Читаем Shufflebrain полностью

What is hologramic mind? What is the nature of the phase code? What is remembering? Recalling? Perceiving? Why does hologramic theory assert that physical parts of the brain, as such, do not constitute memory, per se? Why does hologramic theory make no fundamental distinction between learning and instinct? Why does hologramic theory predict the outcome of my experiments on salamanders? We have touched on these issues already, but only in an inferential, analogous and superficial way. Now we are on the brink of deriving the answers directly from hologramic theory itself. We will start by reasoning inductively from waves to the hologram and on to hologramic theory. Then, having done that, we will deduce the principles of hologramic mind.

***

The coordinate system we used in chapter 7 does exist on an ideal plane, true, but one we can easily superimpose on the surfaces we encounter in the realm of our experience. We can draw sine or cosine axes vertically on, say, the bedroom wall, or scribe a pi scale on a roll of toilet paper. If we equate sine values to something such as lumens of moonlight and place 29 1/2-day intervals between each 2pi on our horizontal axis, we can plot the phases of the moon. Alternatively, we could put stock-market quotations on the ordinate (sine or cosine axis) and years on the abscissa (our pi scale), and get rich or go broke applying Fourier analysis and synthesis to the cycles of finance. Ideal though they were, our theoretical waves existed in the space of our intuitive reality. I shall call this space "perceptual space" whether it's "real" or "ideal."

In the last chapter, I mentioned that in analyzing the compound wave (as a Fourier series of components regular waves, remember) the analyst calculates Fourier coefficients--the values required to make each component's frequency an integral part of a continuous, serial progression of frequencies. I also mentioned that the analyst uses coefficients to construct a graph, or write an equation. Recall that such an equation is known as a Fourier transform and that from Fourier transforms the analyst can calculate phase, amplitude and frequency spectra.

In everyday usage, "transform" is verb; it is sometimes a verb in mathematics, too. Usually, though, the mathematician employs "transform" as a noun, as the name for a figure or equation resulting from a transformation. Mathematical dictionaries define transformation as the passage from one figure or expression to another.[1] Although "transform" has specialized implications, its source, transformation, coincides with our general usage. In fact, a few mathematical transformations and their resulting transforms are part of our everyday experience. A good example is the Mercator projection of the earth, in which the apparent size of the United States, relative to Greenland, has mystified more than one school child and where Russia, split down the middle, ends up on opposite edges of the flat transform of the globe. We made use of transformation ourselves when we moved from circles to waves and back again. In executing a Fourier transformation, in creating the Fourier transform of components, the analyst shifts the values from perceptual space to an idealized domain known as Fourier transform space. In the old days (before computers did just about everything but wipe your nose) the analyst, more often than not, was seeking to simplify calculations. Operations that require calculus in perceptual space can be carried out by multiplication and division--simple arithmetic--in transform space. But many events that don't look wavy in perceptual space show their periodic characteristics when represented as Fourier transforms, and by their more abstract cousins, the Laplace transforms.

But my reason for introducing transform space has to do with the hologram. Transform space is where the hologramic message abides. The Fourier transform is a link to transform space.

We can't directly experience transform space. Is it a construct of pure reason? Alternatively, is it a "place" in the same sense as the glove compartment of a car? I really can't say, one way or the other. But although we cannot visualize transform space on the grand plain of human experience, we can still intuitively establish its existence. We can connect transform space to our awareness, and we can give it an identity among our thoughts.

Перейти на страницу:

Похожие книги

Фаина Раневская. Клочки воспоминаний
Фаина Раневская. Клочки воспоминаний

Фаина Георгиевна Раневская, урожденная Фельдман (1896–1984), — великая русская актриса. Трижды лауреат Сталинской премии, народная артистка СССР.«Я дочь небогатого нефтепромышленника из Таганрога» — так говорила о себе Раневская. Фуфа Великолепная — так называли ее друзья и близкие. Невероятно острой, даже злой на язык была великая актриса, она органически не переносила пошлости и мещанства в жизни, что уж говорить о театре, которому она фанатично служила всю жизнь.Фаина Раневская начинала писать воспоминания по заказу одного из советских издательств, но в итоге оставила это занятие, аргументируя свое решение следующим: «Деньги прожрешь, а стыд останется».В этой книге по крупицам собраны воспоминания о великой актрисе ее коллег и друзей, ее высказывания — ироничные и злые, грустные и лиричные, письма актрисы, адресатами которых были Анна Ахматова, Марина Цветаева, Осип Мандельштам.

Иван Андреев , Коллектив авторов , Фаина Георгиевна Раневская

История / Неотсортированное / Образование и наука / Документальное / Биографии и Мемуары