate.

  11. Next of all, getting back to the term itself, 'particle', rather than describing a portion of a physicality, is actually describing an 'action', or actor, or activity, or function, that can seemingly exist of its own accord, everywhere and anywhere! So, exactly WHAT would such a description define, as a term for our 'particle'? At this point, I don't know, so, for now, I will continue calling it a 'particle'! However, I am certainly open to input from the worldwide community as to what to call such an 'entity'. (This may very well also include other terms, as I shall be discussing here further!)

  12. Okay, another 'problem' here, as per the second dictionary term above, is the term 'quantum'. (Even though that very dictionary definition uses the wording "the quantum" in the second definition, when I went back and told the dictionary program to search for the definition of 'THE quantum' (the quantum), the program was unable to find such a definition!)

  13. Actually, I do believe that the term 'quantum' actually gets us into something else that is also a problem here... Mathematics! In Math, apparently, there are 'quantum' quantities, as well as other realities, such as 'infinities', that, in the mathematical, physical, corporeal 'world', are irrelevancies and impossibilities, or are nonsensical quantities, that do not, and should not, exist! But then again, as I have quite clearly stated elsewhere already, Mathematics and it 'cogitations', just does NOT apply to Incorporeality and Consciousness!

  14. First of all, there are lots of 'infinities' in Consciousness/Incorporeality, and therefore Mathematics, in not even attempting to 'realize' or mathematically-describe an 'infinity', certainly does leave something to be desired!

  15. Next of all, though, getting back to our quantum axion particle and the term 'quantum'... In reality, as the term 'quantum' is used in QUFD, as when it refers to the 'quantum realms', I do believe that everyone can see, in their mind's-eye, that what I am referring to, is something so gigantic, and yet invisible, that it does encompass the entire Cosmos, or at least parts thereof!

  16. Okay, so much for the quantum axion particle, which term I will yet continue to use, pending any reasonable agreement to 'validate' something better! But now I'd like to get back to another term that was brought up here earlier, and which I feel is also a 'problem', as to Consciousness and Incorporeality! That term is 'Physics'!

  17. Yes, I realize that we have the 'rudiments' here of the 'left-overs' from Classical Newtonian Physics and such, and even the modern use of the term 'Quantum Mechanics' is disingenuous and misleading. I have, myself, distinguished 'Quantum Mechanics' as those physicists and researchers who allow the conventions of Classical Newtonian Physics to impose upon their considerations of Quantum Physics, rendering such 'considerations' corrupt and non-valid. In doing so, by attribution therefore, I 'reserve' the term 'Quantum Physics' for those Researchers who are more amenable and knowledgeable with the intricacies of Incorporeality and Consciousness, as aspects of the quantum realms!

  18. But again, as we are discussing here, the very terms 'quantum' and 'physics' are themselves questionable, with relation to Consciousness and Incorporeality! Belying the term 'quantum' for now (which I will continue to use!), let me concentrate here on 'physics'!

  19. Certainly, QUFD, QUFD Physics, and the QUFD Textbook, have, primarily, a 'hell-of-a-lot-to-say' about Consciousness, Incorporeality and the Unknown! BUT, such is NOT, or has nothing, to do with anything Corporeal or 'physical' (except as indirect 'results' thereof such Incorporeality!) True, I have extensively analyzed such further 'consequences' of Incorporeality, as to the Real-World human, societal and worldly realities that are (and have been!) produced BY actions-of-consciousness! BUT, regarding our concern here, Consciousness is NOT 'physical', in no way, shape or form!

  20. So, again we are left with an ambiguity. I myself will continue to use the terms 'Physics' and 'Quantum Physics', but what the Reader hereof needs to realize it that there is an apparent need here, for a new term, or even a new field-of-scientific-study, that is not 'physical', but is NON-physical, and which can be described, defined and termed, as such! The description and definition, I have largely taken care of already. As to the 'terminology', along with the numbers of other 'terms' within such a new field... At this point, I leave such to others!

  21. Incidentally, as a last point here, with respect to terminology, I'd like to point out that the entire concept and 'Reality' of Consciousness and Incorporeality, as a ground-state Condensate of 'Reality', is based up the principles of Bose-Einstein Condensates, which, however, are known as 'Condensed-Matter' condensates! As applied to NON-matter, or Incorporeality, something new is, again, needed here!

Aum, Peace, Amen
Jerome



| QUFD Opening Page | Main QUFD Document | QUFD Subjects/Categories Page | Site Map |