There has not been a more misunderstood area of human endeavor than religion. Both critics and adherents of religion have placed religion out of its original context and purpose. The Black ancestors who left us the legacy of religion have been castigated by both friend and foe alike as being primitive people whose lack of comprehension of science made them run into the comforting embrace of superstition. In fact there are many Pan-Africanists today who rubbish religion as a pastime for antiquated minds and that modernity has no place for such unproductive activities.

These same people would put forth a formidable argument showing that the notion that Christopher Columbus discovered the Americas is a Eurocentric viewpoint but they are blind to the fact that a rejection of God is also quite Eurocentric. In fact the very separation of religion from science is a Eurocentric construct and I intend to demonstrate that our ancestors knew nothing about what we call religion but were actually practicing science.

Religion is what western observers called the science that our ancestors practiced. The fundamental flaw in western thought or worldview has been their artificial dichotomy between humans and the rest of the universe which is a view in distinct contrast to the African and ancient worldview. However, western scientists, albeit few in number, are today coming around to the African view of the universe and man’s role in it. They have come full circle and have no option but to confront the wisdom of our ancestors head-on.

 

Quantum Theory and the Black God

According to the mainstream view of the origin of the universe, our beginning was occasioned by the ‘Big bang,’ which was the rapid inflation of singularity billions of years ago, and which gave rise to the universe as we know it today. The cooling of the ‘stuff’ that came with the big bang ultimately resulted in the first atoms and molecules forming primordial matter. As the atoms combined they formed the space-time as we know it today including organic life forms. Single-cell organisms evolved into more complex organisms and as the degree of complexity increased consciousness somehow emerged as a property of the complexity. This has been the dominant theory conjured to explain our existence and consciousness.

However, in 1989 Sir Roger Penrose, a Mathematical Physicist at Oxford University in England wrote a book, “The Emperor’s New Mind,” which challenged the mainstream view that consciousness was an emergent property of complexity in the brain. The Artificial Intelligence community of scientists still believes that once a computer is built to replicate the level of complex computations that take place between the neurons in the brain, consciousness would inevitably emerge in robots.

Penrose disagrees. He refutes the claim. He proffers the view that using a computer as an analogous system to the brain is flawed as algorithmic computations are inadequate in explaining consciousness in the brain. Using Godel’s Incompleteness Theorem as proof, Penrose demonstrates that algorithmic processes in the brain aren’t responsible for consciousness and that computers will fail to generate consciousness even if they were able to compute complex algorithms.

He postulates that since computations aren’t able to explain consciousness we must develop a new understanding of the laws of physics in order to fully comprehend consciousness. He believes he has found how consciousness is generated and the implications are startling. Penrose is no small Physicist. In fact, he taught Stephen Hawking and worked with him to deepen our understanding of Black holes. He has published numerous works for which he has received a plethora of awards.

Physicists are well aware of the asymmetry that exists between the laws of physics working at the macro level of Einstein’s theory of relativity and the laws governing the quantum world of particles. Penrose believes his theory unifies the laws operating at the macro space-time level with the quantum world. His theory of consciousness lies at the heart of this discovery.

At the macro level we see stars, planets, galaxies, moons, asteroids, gravity and these appear very real to us. At the quantum level, however, things are so different they appear almost ‘spooky’. When quantum physics was carved out as a field of study, the findings shook the scientific community including Einstein.

The interesting thing is that a quantum particle such as an electron can exist in multiple states or places at the same time. Particles are also able to get entangled with each other making the state of one affect the state of the other even if they are separated by the distance of a whole universe. When two particles are entangled then the state of one determines the state of the other in an opposite manner. If one is rotating clockwise it automatically means the other would rotate anti-clockwise.

However, their states are only determined after observation or measurement; by observing one the other automatically takes on the opposite state of the former. This apparent anomaly is captured by Schrodinger’s Cat paradox. According to quantum theory the cat is both dead and alive until someone opens the box to observe it. The superposition (a particle existing in two or more states or places at the same time) at the quantum level, according to some scientists, creates multiple worlds; each particle in superposition exists in one world and the other pair exists in another.

Penrose offers an alternative explanation by suggesting that the particle never gets separated enough to create two worlds due to quantum gravity. But if a quantum particle exists in multiple states and locations at the same time why does it ‘decide’ a definite state and location when it is observed or measured? Why does the wave function (the probable locations of a particle when not observed) collapse or reduce into one single state and location when measured or observed?

Penrose argues that a superposition literally divides space-time which creates instability and the two particles are brought back into one state or location given rise to reality as we know it. The notion that each of us exist in multiple worlds is thus wrong in his view. As the particle in superposition collapses into one state or location, consciousness arises. Consciousness is thus an intrinsic property of the universe and not an emergent feature of a complex brain processing system. The selection of which state the particle assumes when collapsed is purely based on what Penrose calls Platonic values that are ingrained in the very nature of the universe. These values are what gives the universe its intrinsic mathematical consistency, ethics, aesthetics and geometry. Hence consciousness is based on a non-computable factor unable to be replicated in an algorithm.

But if consciousness exists as an intrinsic property of the universe how then did it get into organic life? Penrose was unable to pinpoint an exact trace. On the other side of the Atlantic, another scientist by the name of Stuart Hammerof had been studying consciousness in the brain for over two decades and was certain that consciousness arose in small cells in the neurons called microtubules although he was unsure how to prove it. Hammerof, an anesthesiologist, was intrigued by how anesthetics deprived patients of consciousness even though they registered brain activity during surgery.

Penrose and Hammerof teamed up to solve the mystery fully with their Orchestrated Objective Reduction theory.

They found that in the microtubules, the wave function collapsed, thus giving rise to consciousness in the brain. Consciousness is then a quantum phenomenon and not occasioned by information processing between neurons. Consciousness occurs before the neurons even fire information out to other neurons for us to move a hand or walk or escape out of harm’s way.

This has been hailed as a new theory explaining consciousness. How new is it really?

The ancient science texts, that have erroneously been dubbed religious texts, speak about the origin of consciousness (mind) in an interestingly similar manner as the Penrose-Hammerof theory. In fact, Hammerof has pointed to the fact that their theory bears remarkable similarity to eastern philosophy. In the proto- Semitic religion of the Middle East and Africa, mind is intrinsic to the universe and at one point this conscious mind infused itself in an atom which became the basis of matter and man.

This incarnation of the ‘cosmic mind’ in human form is covertly covered in the first chapter of Genesis and in the making of Adam in the Qur’an. The creation story of ancient Kemet centered on the God Ptah being the father of himself and infusing himself in a human body thus making him God in the flesh also bears a resemblance to the Penrose-Hammerof theory. This phenomenal and momentous event of the ‘cosmic mind’ infusing or incarnating itself in a Black man is the basis of Judaism, Christianity, Islam and other ancient religions. Elaborate rituals were designed to commemorate this incarnation event and the Tabernacle of Moses as well as the Kabah in Mecca both represent structures dedicated to the Black God in human form.

The worship of a formless incorporeal God is a recent invention closely linked to the Greek philosophers. However our ancestors taught that God is a man and they captured this in myths and stories that may appear unscientific at face value but are nevertheless based on a deep insight of science.

How does the replication of the wave function collapse in the brain translate into man being God as espoused by the ancient world? They understood that humans have the potential of taking control of the mind by adhering to a certain body of knowledge or principles that would later be called religion. Humans could then become ‘one’ or entangled with the ‘cosmic mind’ and direct events in the universe. Stars could be moved, messages sent from one mind to another without an iPhone or sim card, and new things brought into existence in the universe.

In ancient Kemet these training institutions were known as the ‘Mystery schools’ and only a select number of initiates would be allowed access to the knowledge of self as they called it.  The mystery schools would later find their way into Arabia and then Europe where they became known as Free Masonry or Secret Societies.

 

Free Masonry and the Black God

feeharrypeopleOn August 28, 1963 Martin Luther King Jr stood on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial in Washington D.C and delivered his famous “I Have A Dream” speech. It was an epic moment in the civil rights struggle in the US and many victories were derived from that event as far as civil rights are concerned. Blacks would receive the right to vote and other rights of full-fledged citizens in the wake of the ‘March on Washington.’  Schools, buses, hotels, cemeteries, restaurants, etc. were all desegregated and Black and white Americans could enjoy life, supposedly, as one nation.

However, there was one institution that somehow never got the ‘desegregation memo’ from King and the Federal government and that institution has remained segregated. In America the institution of Free Masonry remains segregated up to this day especially in the South.

Why are Free Masons in segregated lodges in the US?

This is simply because the secret kept in masonry revolves around the Black man as God. The Ancient Arabic Order of the Nobles of the Mystic Shrine (A.A.O.N.M.S) now known as ‘Shriners’ is an appendant body to Free Masonry with a near global presence. Why are they called an Ancient Arabic Order? Who are the Nobles of the Mystic Shrine? Why are their temples or lodges or mosques named after Arabian cities such as Mecca and Medina? Why is their symbol the crescent, star and a sword over the crescent? Why do they wear the Fez of the Moors? In order to understand these mysteries one has to unlock and unravel layers of rituals that are so common in Free Masonry.

A shrine is a building or structure dedicated to a deceased holy person, saint or martyr. The Shrine of the Free Masons is a ‘mystic’ one, meaning there’s some mystery or secret surrounding it. Why is the shrine linked to an order of Nobles? A noble is a person of royal or aristocratic descent. The deceased person is a holy person of noble descent and his identity is a mystery and a secret. It is only at the level of the 3rd or 33rd degree of Free Masonry that the masons are taken through the riddle or ritual to highlight this mystery through the story of Hiram Abiff.

Hiram means ‘the exalted one’ in Hebrew and he is presented as a Master Mason who was accosted by three ruffians who demanded that he provide them with the secrets of a Master mason. When he refused he was killed, his remains were taken toward a westerly course where he was buried in a North Country in a shallow grave with an acacia flower eventually growing from his grave. Some persons tried to raise him from his grave but they lacked the ‘master’s grip’ or the ‘lion’s paw’. The Master eventually does come around to raise him to assume his role as a Master builder or architect. This story is told through a ritual at the 3rd or 33rd degree level which is the final stage of Free Masonry.

Who does Hiram Abiff represent? For the answer we must turn to America and her Founding Fathers.

 

The United States of America and the Mathematics of Probability

I continue to believe that until Black people develop a healthy appreciation of our culture and history we will never truly be independent and equal in the world. One major challenge we face is our complete misunderstanding of the ancient scriptures written by our ancestors thousands of years ago. The western world has pooh-poohed the role that Africans have played in the establishment of civilization and the sad part is that Africans have believed the lie hook, line and sinker.

Long before Pythagoras or Euclid, our fathers were the masters of mathematics and science. In fact, today’s mathematics pales in comparison to the mathematical sophistication of our ancestors.  How does one begin to prove that knowledge of mathematics was way more sophisticated in the ancient world than that which pertains in today’s world? One way would be to refer to the use of predictions and probability theory by our ancestors.

In mathematics the theory of probability deals with the likelihood of an event occurring. A dice with six sides and numbers has a probability of one out of six to show the number two on a roll. Policy-makers make use of probability theory when they forecast the inflation rate, depreciation of currencies, election results, etc. The key to making accurate predictions is to account for the variables that are likely to impinge upon a certain outcome. The greater the time interval between the prediction and the outcome the more sophisticated one’s knowledge of mathematics must be to account for all the variables responsible for the outcome. What level of knowledge of mathematics would one need to have to predict an outcome 4,000 years in the future?

Genesis chapter 15:13-14 states:

“Then the Lord said to Abram, know for certain that for four hundred years your descendants will be strangers in a country not their own and that they will be enslaved and mistreated there. But I will punish the nation which they serve as slaves and afterward they will come out with great possessions.”

The above verse in the book of Genesis has been taken by theologians, Jews and Christians alike to refer to a historical event that occurred in Kemet. However, historians and archaeologists can find no evidence of a four hundred years enslaved people in Kemet even though Kemet was a record-keeping nation. There is simply no trace of Hebrew enslavement in Kemet.

It is because of these stories of past events without any shred of documented evidence of their occurrence that most people have rubbished them as myths and folktales. What they don’t understand however is that these stories are written in ‘coded’ form and the names of people and places used are not the real names or places of the event predicted.

It is a combination of white supremacy and ignorance that has the world of Jews, Christians and scholars not appreciating the fact that the ONLY people that have been in servitude and mistreated in a strange country not their own for four hundred years in a Kemet-like superpower are Africans in the United States of America. They are the only people who fit the prediction accurately but of course this has ground-shattering implications as it makes them the ‘Chosen people’ of God from whom the Messiah would arise.

White supremacy can’t accept such a reality which is why the schools of theology and seminaries keep churning out pastors who still adhere to the lie that white Jews from Europe are the chosen people even though these pastors claim to be led by a Holy Spirit. Yet, they remain deceived. The Bible states Joseph was sold to merchants by some of his own brothers, these merchants sold him into slavery in a land not his own.

The Qur’an states chapter 28:4:

“Surely Pharaoh exalted himself in the land and made its people into parties, weakening one party from among them; he slaughtered their sons and let their women live. Surely he was one of the mischief-makers.”

Clearly according to the Qur’an Pharaoh was practicing a form of apartheid or segregation which deliberately sought to weaken a particular party or group in the country. The text refers to the Pharaoh in the singular but no Pharaoh lived to be 400 years so this was clearly a policy that successive Pharaohs practiced. It was an institutionalized form of segregation that wasn’t limited to any particular Pharaoh.

The United States government has proven itself to be an enemy of Black progress ever since Africans set foot on Native American territory. Even after 1863 when Abraham Lincoln signed the Emancipation Proclamation, Blacks were simply transitioned into other forms of oppression such as share-cropping and Jim Crow, where lynching and destruction of Black towns became the norm. It was the US government under J. Edgar Hoover’s ‘Counterintelligence Program’ (COINTELPRO) that set out to infiltrate Black organizations and disrupt them so that Blacks could never organize themselves to become a formidable force in America. Countless Black leaders have been systematically killed or imprisoned by the US government. The oppression occurs even as these words are being typed. The verse above from the Qur’an mentions another interesting thing:

“He slaughtered their SONS and let their women live.”

The systematic destruction of the Black male in America is well documented. There are more Black men in prison than other males of any other race in America. It was the US government that brought Crack Cocaine into the Black communities causing a drug epidemic of gargantuan proportions unrivalled anywhere else on the planet. The war on drugs was then used as a pretext to imprison Blacks, especially Black males.

Black women in America tend to be better educated than their male counterparts making it very difficult for educated Black women to find an ‘equal’ partner.

How did the Black authors of these ancient predictions account for the variables involved in determining the outcome outlined in the above verses of both the Bible and Qur’an? At what point does an alleged coincidence become a prediction?  Is it a mere coincidence that the verses above accurately describe the predicament of an entire nation thousands of years after the prediction was made? Would Bayesian probability theory allow us to dismiss the veracity of the prediction?

The United States of America is the ancient Egypt spoken of in the Bible and the Qur’an.

This is well known by the Free Masons as it is captured in the Hiram Abiff story and ritual.  Hiram was a master architect who was accosted by ruffians, beaten and taken on a westerly course and buried in a North Country (North America) to be raised by the Master’s grip or Lion’s paw of the Master (Slavery).

Out of the 56 signers of the US Declaration of Independence at least 9 were known Free Masons. George Washington, Benjamin Franklin, Elbridge Gerry, John Hancock, William Hooper, Richard Stockton, Matthew Thornton, William Whipple and George Walton were all known Free Masons with identified and documented lodges.

On July 4, 1776 the same day that the thirteen States declared their independence from Britain a committee was set up to design a seal for the new country. The Committee was comprised of Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson and John Adams. Each of them gave a description of their design proposal for the seal. Benjamin Franklin proposed the following:

Moses standing on the Shore, and extending his Hand over the Sea, thereby causing the same to overwhelm Pharaoh who is sitting in an open Chariot, a Crown on his Head and a Sword in his Hand. Rays from a Pillar of Fire in the Clouds reaching to Moses, to express that he acts by Command of the Deity.” Motto, “Rebellion to Tyrants is Obedience to God.”

Thomas Jefferson proposed the following:

“A depiction of the Children of Israel in the wilderness, led by a cloud by day and a pillar of fire by night for the front of the seal.”

Why did both Franklin and Jefferson suggest themes directly tied to the Exodus account to represent the Seal of the United States? Could it be that they knew the role America was to play in the Exodus story and prediction?

It is clear that the Orchestrated Objective Reduction theory confirms or provides the scientific confirmation of the belief of the ancient people in the incarnation of God in a Black man and that his descendants would be enslaved in a strange country for four hundred years and that America is that country. This forces us to not only re-evaluate our understanding of the scriptures and religion but the Black people at the center of these scriptures.

83 COMMENTS

  1. Great changes in society, and equally so in science, are spurred on by observations and new creative ideas, of which this is a fine example. Let us go back, let us take this journey with Atiga Jonas Atingdui, to the formidable years of our Ancestors to see just what the events were that so shook the world of science and religion.

    In this essay, Atiga presents the religio-scientific basis of the Orchestrated Objective Reduction theory, which provides the scientific confirmation of the calculations of our ancient Ancestors in the incarnation of God in a Black man. This thesis is his humble effort to (re-)bridge the gap between scientific prediction and ancient prophecy, a scholarship clearly misunderstood by new-comers to the the field of sophisticated scientific inquiry.

    As a corollary, he expands upon the probabo-prophetic theory, or shall I say the quantum-prophetic understanding, needed to grasp, for example, the plight of the African American today – essentially that, he is the descendant of this Black man, God. That his enslavement in a strange country, called America, for four hundred years was correctly prophesied by our ancient Ancestors. And that, he is the “Chosen One.” It is my hope that the humble attempt here forces us to not only re-evaluate our understanding of the scriptures, religion and science, but that it invokes in us renewed energies of mind for appreciating the Black people at the center of the scriptures themselves.

    Enjoy. By all means!

  2. JESUS! Give me time. I shall read, and I’ll be back. But Jesus! This is enticing. I salivate over these things…

  3. Atiga Jonas Atingdui some level of great work done here, even though your deduction through your essay may not have a strong empirical support by current scientific standard but it make logical sense to me.

    Furthermore to reveal the historic fact that knowledge and mystics goes hand in hand in the ancient era, is the most joyful aspect, I deduce from your essay. We have lost real meaning to science of application (pedagogy) because an attempt to extract it from it root that gives “life” to the knowledge, making it powerful as enumerated currently in an ecliche manner, is the cause of imperfectionist nature of most of our current inventions as scholars hence making knowledge loosing it “power” known to be standing for, in the life of the society transformation in a right direction.

  4. I haven’t enjoyed another book on Quantum Mechanics since undergrad so this comes to me as an appetizing forum where I can flex my muscle any how I want and still get away without the fear of failing the class. So hear me…

    Now it seems to be that the idea of Platonic values, from the mathematical perspective, is stooped in the idea that the universe indeed carries with it (1) certain independent characteristics that do not bend to observation and (2) that these characteristic “objectives” (independent sets) are the ideals of any scientific observation.

    Ok. Atiga, if one characteristic property of the universe is under observation, then that property cannot exhibit uncertainty in its state – that, you claim by implication, the property collapses the wave function and reality results. One state is then observable. Nothing else. This is a tad bit different from Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle which strictly applies to Canonical Values, that one cannot determine accurately the position and the momentum (velocity) of a quantum particle.

    But, let us, for the sake of discussion, keep to the discussion about multiple states. You seem to claim that when we move from the atomic level to the planetary levels, space-time collapses into one. That the wave function collapses and we are more likely say to observe a a line of donkeys marched across a pasture as mere donkeys that a wave of donkeys. Right? These donkeys have this collapsed space-time and assumed one observable state. Right?

    Well, to be scientifically objective, and if scale is the matter at hand, and if one can assume that a human being, called Dade Afre Akufu, in his observation of a line of donkeys will only see donkeys and not a wave of donkeys, then one must also equally assume an observer huge enough that the scale of a donkey appears as an atomic particle small enough as can assume a quantum state. No? Now how come to this large observer, the donkey still remains a donkey?

    Perhaps there’s an INDIVISIBILITY at work here? Perhaps the INDIVISIBILITY is the God particle? The more indivisible the closer a particle and its properties are to God?

    A human being, like a donkey, as with all complex life forms, must die, in order that their bodies can disintegrate to achieve this indivisibility? To achieve immortality? Hence the “Death” mime of all “Savior” tropes? They must die and they must somehow ascend into Godliness?

    But then the more uncertain this state becomes! Of course, uncertain, to an observer. So how can uncertainty be so close to Godliness? My friends?

  5. My brother Atiga Jonas Atingdui. This is heavy and deep and accurate. Time will tell. Thanks for a great enlightenment and contribution to our national liberation. Forward ever.

  6. Dade Afre Akufu I am not sure I get you fully. However, under the Orchestrated Objective Reduction theory it is not the observer whose presence or observation that collapses the wave function. Rather an Objective threshold ( hence the term Objective Reduction) is reached beyond which further superposition is not possible. At this stage the wave function collapses and we see the donkeys as you depicted. So even if there were no humans or any observer the wave function would still collapse. It is the collapsing of the wave function that causes consciousness as a decision is made about the possible state of the donkeys reducing it to a single state– donkeys walking in line. Space-time doesn’t only collapse at the Macro level but also at the quantum level. However at that small level the collapse occurs very slowly over thousands of years given the small size and energy involved. There is actually a mathematical equation capturing this reality which states that the speed of the collapse is determined by the amount of mass of the object or particle. The greater the mass the faster the collapse which is why we only see a donkey instead of the same donkey in different states or locations. The mass of the donkey is such that it collapses almost instantaneously.

  7. There are other people who hold the view that the collapse is caused by an observer. Thus the collapse of the particles and macro bodies such as the sun or moon is due to the presence of a ‘cosmic observer’ out there. So in the same way as we observe an electron and cause it to collapse or become localized so too the cosmic mind causes the collapse of all particles and bodies out there

  8. Sounds good to me. It seems utterly similar to de Broglie’s wavelength where the wavelength of say an electron traveling at 1.00 % the speed of light is 243 pm while that of a Golf ball at 30 ms^-1, is 4.9 X 10^-22 pm.

    Anyway, I will read more about this Objective Reduction – one that has caused me flipping through my quantum mechanics notes. Thanks!

  9. Very tact-full! Fascinating reading your thesis Atiga. My question is rather mundane, although it seems to me that this lies at the heart of your thesis.

    How is it that the Wave function would collapse at a certain threshold along the scale of planetary to atomic or subatomic particles but would not collapse in the same cases as the same atomic or subatomic particles, which are used for quantum computing processes? Or do you see this avenue in the next generation of computing the step necessary for generating consciousness?

    If not, then it seems to me that the Objective Reduction also ceases at Artificial Assembly of particles for say, Super-Computing?

  10. Quantum computers are already being built at the pilot phase in many countries. The feature of quantum mechanics that quantum computers want to exploit is quantum entanglement. This would make calculations and process much much faster than conventional computers. So in the strict sense they aren’t really quantum computers in that sense just making use of a quantum feature to speed up its computations.

    • Hahahahahaha. For the benefit of the Non-Kassenas here, my brother Haille is accusing me of spewing ridiculous stuff here ?????

    • By Chalmers I presume you are referring to David Chalmers? He is actually a fan of tge Orch OR theory of Penrose and Hammerof. He attends their conference on consciousness annually and is a founding member I believe. But he is a Philosopher and not a scientist sir.

    • He is a cognitive scientist and the leading philosopher in the philosophy of mind. Read his The Conscious Mind.

    • His view is not diametrically opposed to the Orch OR theory. He calls himself a naturalistic dualist. He believes mental states are caused by physical systems such as the brain but believes they are ontologically different from those physical systems. How does that differ from the Penrose model?

  11. It seems to me that explanation is exceedingly fair. The idea of achieving the kind of complexity of subatomic structure, atomic structure and molecular structure, let alone the cellular organization at the heart of the mind (say microtubules) in a super-computer is farfetched. I have to agree with you Atiga that it is thoroughly beyond reach.

  12. Ok its now 2:30am and I now am able to understand your question Dade Afre Akufu ?. The uncertainty principle only exists when the quantum particle hasn’t been observed or measured yet. in such a state the quantum particle exists as a wave of probable locations within the wave only after an observation does it choose a specific location or collapses to become localized.

    Now on the question of scale, you do bring up an interesting point of view. If an observer is large enough to see the donkey as a quantum object would he see it as a wave or a particle? My take on this would be to resort to the mathematical equation that states that the speed of the collapse from a superposition depends on the MASS of the object being observed independent of the size of the observer. Hence the donkey would never appear as a wave in the sight of the giant of an observer because the mass is such that it instantaneously becomes a donkey that is walking in the green pasture.

  13. Ah, Atiga!! 🙂 This pleases me greatly that you understand my earlier question. I have a few other questions I will follow up on. This answer will suffice for now as I wish to make a quick point.

    Let’s take for instance then a Golf ball. What if a larger observer, a very large observer I mean, was able to putt this ball to a considerable speed within a vacuum? Let us for the sake of argument assume that this golf ball achieves a speed closer to the speed of light.

    According to de Broglie, no matter what you do, since the mass is not on a nanoscale forget it. The wavelength associated with such a golf ball in vacuum at that speed will still be minute, I mean on the order of 10^-15 or less. That the golf ball still remains a golf ball, and will not behave as a quantum particle.

    Mass seems to be the limiting factor! At a certain threshold of mass, the wave functions of the individual subatomic particles of a gold ball collapse.

    Now the next question. How come one type of collapse imbues conscience as in the microtubules, say, and yet another such collapse does not, say in a golf ball?

    Or, are we not aware of the sentience of a golf ball? With the understanding that consciousness is actually an experience, and that if you have no idea, you cannot be conscious of a thing, shall we as humans ever reach a point, shall the microtubules in our brains ever reach a point where they can feel the consciousness of a golf ball? Does that happen when we die, you think?

    Is this why our ancestors begun concentrating on Schools of Mysticism to unearth the methods about which humans can reach a higher sense, higher self, and become conscious and one with the universe?

  14. Dade Afre Akufu once again brilliant points. I haven’t had my coffee yet so I am still partially brain dead but shall attempt to answer the second part of your question lol.

    ” How come one type of collapse imbues conscience as in the microtubules, say, and yet another such collapse does not, say in a golf ball?”

    Ah but the Orch OR theory does postulate that every collapse results on consciousness. However, they distinguish between ‘Proto-consciousness’ and ‘Consciousness’ that complex organisms experience. Take for instance certain single cell organisms such as a Paramecium which has no brain yet it swims, avoids danger , has memory and is able to learn new ways of defending itself. Is it conscious? What about sperm? These are conscious perhaps at a very rudimentary level and so would an atom be. The kind of consciousness that humans and complex animals experience has a greater complexity attached to it as we have greater intelligence.

  15. And about death, I didn’t touch on this in the article. When the brain ceases to work what happens to the quantum information that it was processing? It can’t be destroyed, it is released and gets entangled with the ‘cosmic mind’ from which it came. This is Hammerof’s thoughts on the matter. We go back from whence we came. As our traditions confirm we become ‘Ancestors’.

    “Is this why our ancestors begun concentrating on Schools of Mysticism to unearth the methods about which humans can reach a higher sense, higher self, and become conscious and one with the universe?”

    We knew from the very beginning how this universe worked and the role of Man in it. If we look at things objectively we will accept the fact that our very essence is a quantum phenomenon , this is what our ancestors called ‘The Great Spirit’ or “Ruah’ in Hebrew meaning air which has been translated as ‘spirit’. The quantum world is very different from our macro world, we are comprised of particles that can be invisible, communicate faster than the speed of light, entangle and stay connected to every part of the universe. Is this why we describe God as Omnipresent? Because if I am able to entangle my mind with the cosmic mind then although I am localized in Accra I will know what is going on at the very end of the universe. I won’t need a device to communicate with Dade I would simply send you a message using telepathy,is this how messengers of old recieved their revelations from on High? Don’t forget that our priests claimed to be able to recieve messages from God. Now either these are all lies but then how come the quantum world actually permits all of this as possibilities. Throughout the ancient world these things were known and believed. The only people who disbelieve in these things is the Western world or European world. All Natives or aboriginal peoples have elements of beliefs that correspond to what the quantum world can do.

    The Indeterminacy Equation I have been referring to is :

    E=h/t

    E is the amount of mass being separated from itself during superposition, h is Planck’s constant and t is time. Time and E are thus inversely related. The greater the amount of mass being superpositioned or splitting the faster the collapse would take place. So all of the possible states or locations of the object are collapsed into one definite position and state and this is done by an intrinsic process based on ‘Platonic values’ of the universe. Is this what we call ‘The will of God’? When someone dies we ask why and are told God has decided and He knows best, He has given and he has taken away. We don’t question God because his ‘decisions’ are based on ‘Platonic values’ that always lead the greater good.

  16. Ah! Very exciting answers Atiga Jonas Atingdui. Very very exciting answers! Thanks!

    How complex Agaliba? How complex can Chalmers’ theory be? That physical laws determine mental state (whatever that is) but not consciousness. That there may be “psychophysical laws” (that are not actual laws, they are only “law-like”) that determine which physical systems (man vs computer) are associated with which types of qualia and sentience?

    That is what I call giving up. Leaving the explanation to God (law-like rules beyond comprehension?? Come on!).

    At least with Penrose, like Atiga said, beleives that the nature of physical organization from the subatomic to the structural level of physical systems determine which system gains consciousness. This, I feel, is an attempt – particularly using quantum theory. On the other hand, I can’t see what Chalmers is attempting to unravel, except to state the obvious. Although even in that obvious he’s found wanting describing what a “mental state” actually entails.

    • You speak as if you have read chalmers. But your comments tell me you have not. Read him and then maybe we will debate in a gentlemanly fashion.

    • Ad hominem. You are the master of it. You do not debate anything. You say nothing and absolutely nothing and then you insult when people say anything. I tried engaging you in a sincere fashion. But no. That wouldn’t work for Agaliba! He must tell me I know nothing, although he Agaliba has said nothing himself. Good!

      No ones ever knows what your argument is. No one! No one ever reads what it is that you claim you know. You just keep throwing names here and there but you actually don’t say anything. You divert at best. It’s the Agaliba trade.

      I actually have no idea how you possibly could have come from any West African Royal Family. Maybe, if you do, you’re the reason the chieftaincy system is now absolutely obsolete in Ghana now. Descendants, and this is what you claim you are, are so full of nothing.

      How can we ever move forward?

    • Oooooo Solomon Azumah-Gomez why did u intervene? I was enjoyying it. Now that u’ve said its drama, Agaliba will watch his words.

  17. The Penrose hypothesis lacks the logical strength to sustain the leap Atiga makes. Atiga knows this because he is a smart guy.

    I dapple in pure logic.

  18. Haille you are obviously not familiar with the Penrose hypothesis. Hammerof himself links their theory to eastern philosophy such as Buddhism which is very similar to Islam and Ma’at. So if the co-author of the hypothesis makes such a jump then on what basis am I making a leap into a ditch?

    • This is an argument from authority. Ah, well. I had better quit now. Let us say, you win.

      Adios.

  19. Dade Afre Akufu that is why I said that Chalmers is a Philosopher not a Physicist or scientist. He Philosophizes but with very little scientific foundation

    • No. But this is the second time hearing of him.. listened to few youtube videos last time and I did not like the way he speaks of consciousness as the only direct thing ever

    • The way you added “ever” makes it seem as if reading this guy is so important. one of the things i hate is reading European philosophers.

    • Audu, ask Agaliba if he has himself ever read Chalmers, except throw around names! Hold Agaliba to his rant!

    • Audu … The answer is Yes. For anybody who dapples in the Philosophy of Mind Chalmers, Eccles and Popper are unavoidable.

    • Again, Agaliba has said nothing but throw around names! “Deliver us, oh Allah, from the sea of names!”

    • I learned a thing or two engaging you guys — you Dade in particular are not a serious person. Atiga, or so I think, is a genuine student of knowledge. Which is good. I attain no utility debating you. When you read Chalmers you may tag me in the future for a discussion.

    • Again, you have said nothing! Absolutely nothing! You know nothing! You spew nonsense shrouded in nothingness! When you learn to state what goes on in your mind call me. Or I can also teach you, for a fee of course. I will wipe out the vacuum in your head!

      • Again, you have said nothing! You keep writing statements without saying anything! I have never seen vacuum so wasted.

      • LOL. I like Chalmers because his views are similar to the Penrose model and he disagrees with Dennet who believes that consciousness is nothing but an illusion

      • Aha !! That is why I suggested him in the first place. Your nincompoop of a friend did not grasp this.

        When I read Chalmers as a teen I was flored for about 2 weeks. Luckily, Chalmers remembers the problem of logical strength. You do not. This is why you think that the Penrose hypothesis sufficiently sustains your god delusions — it does not and cannot.

        As for dennet he changes his views so often that I have not read him in years. I do not know his current stance.

      • Look Agaliba. I believe you are a quack. But that’s besides the point. Why don’t you leave “names” out of it, and your experience with “name-calling”, so we can debate the substance of this article. The fact is you cannot! The fact is you cannot state a single position without your opinion of one book after another, or the opinion of one author here and another there. You are a zombie! Although only in that respect. So stop it! Please. Jesus! If you want to debate me, I accpet. Any day! Let’s stick to telling us what you know instead of referring people to dead Europeans! Tell us what Chalmers says and stop referring us to him! Again, you are a kook, and that is entirely my believe. You can however prove us wrong bu taking up my challenge – lets’s talk about the article. Let’s see what you know! Let’s stick to your logic and your science. And let’s have everyone here see it for themselves. Your friends and my friends and our enemies will be the judges! Let’s try that. Jesus!

      • You contradiction yourself in the post. I am a quark and cannot debate. Yet I should debate you.

        Are you perchance autistic?

      • Haille like Dade Afre Akufu stated we are familiar with your stand; my assertions don’t hold. Ok I get it. Can you show me why and how the Penrose model fails to support the notion that God incarnated in man?

      • Jesus, thank you Atiga. Let’s get on with the essay already. I am spent with the insults. I will ignore them for now. So let’s talks about the article. Show us how Penrose model fails to support Atiga’s assertion that indeed, God incarnated in man? Just tell us. Leave the ad hominems out for just one minute!

      • Agaliba you could be suffering from a narcissistic personality disorder have yourself checked. You’re full of so much shit.

      • Agaliba, actually I said, I believe that you are a quack! That is you dabble in quackery. I did not say that I believe you a quark – a subatomic particle! The difference is not insignificant! Again, that is besides the point. Answer the question. Show what you actually know. Please just show us how much you claim, for quite a long time, that you know. Please! Jesus!

      • Atiga all you do in your article is selectively regurgitate Penrose et. al. according to your understanding of their argument (which i take to be an argument against reductive physicalism).

        Now, Leaving aside the conjectural nature of their arguments, I will here point out the following elementary points:

        Even assuming that the Penrose argument is true it is insufficient to prove your substantive claims.

        Namely, that:

        (a) There is a God
        (b) Human consciousness is God incarnated in Man.

        This is because the argument for the existence of God is logically distinct to and from the argument for Orchestrated Objective Reduction of Consciousness.

        Incidentally the enthymematic arguments they employ are not intended to prove Gods existence or God incarnate in Man but amount to an attack of the computational theory of mind.

        Your article is descriptive and to be honest very poor.

        Here is a summary of their main arguments:

        1. Awareness is a feature of the brains physical action.

        2. Any physical action can be simulated computationally
        3. Computation simulation cannot itself be aware.
        ———————————–
        Any one of the above propositions can be contested.

      • Zowuno … You are surprisingly very polite today. Get back to your old form. Are you not going to call me a piece of shit or a coon today? Go on.

      • Haille now we are getting somewhere at least. As I suspected you woefully failed to comprehend the thrust of my assertions

        1. The Penrose theory doesn’t and isn’t supposed to prove God’s existence. I have never claimed such a point especially when Penrose is an agnostic. But what I do attempt to do is make deductions based on their theory. Their theory has implications whether those implications are acknowledged by them or not remains immaterial.

        2. My argument requires actually very little reasoning because it is self-evident in their theory. The claim to have found how consciousness arises in the universe. They claim that the mechanism that occasions consciousness in the universe is intrinsic to it thus making consciousness also a property of the universe. This means consciousness is not a phenomenon that is exclusive to the brain or organic life forms. The same process that gives birth to consciousness in the universe is replicated in the microtubules inside the neurons. I using logic to infer that it is possible that such a replication of consciousness in the brain could be what the ancient scriptures referred to when they state that the spirit of God infused itself in man making man a LIVING being.

        How on earth is that a misplaced inference? The logic squares fully

      • Haille Mariam-Lemar let me help you here, I think our friend Atiga Jonas Atingdui seek not to copy paste the ideas of Penrose et. al. but rather used them as reference per the context of some of their scholastic out put to validate his argument in triangulation manner, which is an academic tradition.

        Therefore will be academically wrong to judge his essay as if it meant to replicate the works of Penrose and the likes to mark the accuracy of his deduction.

        I further think, it will be scientifically unethical to debunk some one’s work when you have not provided an encountering argument to proof the fallacy in his work, or?

  20. Atiga….. I repeat again: the Implications you draw are not sustained by their argument.

    Tweneboah Senzu. You may be correct. He could have also been trying to mystify his readers.

    I have left other criticisms that are more damning.

    I respect Atiga. My role as I pointed out the other day, is to dispel lazy thinking, lazy argument and herd behaviour.

  21. Haille, I think I made my point above quite succinctly. There is nothing in their theory that prevents it from being the subject of the Genesis account or the Adam account in the Quran or of Ptah’s self creation in Kemetian cosmology.

  22. Agaliba! I see that you misread the article, although it seems that you’ve arrived at some understanding of it by reading through my earlier discussion with Atiga. That’s ok. Only it fails to capture the theme of the argument. Firstly, there’s no attempt in this particular essay to prove the existence of God but to assign the idea of awareness/consciousness to God. This in itself is not the theme of the essay but to situate the essay within a careful paradigm, of which religion is a part. And by religion, the belief in God. It is not to prove God.

    Secondly, Atiga, following in the spirit of Penrose, asserts and Penrose proves this, that consciousness is pervasive in physical systems. But the type and nature of the levels of organization, from the subatomic to the cellular organizational level is what determines conscious – where the wave function collapses. Therefore a computer simulation, which does not have the same organizational structure as a microtubule of the human brain, cannot exhibit consciousness. In short, physicalism is necessary, but structure and organization of the physical (that is where the vibrations of the wave function interact) are equally important in determining if the function collapses or not. This is the import of the essay which you have not addressed. Again, I ask you, how does what Penrose wrote fail to support Atiga’s assertion that indeed consciousness (God) incarnates in Man?

  23. Haille before you depart let us at least agree on logical issues. The central thrust of the Penrose theory is to explain consciousness which he states is a quantum phenomenon. He then shows that the quantum process that causes consciousness in the external universe is replicated in the brain and yet you say there is no ‘incarnation’ or replication of the process in man?????

  24. Dade Afre Akufu you and Jonathan Nukpezah have always prove to me you have mastery over Physics and Mathematics….so I read your post to further learn alot. Thank you, while when it comes to Philosophy of the West: learning alot from my brother Agaliba. Respect to all the Intellectual fellowship in this community, will be unfair to leave my current teacher of Metaphysics Atiga Jonas out.

  25. Why did God keep me away from this thread until now? ‘Chance?’ ‘Probability’ ‘Contingency’??? I missed the bulk of the discussion. Mine!

    Mariam, please go and read the following about the “dualism” of the analytic-synthetic distinction. “From a Logical Point of View”, Cambridge, Mass., 1953 Chap. 2, W.V. Quine and Toward Reunion in Philosophy, Cambridge, Mass., 1956, Chap. 8., Morton White. Then lets have a cordial conversation.

    The above will direct you Haille Mariam Agaliba in the right direction to fully intepret Chalmers assertions. Philosophy is a b-tch.

  26. I have read the article and it is quite interesting and very deep. My perspective will be to take the ancient Kemetic view of the primeval water, the Nun out which arose Amun and through the power of the Nun, he achieved consciousness. I will follow John Wheeler and posit that the primeval water the Nun is quantum foam and consciousness is just a fundamental mode of vibration of the quantum foam. We have consciousness since we are affected by the vibrations of quantum foam and experience the particular model of vibration of quantum foam which is consciousness. This is just a thought.

  27. So Lemar, you see. the reason why i asked you the question is evident in Jonathan Nukpezah’s thoughts. He resorted first to kemetic culture before proceeding … I asked because though the two intertwine the guy throws out his stuff out as though consciousness comes either comes before culture or the culture that underpins his consciousness is a prevailing one, without showing any awareness of what effect these two have on each other.

  28. “The Ancient Egyptians envisaged the oceanic abyss of the Nun as surrounding a bubble in which the sphere of life is encapsulated, representing the deepest mystery of their cosmogony.”

    Clearly the primordial waters is where God was present and the bubble (atom) was infused with the consciousness that existed in the Nun. @ Jonathan Nukpezah

  29. Great Physics lectures intertwined with Metaphysics. This kind of series of debate once in my life time, I enjoyed it in 6 month seminary lecture in Jesuits class, never again until this platform. You guys are cranks.

  30. Indeed, knowledge is power and those who lack it might as well disappear from the earth’s surface. This is a beautiful essay by own comrade Atiga Jonas Atingdui and as usual a spicy introductory by the evergreen Akosua M. Abeka. The different perspectives from Jonathan Nukpezah, Audu Salisu et al. cannot go without any mention. Truly, this platform is the place to be if deep thoughts are to be exchanged. Thank you all

  31. Bernard Seth Tornyenyor, I will echo what you have just said. At Grandmother Africa forums, sometimes passions run wild. But so it should. I think that Akosua M. Abeka has the level -headedness to allow adults to sort things out. And in fact, we do. I love the passion. Without it, Gee…, we cannot invest ourselves in anything. Passion is important. I know some get frustrated when say, Dade and Agaliaba go at it. But it’s all fun! Deep down we all just want what’s best for Africa! And we must be passionate about it. But the level of knowledge expressed in Grandmother Africa’s articles are top-notch. Hands down! I learn too, so much! Thanks to all the writers at Grandmother! Thanks to Atiga Jonas Atingdui this time. I expect more, much more! Lol.

  32. Solomon Azumah-Gomez indeed the passion cannot be overstated. But Solomon I feel you are so peaceful inside you that you always want to stop the Dade versus Agaliba. And @Benard Seth Tornyenyor thanks for recognizing grandmother. But where I couldn’t just stoop laughing was where Agaliba said “when I read it as a teen…” That made my day

  33. Guys listen to this carefully in relation to how Physicists are now entering a space that was formerly reserved for religion. Hammerof is mentioned in this short interview as well. Then see if what I postulated about God incarnating in man is so far-fetched.
    https://youtu.be/rGR3SOiTTLc

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here