The Holographic Principle Theory of
Mind
MARK GERMINE
Psychoscience, Mount
Shasta,
CA U.S.A.
Email: mgermine@hotmail.com
Man only progresses
by slowly
elaborating
from age to age the
essence and
the totality
of a universe
deposited within
him.
Pierre Teihard de
Chardin
(1955/1961, p. 180)
The Holographic
Principle holds the
information in any region of space and time exists on the surface of
that
region. Layers of the holographic,
universal ÒnowÓ go from the inception of the universe to the present.
KEYWORDS: Holographic
Principle,
consciousness, evolution, time, mind, brain, memory, microgenesis,
quantum
physics, conceptual synthesis.
INTRODUCTION
The
Holographic
Principle is an analogy to the hologram, in which the form of an object
is
fully enfolded in every point on a two dimensional surface.
The
Raphael Bousso (2000) later elaborated on the Holographic Principle as a universal law that holds for all surfaces, open or closed, regardless of location or shape, and demonstrated the universal Holographic Principle with a wide variety of examples from theoretical physics (Bousso, 2002). Later, Mongan (2007) linked the Holographic Principle to the quantum wave function, demonstrating that local interactions between quanta of mass may have instantaneous and non-local effects effect on the wave function throughout the universe. Non-locality is the quantum phenomenon of instantaneous action at a distance in spacetime. The non-local interaction of quantum fields with the distant universal holographic boundary has been explain in terms of ÒWilson loopsÓ and also in terms of a higher dimensional space (Hubeny, Susskind, and Toumbas, 2000).
Holographic surfaces can be unfolded into sheets, one on top of another, with each sheet or surface being a higher dimension of information. New dimensions of information emerge from the lower-order surfaces as they are unfold on to the higher order surfaces, which carry information of their own respective areas. The higher dimensions manifest information from the lower dimensions that was not there to start with. Higher and higher orders of the quantum wave function exist on the surfaces of world within worlds. Information is extracted from the wave function as we move higher and higher in the hierarchy of Òworlds,Ó until we reach the highest dimension of information, the boundary of the Universe, which is in constant and instantaneous interaction with the ÒworldsÓ beneath it.
As stated by Antonio Dobado (2005) regarding information in the Universal Entropy Bound:
The
UEB refers to
information storage capacity. Usually
this issue is contemplated under the point of view of smaller physical
systems
capable to store one single bit of information like molecules, atoms,
photon
polarization etc. The point of
view of UEB is completely different since it offers a more holistic
kind of
bound which applies to the whole memory system.
Our perception creates a duality of subject and object, of the subjective and the objective. We think of information as objective, and experience as subjective. In fact, no such dualities exist. Information and experience are one and the same. Every particle in the universe is alive with experience. Every organism is alive with experience. The Universe is alive with experience. On the universal level, experience is one. We are one with this universal experience.
Information
does
not pass into extinction with the passage of time.
Time is a series of universal boundaries beginning with the
inception of our universe. We
know, according to relativity that, at the speed of light, time stands
still. So, for light, and for the
Universal
Holographic boundary expanded outward at the speed of light, time is
standing
still. Light is essentially
timeless. It is eternal.
On the boundary of our universe, there is only now. The universe, is, in fact, continually being recreated, continuously revisiting and repeating its own history. It is always being now. From eternity to eternity, forever and ever, from now-past to now-future, it is always being now. This is the eternal now. Everything and everybody is eternal on the highest dimension of the universal pulse.
And
yet time
flows. It flows in the lower
dimensions, tied to the bulk, tied to matter, tied to the continuous
stutter of
systems, following the arrow of the concatenation of information.
Our
now is the
outer surface in time of a series of nows. This
series of nows is
time. As this outer surface moves ever further outward, things appear
to be
created, things appear to be destroyed.
The body dies and decays. This
all is an illusion of our perception.
When the curtain is lifted, we pass into eternity, which is our
home. Eternity is here, right
here, all around us, spread like a blanket that covers the Earth.
We stand, as it were, on the outermost blanket of the pulse of our planet. With every pulse is the creative advance. With every pulse there is a higher dimension of knowing. The evolution of life is fossilized, or so it would appear, in the strata beneath our feet. And yet, if we were to remove these strata, we would have no place to stand. We would fall into the void, into the abyss of time, disconnected from are own ground of being.
.
QUANTUM PHYSICS AND
THE
HOLOGRAPHIC PRINCIPLE
Quantum physicist Henry Stapp (1997) has argued persuasively that classical physics cannot accommodate the phenomenon of consciousness, because it deals with independent entities that are localized in spacetime. In classical physics, one can only conceive of disjointed physical events in various places in the brain, with no experiential unity. Our conscious experience demands a quantum theory of the mind, which allows for instantaneous interaction between the various elements of the brain. The Holographic Principle is the information theory of such quantum fields. Let us briefly discuss the nature of quantum theory and its connection with the Holographic Principle.
Light, as we know, seems to have a particle and wave nature. The theory of the particle nature of light was first published, posthumously, by Pierre Gassendi in 1660. Around the same time, in the 1660Õs, Robert Hooke proposed that light had a wave nature, and this was supported by the phenomenon of diffraction of light, which we will discuss shortly. In 1675, Sir Isaac Newton published his first treatise on light, in which he reasoned that, since light moves in a straight line, and does not seem to bend around objects as waves do, that it is composed of particles, which he called corpuscles. Due to NewtonÕs fame, the theory of the particle nature of light held sway through the 18th century.
What the corpuscular theory of light did not explain was the phenomenon of light diffraction. Two waves originating at different sources interfere with one another. The waves combine to form a complex pattern, whereby the peaks and the troughs of the waves add up, producing a diffraction pattern. In 1801, Thomas Young conducted his famous double slit experiment, which demonstrated the wave nature of light. He found that coherent light, when passed through two separate slits, created a diffraction pattern of light and dark stripes. Where peaks or troughs of the waves coincide, they interfere constructively to form the light stripes, while that dark stripes form where the peaks or troughs of the waves do not coincide and interfere destructively. Later, it was discovered that, if a very weak light source is used, individual photons can be delivered through the slits. When recorded on a photographic plate, these individual photons produce individual spots. When all these individual spots are added up, they form the pattern of light and dark stripes. It was concluded that each photon, in fact, passes through both slits, and thus interferes with itself, acting as if it were a wave and a particle at the same time. Thus the wave/particle duality of light was established.
Later,
with the
advent of quantum theory in the early 20th century, this
wave/particle duality was explained by the theory of the quantum wave
function. According to this
theory, the photon does not travel through any one path, but is a wave
function
of possible or virtual paths. The
sum of the virtual particle paths of the photon then undergoes
diffraction when
passed through the double slits.
The fact that we see only one spot, rather then a diffraction
pattern,
indicates that the wave function has Òcollapsed.Ó That
is to say, the wave function of all possible paths
collapses into a single particle when observed. Thus,
it would seem, we have an observer-created
reality. The photon is a wave
function until it is observed, then it becomes a particle, leaving a
spot on
the plate, which will be in the exact same place for all
But
does the wave
function of possible particle paths really
How
do we
reconcile these conflicting findings, whereby, on the one hand, we
observe the
collapsed wave function, or spot, and on the other the un-collapsed
wave function,
the diffraction pattern? Afshar
and others (Laszlo, 2004) imply that the wave function is the real
nature of
the photon, and that the collapsed wave function is a mere appearance.
The
principle of
collapse of the wave function has now been extended to the universal
level,
where the wave function is the wave function of the Universe, collapsed
only in
the process of observation. The
alternative is the theory of parallel universes, or the multiverse,
where all
of the wave functions of the multiple possible universe really exist.
What
if, instead
of there being a single universe, there are actually multiple, parallel
universes,
but only a single collective
Mind, the
Universal Mind, which creates our
The One Mind Model was tested by recording the brain waves of the observer of random stimuli through a series of observations in two conditions. Without the knowledge of the observer being recorded, another individual observes the stimuli randomly. What was predicated, according to the One Mind Model, was that the prior observation of the stimuli by one observer would collapse the wave function for the second observer, and that this would produce a different brain wave pattern. When the brain wave patterns were summed over a large number of observations, they were found to be different at a chance level of about 100,000 to one (Germine, 2004). Again, the results of this experiment are enticing, although not absolutely conclusive.
Applying
the Holographic
Principle, information regarding the location of the particle, or the
status of
the random stimulus, emerges through a series of higher order
holographic boundaries,
until the information regarding the stimulus or location of the
particle is
fully known. So, perhaps, the wave
function on a lower level or dimension of observation is observed
as a particle at a higher level.
The
lower domain
of experience is what we do not directly observe, the quantum realm,
while the
higher level is what we ordinarily observe, the classical realm.
David BohmÕs theory of the implicate and explicate orders involves a holographic
principle that is fully
consistent
with the Holographic Principle discussed here (Bohm 1980; 1986; Bohm
and Hiley,
1993). According to Bohm, there is
an implicate order that represents the universal, holographic subtext
of
reality, and which unfolds in every moment to produce the explicate
order that
we all observe. Thomas Germinario
(2004) has equated the implicate order with the unconscious process,
and the
explicate order with conscious process.
He emphasizes the nature of dreams within the implicate order,
and the
importance of the dream work for maintaining a healthy mind through
integration
of the implicate order and our daily lives. Allan
Combs and Mark Holland (1990) connected the implicate
order or holomovement (Bohm, 1980) with Carl JungÕs theory of
synchronicity (Jung
and Pauli, 1955), with the implicate order providing a holographic
medium
through which apparently disconnected individuals become connected.
Applying the Holographic Principle theory of mind, subjects may be connected synchronously in the manner of two individuals conversing through cellular phones, where the radio signals are transmitted through a distant satellite. The difference here is that the radio signals travel at the speed of light, and thus the there is some miniscule time lapse between the sending and receiving ends. The Holographic Principle implies a much more distant and instantaneous communication pathway, with the analogue of the satellite being the holographic boundary of the Universe, as well as a much richer communication, potentially involving a transmission of thoughts and feelings.
Our ego-consciousness seems to mask the universal relatedness implied by the Holographic Principle, and it is perhaps only through transcendence of the ego-consciousness that the higher orders of experience can become conscious. In the phenomenon of synchronicity, there seems to be a meaningful connection between individuals that breaks through the barrier of ego-consciousness. Such a connection is reported by many individuals in the course of dreams, when the ego-consciousness has been suspended, at times informing the dreamer of something that has happened in the life of a meaningfully-connected individual.
MIND, BRAIN, AND THE
HOLOGRAPHIC
PRINCIPLE
The brain is the center of our conscious experience. This does not imply that consciousness does not exist outside of or beyond the brain. Indeed, it is our hypothesis that consciousness is the inevitable product of the higher orders of experience that have evolved in the progressive universal unfolding of a hierarchy of experience, according to the Holographic Principle. As the boundary of the Universe, and the boundaries of all systems, expand outward, higher and higher orders of information, and therefore experience, unfold in a recursive manner.
The
brain is most
clearly associated with human consciousness, so much so, that if brain
function
is permanently lost, we no longer consider humans to be alive.
The
Holographic Principle, as conceived in current physics, applies to
fields, and perhaps,
even to more elementary entities, called strings and branes.
The
surface area
of dendrites is directly correlated with the efficacy of synaptic
integration,
and we may consider this a function of the mere complexity of
connections
involved (Shepherd, ed., 1990). However,
we must ask ourselves how this complexity is translated to experience
and
consciousness, to the unity of perception, and to the binding of
experience of
separate brain structures into an integral and unified whole.
A wealth of data supports the notion that the dendritic arborizations are the primary structures that support perception (Pribram, 1991). The neural wave form characterizes the dynamics of the dendritic network, and this wave form can be described by an equation that is fundamentally the same as the equation describing the quantum wave form (Pribram, 1991), in accordance with the quantum field integration of information according to the Holographic Principle. Complex mathematical analyses of electrical activity of the brain in space and time indicate that it is holonomic or holographic, forming what is called the holoscape of the brain, which appears to give rise to perception through ensembles of receptive fields (Pribram, 1991). The surface area and holographic nature of electrical potentials of the dendritic networks supports the idea that the dendritic surfaces themselves are intrinsic to experience at the level of neuronal cell ensembles. This is consistent with the Holographic Principle. If we do not invoke the Holographic Principle in this context, with its fundamental non-local basis, then we have to question who it is that is observing these potentials, and how it is that they are translated into information that constitute the unity of experience.
Decreased dendritic surface area is seen in humans with AlzheimerÕs Disease (AD) and in animal models of AD (Moolman and others, 2004). This is consistent with dendrite area-dependent functioning of memory and cognition, in keeping with the Holographic Principle. However, many other neural changes have also been observed in AD, including dysfunction of the microtubules.
The
disturbance of
memory and cognition in AD is often accompanied by observations by
friendÕs and
family that the person or self has been lost, which can be particularly
distressing to loved ones. This
apparent loss of self is reminiscent of the Òit from bitÓ principle of
the
renowned physicist John Archibald Wheeler (1998). It
is likely that there is a recursive process involving both
Òit from bitÓ and Òbit from it.Ó
Only the latter principle seems to be endorsed by current
mainstream
neuroscience, and only in materialistic terms. The
abstraction of an ÒitÓ being constituted of immaterial
information is not considered, in keeping with the vacuous materialism
prevalent in science today. This
neglect or oversight of WheelerÕs principle creates a neuroscientific
view of
information that is unphysical, and therefore not scientific at all.
As
a physician, it
has been my own intuitive experience that the person remains present
even in
cases of extreme dementia, and that the person often seems somehow
disembodied
in cases of brain death or deep coma, looking down from above.
Brain
changes in a
variety of mammals and other animals have been so predictable that we
can infer
changes in the evolution of our animal ancestors based on a combination
of
fossil evidence and evidence from the brains of extant animals
(Streider,
2005). Brain volume has grown
exponentially, in mammalian evolution and in the evolution of other
animal
classes, across all major brain regions (Streider, 2005).
The phenomenon of exponential brain
volume growth bringing about a relative increase in volume of initially
larger
brain regions can be explained by simple mathematics. If we take a
volume of
two cubic centimeters to the third power, we get eight cubic
centimeters. If we take an area of four
cubic
centimeters to the third power, we get 64 cubic centimeters.
In accordance with the Holographic Principle of Mind, surface areas of lower order structures, such as neuronal organelles and membranes, develop, in the course of evolution, at optimal ratios to the surface area of higher order structure. These optimal ratios should be conserved. This leads to the conservation of surface in brain areas as the volume of these areas increase in evolution.
Volume for regular or smooth-surfaced regions of space increases with spatial dimensions by a power of three, and area increases by a power of two. This has implications for the storage and processing of information in the Holographic Model.
As stated by Bekenstein
(2003a): ÒHas
it not been obvious for generations that, other things being equal,
information
capacity scales with volume of the information registering milieu?
If
we look across
mammalian species, the surface area of the brain increases essentially
by the
same power as volume (Butler and Hodos, 2005; Striedter, 2005),
consistent with
the Holographic Principle and the Bekenstein bound on information
limits. This phenomenon is largely the
result
of the progressive convolution of the cerebral cortex, increasing the
area of
the brain, and, according to the Holographic Principle, increasing the
brainÕs integrated
information storage and processing capacity. It
has been traditionally thought that the folding of the
cerebral cortex into convolutions has occurred in order that it might
ÒfitÓ
within the cranium. It would seem
more likely that the cranium should ÒfitÓ around the brain, which is
why the
cranial sutures between the bones of the skull remain open to allow the
brain
to grow until it fully developed at the beginning of adulthood.
There is an increase in the number of neural brain centers, or modules, with increasing brain size in the course of evolution, which is most evident in mammals (Strieder, 2005; Northcutt, 2002). Primates, for example, have five times the number of cortical centers than rodents. In every case, the increase is most striking in the roof of the telencephalon, the uppermost and evolutionary most recently portion of the brain, which includes the cerebral cortex (Northcutt, 2002), and which has grown in volume at a greater proportion than underlying structures. An increase in number of neural centers, as opposed to the size of neural centers, means that the relative area to volume ratio of such centers is conserved in evolution, consistent with the Holographic Principle. Increase in the volume of neural centers is associated with an increase in connectivity (Strieder, 2005), and in this sense, based on purely connectionist models of brain function (Bechtel and Abrahamen,1991; Shepherd, 1990), an increase in volume relative to area would seem to be favorable. Decreased connection density in smaller volumes of brain tissues forces neural centers to become more independent (Strieder, 2005), which, again, would seem to be unfavorable in the context of connectionist models.
The
evolution of
the cerebral cortex, as well as many other brain regions, has been
associated
with an increase in lamination or layering, which is proportional to
the size
of the brain region (Strieder, 2005).
These layers of brain tissue are potential holographic surfaces.
Across
all of
these examples of the relationship of surface area to volume in the
substance
of the brain, it would seem that there is an optimal ratio of surface
area to
volume. Within each neural center
or region, there are a vast number of lower order surfaces.
Our
challenge of
the neuron doctrine does not relate to the fundamental function of
neurons in
the brain, but rather holds that, according to the Holographic
Principle,
neurons are not absolutely autonomous units, but that surface areas
within the
neuron are integrated at higher levels in an interdependent manner.
Information processing in computers, because of these limitations, does not reach the level of experience that we could attribute even to the single celled organism, and will not reach the level of experience associated with consciousness in the foreseeable future, even as we develop vast networks of computers such is the global internet. The development of such experience in computers is analogous to saying that a book is aware of the words and meanings contained within it. We say that this information is Òin the book,Ó and this sort of concrete interpretation of information as equivalent to the representations of information is also applied, in most widely-accepted models, to the brain. The book is necessary but not sufficient to elicit the information in its pages Ð a reader is required to do so, and the reader can remember the information long after the book is gone. In a similar way, the representations of information in the brain are necessary but not sufficient to elicit that information, and this information does not go into extinction with the extinction of its representations.
MICROGENESIS AND THE
HOLOGRAPHIC
PRINCIPLE
The most complete theory of mind that comports with the Holographic Principle of Mind, as developed here, is the microgenetic theory of neurologist Jason Brown. Brown (2005) presents an evolutionary theory of values, morals, and ethics, building on the microgenetic theory and process theory of his earlier works (1988, 1991, 1996, 1998, 2000). BrownÕs work has been a progression that began with the study of brain processes in neurological subjects with brain injuries or lesions. In his earlier work (Brown, 1988; 1991) he described the process of microgenesis as a process of elaboration of mental contents in an evolutionary and developmental hierarchy of brain structures within the process of the genesis of the mental state, and related the hierarchy of the genesis of the mental state to disturbances of language comprehension or expression (aphasia), of knowledge (agnosia), and or purposeful movement (apraxia). The fundamental neurology of these disturbances had been described in BrownÕs previous work (1972, 1988), and in the seminal work of the Russian neurologist and neuropsychologist, Alexander Luria (1966).
Brown (1988, 1991, 1996, 1998) created a process theory of mind on the basis of his neurological observations, and went on from his neurological work to incorporate process theory in philosophy, as developed principally by Henri Bergson (1911/1998). and Alfred North Whitehead (1925/1953, 1929/1978). Bergson had pioneered the concept of an irreducible duration of experience. This concept was elaborated by Whitehead, in keeping with discontinuities of particles, as Òactual entitiesÓ of a rudimentary sort, as they make Òquantum leapsÓ along their trajectories, halting or persisting at a given location for a short period of time or duration before leaping to the next.
Whitehead employed these Òquantum leapsÓ to the process by which experience arises in Òactual entitiesÓ at the most fundamental level of actuality, through the epochal or halting duration of a discontinuous process (Whitehead, 1925/1953, 1929/1978). This halting allows actual entities to participate in a process of internal relations, relations on the ÒinsideÓ of things. According the Holographic Principle, this ÒinsideÓ is in the holographic surface of the relevant region of spacetime of the actual entity, and within other surfaces that are non-locally connected with that surface. The holographic surface is thus the locus of non-local information and experience, in our interpretations of WhiteheadÕs metaphysics.
Internal
relations
occur through feeling, or Òprehension,Ó which is nothing more than the
subjective quality of non-local experience. The internal relations of
the
becoming entity occur in a seriality of prior becomings of the actual
entity, with
the entity inheriting all of its causal past as well as its relevant
feelings
or prehensions from prior ÒoccasionsÓ or quanta of experience.
The ÒingressionÓ of eternal objects is fundamental to each duration of becoming of the entity, and, on this basis, Whitehead formulated the notion of an eternal heaven in constant intercourse all of its creation. There are clear parallels between WhiteheadÕs cosmology and the cosmology introduced here according to the Holographic Principle, in that the ÒheavenÓ may be regarded as the holographic boundary, in constant intercourse with the relevant volume of spacetime.
This interconnection of feelings or prehensions, according to their relevance, produces intensities and contrasts which give rise to the creative advance, which, for Whitehead (1929/1978) is the process which impels the movement from the physical to the mental pole of process. With each halting, internally-timeless duration there is a concrescence or integration of these feelings, which, when complete, constitutes a new actual entity or actual occasion (they are the same thing) at a new locus in spacetime. This movement to a new locus, or transition, is, fundamentally, the quantum leap.
The
reason for becoming,
according to Whitehead, is always the actual entity itself.
In his independent formulation of the microgenesis of the mental state, Jason Brown discovered a process theory of mind that had many similarities to Whiteheadean process. He took the concepts of duration and discontinuities of process and applied them to the duration of the mental state as it recapitulates the contents of prior mental states. Through the introduction of novelty, and through the process of microgenesis during the progression of mental states, the Self gives rise to a percept of Self, the ego, in the object world, at the termination of the microgenetic process. This termination is the conscious instant, or instantiation of the microgenetic process. It is all that we consciously see. We see the ego, not the Self, and thus mistake the ego for self, replacing Self with selfhood. The process itself is obscured from our consciousness, but can be inferred from those neurological deficit syndromes, which expose lower ÒlayersÓ in the becoming. This parallels the ÒlayersÓ of the nested hierarchy of holographic surfaces in the brain itself.
BrownÕs
theory of
microgenesis involves a progression in the genesis of the mental state
in a
developmental sequence that recapitulates the organismÕs evolutionary
development (phylogeny), embryologic development (ontogeny), and
history of
personal and social experience and development, in a movement in an
upward
direction through structures of increasing phylogenetic and ontogenic
recency
(Brown, 1988, 1991, 1996, 1998, 2005).
He developed a view that considered the evolution of mental
states to be
a continuum from depth to surface, with leaps or saltation between
mental
states at intervals that are temporally irreducible units of the
duration of
microgenetic process (Brown, 1996, 1998).
The process of neoteny, through which earlier features of
development
and evolution are brought to the present, was described (Brown, 1996)
as a
change in the development of some aspect of the mental state, which is
attenuated at some stage of elaboration.
In neurological and psychiatric deficit syndromes, this
attenuation
corresponds with the locus of a lesion or functional deficiency.
The
intellectual
pedigree of the theory of microgenesis dates back to the principle of
superposition of Sir Charles Lyell, according to which younger strata
lie on
top of older strata. Lyell, a
geologist, was to have great influence on evolutionary theorists,
including
Darwin and Wallace. The principle of
superposition was taken up by Herbert Spencer, a scholar of many
fields, who
was a contemporary of Charles Darwin, and who had developed an
evolutionary
theory that perhaps rivaled DarwinÕs in popularity during the late
1800Õs and
early 1900Õs. An important element
of SpencerÕs theory was his observation of the brain, which he
fashioned to be
layered, with the newer layers added on to older layer during the
course of
evolution. Looking at the deeper
layers was, for Spencer, like peeling away the layers of an onion.
SpencerÕs idea was taken up by the renowned British neurologist Hughlings Jackson (Kennard and Swash eds., 1989), who developed the notion of hierarchies of brain process and the concept of neurological deficit syndromes as disturbances in the hierarchical structure and function of the brain. The concepts of microgeny and microgenesis, derived from hierarchies of brain function, were later developed by Arieti (1962) and Werner (1956). Later, the concept of a hierarchy of adaptive ego mechanisms, including lower order defenses such as denial and reaction formation, and higher order defenses such as altruism, was developed by Vaillant (1971), with the more mature defense mechanisms bearing on higher order values.
The
process theory
of the evolution of the brain is extraordinarily important to BrownÕs
process theory
of mind. We can place these
theories in perspective with the process theory of Whitehead, into
which the
theory of Brown partially merged (Brown, 1996; 1998; 2005).
The physical nature of the brain state, including the notion of binding of the mental state into a coherent whole, is also critical to BrownÕs theory of microgenesis. Recent evidence indicates that the brain is a chaotic or dynamical system (Freeman, 1987; Combs, 2004; Abraham, 2004). The self-organization of dynamical systems, which include all living organisms as well as the brain, has been described in detail by Ilya Prigogine (1980), who won the Nobel Prize in chemistry in 1977 for his work on dynamical systems. Prigogine defines an Òinternal timeÓ or duration of the states of dynamical systems. Physical time, he states, is secondary, and internal time is primary (Prigogine, 1986). The dynamical interval of internal time, or duration, is governed by the baker transformation (Prigogine, 1980), which can be envisioned as the time it takes the baker to knead or fold two different colors of dough successively, until it seems to be uniform in color.
The
brain, as a
dynamical system, thus ÒdepositsÓ time in the sense of Brown (1996).
The
work of Jason Brown in process neurology and psychology stands in sharp
contrast to the prevailing scientific and philosophical nihilism in
these
fields regarding the self, free will, and the process of experience.
The
process of microgenesis, as it applies to brain evolution, can be seen
in
purely classical way, related to the recapitulation theory of
vertebrate brain
evolution (Aboitiz, Montiel, and Lopez, 2002), which implies that
Òsensory
projection sites and sites and processing circuits have been conserved
[recapitulated] in reptiles and mammalsÓ in the course of evolution.
Microgenesis
is readily related to the Holographic Principle of Mind, whereby the
past
remains actual, and, in the course of each mental state or mental
process,
there is a literal recapitulation of the organisms entire past.
MEMORY AND THE
HOLOGRAPHIC
PRINCIPLE
In
science, there
has been the tendency to enshrine empiricism as the only true
epistemology or
way of knowing. To know directly,
beyond or in transcendence of the external senses, has been regarded in
modern
times as a myth. This has created
a scientific theory of mind and brain which is vastly underdetermined.
PlatoÕs
view, as
expressed in the Socratic dialogue of the Meno
In
his treatment
of the innate image, mythologist and scholar Joseph Campbell
(1969/1976)
remarks: ÒThe recognizing and responding subject isÉsome sort of trans-
or
super-individual, inhabiting and moving the living creature.Ó