My work is focused on the 'community-constituent-codynamics' of exceptional teams and dysfunctional teams, and utilizes the basic principles of relativity and quantum duality to model what is going on. This involves the original work on relativity and geometries of space by Henri Poincaré that was more comprehensive than the relativity of Einstein. While Einstein captured the spirit of the public in the 1915-onwards era, Poincaré died in 1912 and was less well known by the educated public yet he not only came up with relativity before Einstein, his epistemological framing was more comprehensive than Einstein’s. Had science picked up on Henri Poincaré's relativity, relativity would not have remained an esoteric scientific discipline confined to close-to-speed-of-light phenomena etc., but instead, we would be looking at the radical manner in which the relativistic view alters our perception of the world around us, and in particular puts the 'invisible' and 'imaginary' into the primacy over the material and visible. Of course, when one makes such a proposition, it isolates one from one's 'brothers in science' who prefer to deal in the tangible and explicit of visual space.
Nevertheless, the unavoidable implication of the principle that motion is relative means that it is not legitimate to portray material agents in the terms that their behaviours are 'independent'. Instead, the movements of the material constituents of space are INTERdependent via the mediation of the dynamical geometry of space that emerges from the simultaneous interference of their/our movements. at the level of our sensory perception, this equates to 'possibility' or 'opportunity' and it is an invisible and continuously transforming thing but while we cannot see it (i.e. while it is not part of the visual space scene), we can 'feel it' and it influences our assertive behaviours INDUCTIVELY (i.e. it is part of the acoustic space scene, as Marshall McLuhan has termed it). the implication that we have a 'duality' of 'self', the shallower view of self forming from our visible assertive behaviours and material actions and the deeper view of self emerging from how our presence induces transformation in the enveloping dynamical geometry of possibility space. Dennis Gabor's information theory with its real and imaginary components provides a way to comprehend these shallower and deeper views of what is going on since the imaginary component is given by the auto-convolution of the real signal or the 'ghosting response' that reflects back from the transmitting agent from the enveloping diversity of transmitting/receiving transponder agents. this duality of 'self' is captured in the ancient Egyptian notion of the 'ka'; so, once we open the door to relativity, science and mysticism begin to come into meaningful confluence, but of course, many scientists are frightened by this because the notion of determinism and control disappears when we do open the door.
Professor Enrico Giannetto (university of Pavia, member of the commission for the history of physics & astronomy) comments on the more general implications of relativity of Henri Poincaré in 'the rise of relativity';
"Since at least 1953, when Edmund Whittaker published the second volume of A History of the Theories of Ćther and Electricity, containing a chapter entitled The Relativity Theory of Poincaré and Lorentz, the indeed older controversy on the authorship of special relativity was opened again to a wide and long debate. . . . I would like to show what is the importance to recognize the Poincaré's priority on Einstein, pointing out that it is not only a legitimate question of priority. Very briefly I can anticipate what will emerge in the text: this recognition is needed to understand the new rules of enunciate formation of special relativity as a new theoretical practice, and so the meaning of the new concepts, the historical reasons of its origin, and indeed its theoretical value and its epistemological implications which are not the same Einstein-Minkowski's realistic, objectivistic ones. I have also to stress that one must distinguish the question of the creation of the new theoretical framework from the question of its institutionalization as a discipline separated from other branches of physics, which is a sociological question as long as its disciplinary constitution - that in our times has brought also to the institution of specific universitary chairs -involved the diffusion and acceptance by the international physicists' community. This sociological aspect is indeed related to the Einstein-Minkowski's presentation of special relativity, to their axiomatic (not problematic) formulation, to their epistemological views which, beyond the seeming conflict of "philosophical relativism" and objectivism, contributed to a specific historical episteme or regime of truth that has still its roots in that historical western form of life. In my opinion, Poincaré's position (problematic formulation of the theory, "conventionalism", non-separability and historicity of physical systems, features of which I will give some account in the course of this text) was not viable to be embodied in this form of life and so some "revolutionary" aspects of the new physical framework (given by Poincaré) have been lost."
What 'was lost' in the gap between Poincaré's relativity and Einstein's is that Poincaré's relativity leads directly to the notion that 'somatic awareness' or 'feelings' are in a natural primacy over 'psychic awareness' or 'thinking' (i.e. in Mcluhan's terms, our perception of acoustic space (invisible) that comes to us by our 'feelings' is in a natural primacy over our perception of visual space that comes to us by our 'judgment' as to the nature of the material objects out there and what they are doing. in fact, the perceptual world of visual space is informationally included within the perceptual world of acoustic space and is the degenerate 'reduced' case where we 'suspend relativity' and impose a reference frame of absolute space and absolute time on our raw sensory perceptions, ... so that the material agents appear to be 'behaving independently', ... rather than 'INTERdependently', connected through the intermediation of the dynamical geometry of possibility-to-act space that they are co-creating through their manner of acting RELATIVE TO one another, ... a possibility space that emerges from the actions of multiple agents moving under the simultaneous mutual influence of one another.
While Einstein persisted in keeping the observer himself outside of the environmental dynamic he was observing ("the environment is everything that isn't me", Poincaré imposed no such constraint. the implication that the observer is included in the enveloping environmental dynamic means that we can no longer model the dynamics in terms of the assertive behaviours of the constituents as if they were detached from the environmental dynamics. What is implied instead is that the individual's actions (and the actions of the material constituencies of the individual) are guided in their 'ordering' by the geometry of possibility-to-move space that emerges continuously from the way the constituents move relative to one another. This in turn implies the primacy of 'somatic awareness' (inner-outer dynamical phase-coupling) over 'psychic awareness' (awareness of the assertive actions and transactions of the constituents of space).
The differences are epistemologically subtle between Poincaré's relativity and Einstein’s, but the implications are not at all subtle. the implications are that 'feeling' ( the somatic awareness of the 'body-mind' ) is in the primacy over 'thinking' (the rational awareness of the 'head-mind') and that the brain is not the primary mover and shaker in the psychosomatic system (there are also the distributed peptide transponder networks in the sensory system) but is instead a specialized visual space perception subsystem that supports the enveloping and including acoustic space perception system.
Once the 'brain' is 'demoted' from its position as the top dog in orchestrating order in the human constituent, things start to fall into place much better. therapeutic techniques such as neurofeedback can then be seen, not as a 'neural training' technique but as an 'untraining' technique and/or a 'rational unlearning' technique. for example, PTSD (post-traumatic stress disorder) can be seen as rational learning that 'blocks' access to 'somatic awareness' (inner-outer engagement) and since 'somatic awareness' is naturally in a primacy over 'rational awareness' in the relativistic model, the rational learning must be taken out of the 'lead role' and demoted to a 'support role'. the persistence of 'somatic awareness' during comas and immediately after 'death' when 'rational awareness' has ceased also makes more sense in this relativistic model.
The challenge for the individual in all of this is to 'think rationally but act somatically' as one does when one 'drives friendly' on a crowded freeway, and/or as the geese do when flying in formation. That is, rational thought is a support tool for somatic engagement with the enveloping world dynamic.
There is nothing new in this suggestion for eastern and aboriginal medicine and/or mysticism, but it a shocker from where western science and medicine has been 'coming from'.
Ted Lumley
www.goodshare.org |