The NSTP ( Non - Spatial Thinking Process ) Theory
Abstract The NSTP theory mainly advocates that the material
universe is exclusively a group of thinking process/es existing
in the form of non-spatial feelings. In computer terminology it
regards (material) universe as a non-spatial computer (whose
hardware is made up of non-spatial feelings and software is made
up of superhuman thoughts) and space as a virtual reality (i.e.
a projection of non-spatial mind, a form of illusion/mere
appearance). It entails 7 theorems which are to some extent
proved or reasonably demonstrated / supported. It is found to be
a master-key that can resolve mysteries surrounding Zeno's
paradoxes, quantum mechanics, biology, etc through its non -
spatial universal mechanical framework.
Main Body The term NSTP (Non - Spatial Thinking Process) in the
NSTP theory means thinking process existing in the form of
non-spatial feelings. The theory is comprised of 7 theorems that
are stated and demonstrated below.
Theorem 1 : Phenomenal mind (i.e. feelings or qualia) is
non-spatial. In other words, no kind of feeling, e.g. feeling of
bodily pain, can be represented by any spatial structure. 1. The
feeling of bodily pain, for example, is conceptual distinct from
its bodily counterpart (i.e. identification of some
electrochemical signal in brain) for the following two reasons.
a. This conceptual distinction is obvious or self - evident or
axiomatic to me. [ It is important to note that I advocate 'the
principle of universal doubt' : anything may be possible, for
that which is believed to be absolutely (or 100 %) certainly
true at present could be false as the intellectual capacities of
the believer may be limited. Thus all axioms are at the most
99.99...% certain to me. ] b. The knowledge of identification of
electrochemical signal is not at all sufficient for the
knowledge of the feeling of bodily pain, for example. 2. Theorem
1 has been axiomatic to me. The abstract nature of a spatial
structure and mechanism, involving transfer of information (in
general, spatial actions), and the abstract nature of a feeling
(which can only be experienced) are not equivalent.
Theorem 2 : All kinds of experiences, even abstract thoughts I
know I am having, are ultimately feelings (or qualias). 1. When
I know I am thinking, for example, this knowledge ultimately
comes through some kind of feeling. 2. Theorem 2 is axiomatic to
me.
Theorem 3 : I am a (temporal) stream of (non-spatial) mental
events (i.e. feelings). I am an NSTP (Non - Spatial Thinking
Process). 1. I am a group of feelings. I am not something other
than feelings. a. The feeling of pain, for example, is itself
sufficient for its own existence. There is no need of some other
substance (which is not a feeling itself) for the feeling of
pain, for example, to exist. b. When I know that I am feeling
pain this knowledge itself, according to theorem 2, is
ultimately represented as some feeling. 2. The feeling of bodily
pain, for example, represents the idea, concept, or thought of
the feeling of bodily pain (itself). Thus every feeling
represents some thought. So I am an NSTP.
Theorem 4 : Feelings are most certainly real and thus physical
or material. 1. The proposition 'feelings are real' is axiomatic
to me. I cannot deny I am feeling something at the moment. This
feeling is the most real thing while the whole space, with all
spatial entities including my body, could be a form of illusion.
(I feel therefore I am.) 2. If something is real then it is
physical or material.
Theorem 5 : Space ( as a room or void out there : whether three
or higher dimensional, bounded or unbounded ) is a mere
form/kind of illusion. ( i.e., exclusively / only a virtual
reality; a projection of non-spatial mind; a kind of feeling.)
1. The problem of spatial - non-spatial interaction and
ontological complexity- If space and non-spatial mind are both
realities (i.e. ontologically existent) then there are following
two possibilities : a. Spatial and non-spatial entities interact
b. Spatial and non-spatial entities do not interact but rather
follow a parallelism In the first case there is a problem 'how
spatial and non-spatial physically interact' and in the both
cases the model of the universe becomes unnecessarily
(ontologically) complex as there are two real (ontologically
existent) entities involved rather than 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 ?' (See David
Darling : The universal book of mathematics, 2004) 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 persuing 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.' (See Simon
Blackburn : Dictionary of Philosophy, 1996) 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
reality, a form/kind of illusion (existing in the form of
non-spatial mind/s). Consequently (spatial) motion is also a
form of illusion (to non-spatial observer/s). Thus reality
(which is non-spatial) is not constrained by spatial infinities
as whatever that is seen (i.e. experienced or 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 do 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 is that it has to produce some dynamic spatial pattern
(actually represented in the form of some non-spatial feelings
or states of consciousness), as if a mover moving or the faster
overtaking the slower. That's it. [ In analogy with desktop
computers a software programmer or graphic designer do not at
all have to worry with Zeno's arguments or paradoxes. All s/he
has to do is to design and write a program in order to create an
appropriate dynamic or changing pattern on the computer monitor
screen. ] ( The last two of the four Zeno's paradoxes have
different solutions which are stated in my article 'The NSTP
theoretical resolution of Zeno's paradoxes'. ) 3. The problem of
non-locality in quantum mechanics - 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. (See Robert Nadeau and Menas
Kafatos, 1999. The non-local universe. 1st ed. Oxford : Oxford
University Press) This problem is also out of the misbelief that
space exists in the ontological sense, i.e. as a reality, out
there. (Because if we believe that space does exist in that
sense then any spatial communication would need 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, space being a virtual reality (to non-spatial
observer/s) the quantum non-locality is no longer mysterious or
problematic as the photons and their behaviour is a mere form of
illusion, a virtual reality. [ Again in analogy with (spatial)
desktop computers such a photonic behaviour on the computer
monitor screen has no slightest mystery surrounding it, as it is
just a dynamic or changing pattern of pixels modulated by some
hidden software process/es. ]
Theorem 6 : The spatial illusion (to individual non-spatial
minds, such as humans, animals, etc.) is (orderly /
thoughtfully) created or modulated by some superhuman
non-spatial thinking process/es (NSTP/s). In other words, the
individual (or peripheral) NSTP/s are created or modulated by
some (central) superhuman NSTP/s (i.e. non-spatial feelings
representing superhuman thoughts or ideas). 1. There should be
some intelligence responsible for the immense order in the
universe (e.g. gravitational phenomenon or quantum
non-locality). I/we, the individual NSTP/s, are not responsible
for the order (i.e. orderly spatial illusion). In general, in
any machine where its peripherals are not intelligent enough to
account for their own behaviour there has to be some central
intelligent part in the machine to bring out the peripheral
happenings or phenomena. [ In analogy with desktop computers the
order in the dynamic pattern on the monitor screen is created by
some central intelligent hardware representing some software. ]
2. As the spatial illusion (say, gravitational phenomenon or
quantum non-locality) could be of any logically possible kind
there has to be some way to change the ways individual NSTP/s
are generated (or created or produced). And for that to be
possible there has to be some central intelligence existing in
the form of (non-spatial) feelings, which itself could be
modulated to alter (or modulate) the modulation of individual
NSTP/s. [ In analogy with desktop computers if the software
instructions or parameters (ultimately some hardware pattern)
are changed the dynamic pattern on monitor screen could be
changed (or even destroyed). ] 3. The central NSTP/s represent
superhuman thoughts or ideas (or, in general, mind) as they
orderly create individual (non - superhuman) NSTP/s which is a
super-task, distinctively beyond human capacities. Theorem 7 :
The central superhuman NSTP/s are processed instantaneously
(i.e. in zero time). This is because of no spatial limitations.
(In space it takes time to transfer data from one spatial
location to another.) [ Although a conscious human being, for
example, is nothing but an NSTP, it is, at least partially,
conceptually (as in contrast with physically) bound to the
spatial biochemical brain, and thus the central NSTP/s introduce
time lag (i.e. temporal experience) in individual NSTP/s. ] [
Thus, in computer terminology, in the NSTP model of reality the
hardware of the universe is composed of non-spatial feelings,
while its (central) software is made of superhuman thoughts, and
the peripherals represent non-superhuman thoughts, concepts or
ideas. ]
How the non - spatial universal computer exactly works. -
Consider some experimental setup for detecting quantum
non-locality. A conscious (human) being observing one of the
photons (say A) is actually a peripheral NSTP. An event in this
NSTP has some superhuman or meta representation in the central
NSTP/s, which is caused and further processed by static
(representing laws of physics : in computer terminology main
instructions and parameters in the software) as well as dynamic
(representing thoughts used merely for the purpose of processing
: in computer terminology the run time data) NSTPs. According to
theorem 7 this central processing takes no time, and thus within
no time (i.e. instantaneously) creates appropriate illusion of
the other photon (say B). Ultimately it appears that the two
photons communicate with each other instantaneously or in zero
time.
[ Theorems 1 to 4 are relatively axiomatic; theorems 5 to 7 are
relatively hypothetical; while theorem 6 and thus theorem 7 are
not necessary for the NSTP theory, at least for its
nomenclature. ]
Conclusion The 7 theorems of the NSTP theory - 1. Feelings are
non - spatial. 2. All experiences are feelings. 3. I, a
conscious being, am an NSTP (Non-Spatial Thinking Process). 4.
Feelings are physical or material. 5. Space is a virtual
reality, that fact which the Zeno's paradoxes necessarily imply
(for if space is a reality, i.e. ontologically existent, then
Zeno's paradoxes would arise/be unsolved). 6. Individual or
peripheral NSTP/s are orderly created by central superhuman
NSTP/s. 7. The central superhuman NSTP/s take zero time for
being processed. The NSTP theory 1. Maintains both mentalism (or
idealism : only mind is real), as only non-spatial mind is a
reality, and materialism (or realism : only matter is real), as
mind itself is matter. 2. Coincidently entails the ideas of
philosophers viz Descartes (mind as non-spatial) and Kant (space
as a projection of mind). 3. Strongly supports that idea of
solipsism (I'm the only mind in the universe) as well as the
idea that any apparently spatial entity could be conscious. 4.
Falsifies general relativity, for example, on its physical or
ontological side, while retaining its (so called) mathematical
validity.
Problems with two other models of reality - 1 : Many - worlds :
a. Does not explain exactly how a single world splits into many
worlds and how many worlds unite into a single world. b. Does
not explain consciousness. (i.e. Does not provide appropriate
physical basis for consciousness. ) 2. String theories : a. Do
not explain consciousness. b. Do not solve problems like quantum
non-locality.
Kedar Joshi BSc MA MRI Cambridge, UK.