[ExI] Fwd: New article: EM Field Theory of Consciousness

[Colin Hales]

Colour is being used as an arbitrary label for a set of parameters in the
model. Charmed, up/down etc etc all the same. The references to the model
are in there. Perhaps familiarise yourself, and then re-read our article.

On Mon, Jun 20, 2022, 7:30 AM Brent Allsop <brent.allsop at gmail.com> wrote:

>
> Hi Colin,
> I'm looking at the first figure in your paper
> <https://www.frontiersin.org/files/Articles/836046/fnhum-16-836046-HTML-r1/image_m/fnhum-16-836046-g001.jpg>
> .
> Your theory doesn't seem to talk about color, at all, which to me is the
> only thing the explanatory gap is about.
> I noticed that in your image "color charge" is listed under the "strong
> interaction" column, not under the "EM" column.  Could you describe what
> this means?
> I'm quite clueless about this.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Sun, Jun 19, 2022 at 3:15 PM Brent Allsop <brent.allsop at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Colin,
>>
>> On Sun, Jun 19, 2022 at 2:59 PM Colin Hales <col.hales at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Imagine the canonizer idea comes across "the answer"? What's your end
>>> game?
>>>
>>
>> Then you answered with:
>>
>>
>>> The only thing that really matters is if somebody comes out with a major
>>> refutation that will also involve a dramatic new construct inside the
>>> standard model. With evidence. Which is what I'd rather see than anything
>>> else.
>>>
>>
>> THIS is exactly what canonizer is designed to rigorously track and
>> accelerate.  Some patent clearc named Einstein is the first person to start
>> a camp saying the established f=m*a consensus is wrong.  Then people
>> discover the quality of the argument, and experimentally demonstrating it
>> to be true.  More and more people are forced to jump to that camp, and
>> eventually the scientific revolution is complete, with an entirely new
>> consensus theory.  At least, until the next first person to falsify that
>> with a good demonstration or argument, and start the process all over.
>>
>> With Truth, there is no "end game".  The best we can know is whether
>> something has been falsified or not, and how much consensus there is, or
>> isn't for the many yet to be falsified theories (represented as sub camps
>> of RQT <https://canonizer.com/topic/88-Representational-Qualia/6>)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20220620/d70621d4/attachment.htm>