I recently decided to expand on Fineman's quip "there's plenty of room at the bottom" which he used to refer to nanotechnolgy by taking his quip even further into the quantum realm. When I did that, it occurred to me that the field of conciousness as primary becomes possible in a physics and very materilist way which materialists themselves have a continuing problem with. Cryonics assumed Finemans level of room at the bottom which thus made cryonics and preservation of mind as being in the brain feasible. However, if we take the mind into the quantum realm which is consisntent with the notion that consciousness is fundamental and not emergent from brain structure after all, cryonics becomes impossible since it's not possible to freeze-in-place the scale of phenomenon at the quantum level. The brain, at this level becomes a mere antenna, though a sophisticated antenna. It give new life to dualism. Quantum physicist Doug Matzke gave new life to quantum physics via geomatric algebra and his notion of existons, though he's not as well known as Harold Saxon Burr who detected a field operating behind all lifeforms in the 1930's through the 1960's. Restate what I just wrote to indicate that I have discovered the best argument against cryonics that's ever been found. I didn't like the discovery because I was signed up for cryonics for years but in another sense, it's a relief that my conciousness that I know as me isn't dependent on cryonics for immortal existence. Edward W. Russel, in Prospects for Eternity expanded on Burr's work and speculated on the extension of a L-field to a T-field which is the repository of individual consiousness, or what I now call quansciousness.
I have stumbled upon what I believe is the ultimate and most devastating argument against cryonics, a conclusion that has personally shaken my beliefs, despite having been a long-time proponent of the procedure. This argument stems from pushing Feynman's concept of "plenty of room at the bottom" to its logical extreme – the quantum realm. While cryonics relies on the idea of preserving the brain's physical structure at a nanoscale level to preserve consciousness, this approach becomes fundamentally flawed if consciousness originates at the quantum level.
If, as suggested by theories of consciousness as primary, our subjective experience (or "quansciousness," to borrow a term) is not an emergent property of the brain, but rather exists as a fundamental aspect of reality at the quantum level, then the brain merely serves as an antenna or interface for this pre-existing quantum consciousness. In this model, freezing the brain, the very premise of cryonics, becomes irrelevant. The delicate quantum states underlying consciousness cannot be "frozen in place" or preserved through cryopreservation.
This perspective, while unsettling given my previous investment in cryonics, provides a strange solace. It suggests that my essential self, my "quansciousness," isn't dependent on the success or failure of cryonic preservation. My existence transcends the physical fate of my brain. Thinkers like Harold Saxon Burr and Edward W. Russel hinted at this with their research on life fields, which Russel expanded on in his vision of a "T-field" as a repository of individual consciousness, all now pointing towards a quansciousness, with the brain not being the origin but just an antenna.
17
Responses