Very nicely written article.

There are alternative ideas these days with respect to consciousness. There is a good book from Michael Talbot called “The Holographic Universe,” and another good book by the author Paul Brunton called “The Wisdom of the Overself.”

There are cross disciplinary breaches that arise on occasion, though, within the conventional models of our conventional thinking. For instance, from physics, it has been found that the information contained within a space-time construct can only be described by its surface area, and not its volume. A very surprising result that suggests that “things” don’t have volume, only surface area.

The mystics and sages throughout history have nearly all agreed that mankind lives within an illusion, something like a very convincing dream state.

What if what we are seeing “in the conventional real world” is an idealized representation, or a visual/sensory system of abstract labeling including that which we see as the image of our own brains?

There are some good Youtube talks given by a professor named Don Hoffman.

It seems to me that due to the unrelenting failure to unite quantum mechanics and general relativity that there is a problem with our conventional world model, even in the application of the scientific method. There are also many other issues in our modern physics that seem to doom the idea of space-time. In other words, if there is no physical model of the thing we are studying then what is it that we are studying?

It doesn’t mean that there is nothing to study. We consciously experience what has been called an “explicate” state when in fact that state arises from an “implicate” state. It is in the implicate state that a truer description of reality emerges, however, there may also be many layers of such abstraction.

So, when it comes to studying Neuroscience, are we studying something similar to a television image of the brain?

Something to think about…