The NSTP (Non - Spatial Thinking Process) Theory

Module by: Kedar Joshi

Summary: The NSTP (Non - Spatial Thinking Process) theory is a theory that the material universe is exclusively a group of superhuman as well as non-superhuman thinking processes existing in the form of (non-spatial physical/material) feelings (i.e. states of consciousness). In computer terminology, it regards the (material) universe as a non-spatial computer, with hardware of non-spatial feelings and software of superhuman as well as non-superhuman thoughts/ideas, including those of space, which is then an illusive/virtual/merely apparent entity. The mere existence of the superhuman thoughts is responsible for the empirical (i.e. a posteriori) order in the non-superhuman ones. The theory is constituted of 6 axioms, 2 theorems, and 1 conjecture. It is found to be a master key that can resolve many of the mysteries in mathematics, logic, physics, biology, etc, through its universal non-spatial mechanical framework. Here, mainly Zeno’s paradoxes and quantum non-locality are considered.

THE NSTP (NON – SPATIAL THINKING PROCESS) THEORY

Copyright  KEDAR JOSHI 2007

The NSTP (Non - Spatial Thinking Process) theory is a theory that the material universe is exclusively a group of superhuman as well as non-superhuman thinking processes existing in the form of (non-spatial physical/material) feelings (i.e. states of consciousness). In computer terminology, it regards the (material) universe as a non-spatial computer, with hardware of non-spatial feelings and software of superhuman as well as non-superhuman thoughts/ideas, including those of space, which is then an illusive/virtual/merely apparent entity. The mere existence of the superhuman thoughts is responsible for the empirical (i.e. a posteriori) order in the non-superhuman ones. The theory is constituted of 6 axioms, 2 theorems, and 1 conjecture. It is found to be a master key that can resolve many of the mysteries in mathematics, logic, physics, biology, etc, through its universal non-spatial mechanical framework. Here, mainly Zeno’s paradoxes and quantum non-locality are considered.

Axiom 1: Feeling1Throughout this work, the term ‘feeling’ means phenomenal mind / consciousness / qualia. is non-spatial.

In other words, no kind of feeling, e.g. feeling of bodily pain, can be represented by any spatial structure.

The feeling of bodily pain, for example, is conceptually distinct from its bodily counterpart (i.e. identification of some electrochemical signal in brain).2A point following an axiom, a theorem, or another point, is meant to be its explanation and/or justification.

Axiom 2: Feeling is real and physical/material.

Axiom 3: Any experience, even an abstract thought I know I am having, is, in fact, a feeling.

Axiom 4: The self/I is ‘feeling’.

In other words, the self/I is not something different from ‘feeling’ that ‘feels’, but is itself ‘feeling’. For example, ‘I’m feeling pain’ is altogether a feeling. There is no ‘I’, which, in nature, is not a feeling and still feels something.

Axiom 5: The self/I is a stream of feelings.

Suppose I feel to have felt seeing blue colour. Now the feeling of seeing blue colour itself is not ‘the feeling of self/I’ii4 ‘The feeling of self/I’ is nothing but what means by axiom 4. . However, the former feeling is (conceptually) associated with the latter.

Axiom 6: Every feeling represents some idea/concept/thought.

The feeling of blue colour, for example, is the same as the idea/concept/thought of blue colour.

It may be that none of the 6 aforementioned axioms are self-evident/axiomatic according to the reader. However, all of them are axiomatic according to the author. A simple mathematical axiom, like if p implies q and p is true then q is true, is axiomatically comprehensible to a human of average intellect, for it involves simple, easy-to-understand concepts. On the contrary the 6 axioms involve relatively much profound, hard-to-understand concepts, thus potentially becoming axiomatically incomprehensible to a human of average intellect.

Theorem 1: The self/I is an NSTP (Non – Spatial Thinking Process).iii5 Theorem 1 is implied by the axioms 1, 5, and 6.

Theorem 2: Spaceiv6 Space as a room or void out there: whether three or higher dimensional, bounded or unbounded. is mere (non-spatial) feelingv7 Axiom 3 implies that there is (non-spatial) feeling of space. .

In other words, space is a virtual (i.e. an unreal) entity. It is a mere illusion.

1.The problem of spatial - non-spatial interaction and universal complexity -

If space and non-spatial mind are both realities (i.e. if they are ontologically existent) then there are following two possibilities:

i. Spatial and non-spatial entities interact.

ii. Spatial and non-spatial entities do not interact.

In the first case there is a problem ‘how spatial and non-spatial entities physically/actually interact’ and in the both cases the model of the universe becomes unnecessarily complex, as there are two real (i.e. ontologically existent) entities involved, instead of just one.

2.The Zeno’s paradoxes -

a. The racecourse or dichotomy paradox:

‘There is no motion because that which is moved must arrive at the middle of its course before it arrives at the end. In order to traverse a line segment it’s necessary to reach the halfway point, but this requires first reaching the quarter-way point, which first requires reaching the eighth-way point, and so on without end. Hence motion can never begin. This problem isn’t alleviated by the well-known infinite sum 1/2 + 1/4 + 1/8... = 1 because Zeno is effectively insisting that the sum be tackled in the reverse direction. What is the first term in such a series?’vi8 Darling, David (2004) The universal book of mathematics: from abracadabra to Zeno’s paradoxes. Wiley, USA.

b. Achilles and the tortoise:

‘This is perhaps the most famous of the Zeno’s paradoxes. The slower when running will never be overtaken by the quicker; for that which is pursuing must first reach the point from which that which is fleeing started, so that the slower must necessarily always be some distance ahead. Thus, Achilles, however fast he runs, will never catch the plodding tortoise, who started first. And yet, of course, in the real world, faster things do overtake slower ones.’vii9 Blackburn, Simon (1996) Dictionary of philosophy. OUP, Oxford.

The Solution-

The Zeno’s paradoxes are out of the misbelief that space exists in the ontological sense, i.e. as a reality, out there. In fact, space is a virtual entity, a kind of illusion, a mere appearance, existing in the form of non-spatial mind/s, i.e. feelings. In other words, space is mere (non-spatial) feeling. Consequently (spatial) motion is also a kind of illusion (to non-spatial observer/sviii10 The term ‘observer’ is abstract/conceptual. Axiom 2 and axiom 4 imply that physically it is (non-spatial) feeling. 0). Thus reality, being non-spatial, is not constrained by spatial infinities, as whatever that is seen / experienced / felt as happening in space is a mere illusion, with no resemblance to (non-spatial) reality. And illusion could be of any logically possible kind. In other words, that which creates, or is responsible for, the spatial illusion does not have to bother whether the mover has to first reach half of the distance and so on, or the faster has to first reach the point where the slower started or has infinitely many gaps to traverse, etc. The only thing it has to do is to produce some dynamic spatial pattern (actually represented in the form of some non-spatial feelings), as if a mover moving or the faster overtaking the slower. That’s it.

3.The problem of quantum non-locality -

‘In 1997 experiments were conducted in which light particles (i.e. photons) originated under certain conditions and travelled in opposite directions to detectors located about seven miles apart. The amazing results indicated that the photons interacted or communicated with one another instantly or in no time.’ix11Nadeau, Robert and Kafatos, Menas (1999) The non-local universe: the new physics and matters of the mind. OUP, Oxford.1

The Solution-

This problem is also out of the misbelief that space exists in the ontological sense, i.e. as a reality, out there, for if space had indeed existed in that sense then any spatial communication would have needed some appropriate spatial structure and time, whereas in the case of quantum non-locality the communication between photons is instantaneous and with apparently no spatial structure/mechanism in between. However, as space is a kind of illusion to non-spatial observer/s, the quantum non-locality is no longer mysterious or problematic, as the photons and their behaviour is also a mere illusion, a virtual reality, so to say.

[In analogy with (spatial) personal computers (PCs), such a photonic behaviour on the computer monitor screen would have no slightest mystery surrounding it, as it would just be a dynamic or changing pattern of pixels, modulated by some hidden software process/es.]12 However, in the case of (spatial) personal computers (PCs) it would take some time for the photons to communicate, for the software, written on spatial hardware, would take time to process the data used for the apparent communication.2

Zeno’s paradoxes, being logical (i.e. a priori), imply that space is logically necessarily a virtual entity, whereas quantum non-locality, being empirical (i.e. a posteriori), implies that space is empirically necessarily a virtual entity. That is, it may exist as a reality, where quantum non-locality does not exist.

Conjecture: The Superhuman Engine.

Superhuman thoughts, representing the empirical laws (i.e. being responsible for the empirical order in the universe), exist in the form of (non-spatial) feelings.

1. A Non-Superhuman NSTP- Let’s take a simple example of gravity. Consider an observer x holding a ball at distance d from the ground. At time t=1 x has the feeling of dropping the ball.13 On the basis of axiom 4 and axiom 5 we can say that actually there is just a feeling of dropping the ball. 3 At t=2 x has the feeling of seeing the ball at ¾d. At t=3 x has the feeling of seeing the ball at ½d. At t=4 x has the feeling of seeing the ball at ¼d. And lastly, at t=5 x has the feeling of seeing the ball at d=0. Now, referring to axiom 5 this temporal process of feelings is an NSTP (Non – Spatial Thinking Process).

2. The Superhuman Thoughts- The empirical (i.e. a posteriori) orderx14 That is, the order of gravity- if, under the same conditions, the experiment in point 1 is repeated for innumerable times the same kind of gravity would be experienced. 4 in this NSTP is caused by some superhumanxi15 The thoughts are supposed to be superhuman because non-superhuman, in particular- human, thoughts, in general- mind, are incapable of causing anything like gravity.5 thoughts representing the idea of gravity, and specifically, the laws of gravity. These thoughts also exist in the form of (non-spatial) feelings.16 It is a conjecture.6

3. The Changeable Empirical Order- Since the empirical (i.e. a posteriori) order is not logically (i.e. a priorily) necessary it should be changeable, and that is why it should have some physical representation, which, in this case, is ‘thoughts existing in the form of (non-spatial) feelings’.

4. The Superhuman Engine- Thus, returning to the example of gravity, the feelings of gravityxii17All 5 feelings at times t=1 to t=5 where gravity is experienced. 7 are produced in an orderly sequence because (superhuman) thoughts representing the empirical laws (i.e. the empirical order in the universe) exist.18 Due to the existence of the superhuman thoughts, more than one observer may also experience the feelings of gravity simultaneously. 8 Such superhuman thoughts could collectively be entitled as ‘The Superhuman Engine’.

5. Superhuman vs. Non-Superhuman NSTP/s- As each superhuman thought exists over time, its mere temporal existence constitutes an NSTP (Non – Spatial Thinking Process). Thus, to sum up, the mere existence of the superhuman NSTPs is responsible for the orderly existence of the non-superhuman NSTP/s19 It may be that I am the only non-superhuman NSTP to exist, for there may not be any (non-superhuman) NSTPs corresponding to the non-superhuman (illusive) spatial objects. 9.

[In analogy with personal computers, the order in the dynamic pattern on the monitor screen is created by some central hardware representing some intelligent software, and if the software instructions or parameters (ultimately some hardware pattern) are changed, the dynamic pattern on the monitor screen could be changed, or even be destroyed.]

Summary -

The NSTP (Non – Spatial Thinking Process) theory is constituted of the following

Axioms –

Theorems –

Conjecture –

Superhuman thoughts, representing the empirical laws (i.e. being responsible for the empirical order in the universe), exist in the form of (non-spatial) feelings.

Comments, questions, feedback, criticisms?

Send feedback

• E-mail the author of the module, The NSTP (Non - Spatial Thinking Process) Theory

Footer

More about this content: Metadata | Version History

• How to reuse and attribute this content
• How to cite and attribute this content

This work is licensed by Kedar Joshi under a Creative Commons Attribution License (CC-BY 2.0).

Last edited by Kedar Joshi on Feb 4, 2007 7:14 am US/Central.