#Cognitive consciousness

[penhive]

Phenomenology of the Spirit

Phenomenology refers to contents of consciousness and here I want to probe its relationship with the spirit.

Transcendental Consciousness

Transcendental consciousness is the relationship with the divine and it is exhorted as a process to a deity, our kinship with God of the father, our fulfillment of our hopes and desires through the agent of prayer, our faith in God in times of trouble, our solace, comfort and mercy and grace. Our relationship with God is I and the though and it’s a beatific experience.

Perceptional Consciousness

Perception is a mental process and it’s through perception that we come into awareness of things and ideas. The thing for perception is the volition of the will.

Cognitive Consciousness

Cognitive consciousness relates to the understanding of things and ideas. Cognition can be cultural of scientific. An example of cultural consciousness is: is racism good or bad for the society? Another example is should sex be straight or gay? An example of scientific consciousness can be the mathematics of Pythagoras; another example is the study of the cosmos. 

Self-consciousness

Self-consciousness is the becoming aware of ourselves. It includes the nature of being (the consciousness of the itself), our thinking of consciousness (memory) the consciousness of the itself (being for itself) and the consciousness of being for others. Love and hate, joy and peace are all parts of self-consciousness.

Cathartic Consciousness

Cathartic consciousness is the consciousness of beauty, a feeling gained by encountering art, travelling, being in solitude, being in conversation with nature, and also cathartic consciousness involves creating artistic artifacts. Cathartic consciousness is a jouissance of the mind. We are beatified with the consciousness of aesthetic experience.

[geometrymatters]

Sir Roger Penrose

To me, the world of perfect forms is primary (as was Plato’s own belief) — its existence being almost a logical necessity — and both the other two worlds are its shadows.

Sir Roger Penrose, born on August 8, 1931, in Colchester, Essex, England, is a luminary in the realm of mathematical physics. His journey began with a Ph.D. in algebraic geometry from the University of Cambridge in 1957, and his career has spanned numerous prestigious posts at universities in both England and the United States. His work in the 1960s on the fundamental features of black holes, celestial bodies of such immense gravity that nothing, not even light, can escape, earned him the 2020 Nobel Prize for Physics.

Penrose’s work on black holes, in collaboration with Stephen Hawking, led to the ground-breaking discovery that all matter within a black hole collapses to a singularity, a point in space where mass is compressed to infinite density and zero volume. This revelation illuminated our understanding of these enigmatic cosmic entities.

His work did not stop at the theoretical; he also developed a method of mapping the regions of space-time surrounding a black hole, known as a Penrose diagram. This tool allows us to visualize the effects of gravitation upon an entity approaching a black hole, providing a window into the heart of these celestial mysteries.

Within Penrose’s chapter, “The Godelian Case” (from “The Road to Reality”) the profound implications of Kurt Gödel’s incompleteness theorems are examined in relation to the connection between mathematics and geometry. Specifically, Penrose’s attention centers on the model depicted in Figure 2.1, which portrays a cubic array of spheres. Through this visual representation, Penrose explores the intricate relationship between geometry and mathematical understanding.

By introducing the model of a cubic array of spheres, Penrose highlights the fundamental role of spatial arrangements in mathematical cognition. This geometrical structure serves as a metaphorical embodiment of mathematical concepts, illustrating how spatial configurations can stimulate cognitive processes and facilitate intuitive comprehension of mathematical truths. The intricate interplay between the arrangement of spheres within the model and the underlying principles of mathematics encourages contemplation on the deep-rooted connections between geometry, spatial reasoning, and abstract mathematical thought.

Penrose’s utilization of the cubic array of spheres underscores his broader philosophical framework, which challenges reductionist accounts of human cognition that rely solely on formal systems or computational models. Through this geometrical representation, he advocates for a more holistic understanding of mathematical insight, one that recognizes the essential role of geometric intuition in shaping human understanding.

By looking at the intricate connection between mathematics and geometry, Penrose prompts a re-evaluation of the mechanistic view of cognition, emphasizing the need to incorporate spatial reasoning and intuitive geometrical understanding into comprehensive models of human thought.

(E) Find a sum of successive hexagonal numbers, starting from 1 , that is not a cube. I am going to try to convince you that this computation will indeed continue for ever without stopping. First of all, a cube is called a cube because it is a number that can be represented as a cubic array of points as depicted in Fig. 2. 1 . I want you to try to think of such an array as built up successively, starting at one corner and then adding a succession of three-faced arrangements each consisting of a back wall, side wall, and ceiling, as depicted in Fig. 2.2. Now view this three-faced arrangement from a long way out, along the direction of the corner common to all three faces. What do we see? A hexagon as in Fig. 2.3. The marks that constitute these hexagons, successively increasing in size, when taken together, correspond to the marks that constitute the entire cube. This, then, establishes the fact that adding together successive hexagonal numbers, starting with 1 , will always give a cube. Accordingly, we have indeed ascertained that (E) will never stop.

Penrose’s work is characterized by a profound appreciation for geometry. His father, a biologist with a passion for mathematics, introduced him to the beauty of geometric shapes and patterns at a young age. This early exposure to geometry shaped Penrose’s unique approach to scientific problems, leading him to develop new mathematical notations and diagrams that have become indispensable tools in the field. His creation of the Penrose tiling, a method of covering a plane with a set of shapes without using a repeating pattern, is a testament to his innovative thinking and his deep understanding of geometric principles.

His fascination with geometry extended beyond the realm of mathematics and into the world of art. He was deeply influenced by the work of Dutch artist M.C. Escher, whose intricate drawings of impossible structures and infinite patterns captivated Penrose’s imagination. This encounter with Escher’s art led Penrose to explore the interplay between geometry and art, culminating in his own contributions to the field of mathematical art. His work in this area, like his scientific research, is characterized by a deep appreciation for the beauty and complexity of geometric forms.

In geometric cognition, Penrose’s work has the potential to make significant contributions. His unique perspective on the role of geometry in understanding the physical world, the mind, and even art, offers a fresh approach to this emerging field. His belief in the power of geometric thinking, as evidenced by his own ground-breaking work, suggests that a geometric approach to cognition could yield valuable insights into the nature of thought and consciousness.

Objective mathematical notions must be thought of as timeless entities and are not to be regarded as being conjured into existence at the moment that they are first humanly perceived.

I argue that the phenomenon of consciousness cannot be accommodated within the framework of present-day physical theory.

His Orch OR theory posits that consciousness arises from quantum computations within the brain’s neurons. This bold hypothesis, bridging the gap between the physical and the mental, has sparked intense debate and research in the scientific community.

Penrose’s work on twistor theory, a geometric framework that seeks to unify quantum mechanics and general relativity, is a testament to his belief in the primacy of geometric structures. This theory, which represents particles and fields in a way that emphasizes their geometric and topological properties, can be seen as a metaphor for his views on cognition. Just as twistor theory seeks to represent complex physical phenomena in terms of simpler geometric structures, Penrose suggests that human cognition may also be understood in terms of fundamental geometric and topological structures.

This perspective has significant implications for the field of cognitive geometry, which studies how humans and other animals understand and navigate the geometric properties of their environment. If Penrose’s ideas are correct, our ability to understand and manipulate geometric structures may be a fundamental aspect of consciousness, rooted in the quantum geometry of the brain itself.

The final conclusion of all this is rather alarming. For it suggests that we must seek a non-computable physical theory that reaches beyond every computable level of oracle machines (and perhaps beyond). — Roger Penrose, Shadows of the Mind: A Search for the Missing Science of Consciousness

[graciecatfamilyband]

.

[thebardostate]

Is the Brain a Driver or a Steering Wheel?

This three part series summarizes what science knows, or thinks it knows, about consciousness. In Part 1 What Does Quantum Physics Imply About Consciousness? we looked at why several giants in quantum physics - Schrodinger, Heisenberg, Von Neumann and others - believed consciousness is fundamental to reality. In Part 2 Where Does Consciousness Come From? we learned the "dirty little secret" of neuroscience: it still hasn't got a clue how electrical activity in the brain results in consciousness.

In this concluding part of the series we will look at how a person can have a vivid conscious experience even when their brain is highly dysfunctional. These medically documented oddities challenge the materialist view that the brain produces consciousness.

Before proceeding, let's be clear what what is meant by "consciousness". For brevity, we'll keep things simple. One way of looking at consciousness is from the perspective of an outside observer (e.g., "conscious organisms use their senses to notice differences in their environment and act on their goals.") This outside-looking-in view is called behavioral consciousness (aka psychological consciousness). The other way of looking at it is the familiar first-person perspective of what it feels like to exist; this inside-looking-out view is called phenomenal consciousness (Barušs, 2023). This series is only discussing phenomenal consciousness.

Ready? Let’s go!

Source: Caltech Brain Imaging Center

A Hole in the Head

Epilepsy is a terrible disease in which electrical storms in the brain trigger seizures. For some people these seizures are so prolonged and frequent that drastic action is needed to save their lives. One such procedure is called a hemispherectomy, the removal or disconnection of half the brain. Above is an MRI image of a child who has undergone the procedure.

You might think that such radical surgery would profoundly alter the memory, personality, and cognitive abilities of the patient.

You would be wrong. One child who underwent the procedure at age 5 went on to attend college and graduate school, demonstrating above average intelligence and language abilities despite removal of the left hemisphere (the zone of the brain typically identified with language.) A study of 58 children from 1968 to 1996 found no significant long-term effects on memory, personality or humor, and minimal changes in cognitive function after hemispherectomy.

You might think that, at best, only a child could successfully undergo this procedure. Surely such surgery would kill an adult?

You would be wrong again. Consider the case of Ahad Israfil, an adult who suffered an accidental gunshot to the head and successfully underwent the procedure to remove his right cerebral hemisphere. Amazingly, after the five hour operation he tried to speak and went on to regain a large measure of functionality - and even earn a degree - although he did require use of a wheelchair afterwards.

Another radical epilepsy procedure, a corpus collosotomy, leaves the hemispheres intact but severs the connections between them. For decades it was believed that these split-brain patients developed divided consciousness, but more recent research disputes this notion. Researchers found that, despite physically blocking all neuronal communication between the two hemispheres, the brain somehow still maintains a single unified consciousness. How it manages this feat remains a complete mystery. Recent research on how psychedelic drugs affect the brain hints that the brain might have methods other than biochemical agents for internal communication, although as yet we haven't an inkling as to what those might be.

So what's the smallest scrape of brain you need to live? Consider the case of a 44-year-old white collar worker, married with two children and with an IQ of 75. Two weeks after noticing some mild weakness in one leg the man went to see his doctor. The doc ordered a routine MRI scan of the man's cranium, and this is what it showed.

Source: The Lancet

What you are seeing here is a giant empty cavity where most of the patient's brain should be. Fully three quarters of his brain volume is missing, most likely due to a bout of hydrocephalus he experienced when he was six months old.

Artist: Tom Wright

Last Words

Many unusual phenomena have been observed as life draws to an end. We're going to look at two deathbed anomalies that have neurological implications.

The first is terminal lucidity, sometimes called paradoxical lucidity. First studied in 2009, terminal lucidity refers to the spontaneous return of lucid communication in patients who were no longer thought to be medically capable of normal verbal communication due to irreversible neurological deterioration (e.g., Alzheimers, meningitis, Parkinson's, strokes.) Here are three examples:

A 78-year-old woman, left severely disabled and unable to speak by a stroke, spoke coherently for the first time in two years by asking her daughter and caregiver to take her home. She died later that evening.

A 92-year-old woman with advanced Alzheimer’s disease hadn’t recognized her family for years, but the day before her death, she had a pleasantly bright conversation with them, recalling everyone’s name. She was even aware of her own age and where she’d been living all this time.

A young man suffering from AIDS-related dementia and blinded by the disease who regained both his lucidity and apparently his eyesight as well to say farewell to his boyfriend and caregiver the day before his death.

Terminal lucidity has been reported for centuries. A historical review found 83 case reports spanning the past 250 years. It was much more commonly reported in the 19th Century (as a sign that death was near, not as a phenomenon in its own right) before the materialist bias in the medical profession caused a chilling effect during the 20th Century. Only during the past 15 years has any systematic effort been made to study this medical anomaly. As a data point on its possible prevalence a survey of 45 Canadian palliative caregivers found that 33% of them had witnessed at least one case of terminal lucidity within the past year. Other surveys found have that the rate of prevalence is higher if measured over a longer time window than one year, suggesting that, while uncommon, terminal lucidity isn't particularly rare.

Terminal lucidity is difficult to study, in part because of ethical challenges in obtaining consent from neurocompromised individuals, and in part because its recent identification as a research topic presents delineation problems. However, the promise of identifying new neurological pathways in the brains of Alzheimer's and Parkinson's patients has gotten a lot of attention. In 2018 the US National Institute on Aging (NIA) announced two funding opportunites to advance this nascent science.

Due to the newness of this topic there will continue be challenges with the data for some time to come. However, its impact on eyewitnesses is indisputably profound.

Artist: Tom Wright

Near Death Experiences

The second deathbed anomaly we will take a look at are Near-Death Experiences (NDEs.) These are extraordinary and deeply personal psychological experiences that typically (but not always) occur during life-threatening emergencies such as cardiac arrest, falls, automobile accidents, or other traumatic events; they are also occasionally reported during general anesthesia. Much of the research in this area has focused on cardiac arrest cases because these patients are unconscious and have little to no EEG brain wave activity, making it difficult to account for how the brain could sustain the electrical activity needed to perceive and remember the NDE. This makes NDEs an important edge case for consciousness science.

NDEs are surprisingly common. A 2011 study published by the New York Academy of Sciences estimated that over 9 million people in the United States have experienced an NDE. Multiple studies have found that around 17% of cardiac arrest survivors report an NDE.

There is a remarkable consistency across NDE cases, with experiencers typically reporting one or more of the following:

The sensation of floating above their bodies watching resuscitation efforts, sometimes able to recall details of medical procedures and ER/hallway conversations they should not have been aware of;

Heightened sensations, including cases of blind people who report the ability to "see" during the NDE;

Extremely rapid mental processing;

The perception of passing through something like a tunnel;

A hyper-vivid life review, described by many experiencers as "more real than real";

Transcendent visions of an afterlife;

Encounters with deceased loved ones, sometimes including people the experiencer didn’t know were dead; and

Encounters with spiritual entities, sometimes in contradiction to their personal belief systems.

Of particular interest is a type of NDE called a veridical NDE. These are NDEs in which the experiencer describes independently verifiable events occurring during the period when they had minimal or no brain activity and should not have been perceived, let alone remembered, if the brain were the source of phenomenal consciousness. These represent about 48% of all NDE accounts (Greyson 2010). Here are a few first-hand NDE reports.

A 62-year-old aircraft mechanic during a cardiac arrest (from Sabom 1982, pp. 35, 37)

A 23-year-old crash-rescue firefighter in the USAF caught by a powerful explosion from a crashed B-52 (from Greyson 2021, pg. 27-29)

An 18-year-old boy describes what it was like to nearly drown (from the IANDS website)

There are thousands more first person NDE accounts published by the International Association for Near-Death Studies and at the NDE Research Foundation. The reason so many NDE accounts exist is because the experience is so profound that survivors often feel compelled to write as a coping method. Multiple studies have found that NDEs are more often than not life-changing events.

A full discussion of NDEs is beyond the scope of this post. For a good general introduction, I highly recommend After: What Near-Death Experiences Reveal about Life and Beyond by Bruce Greyson, MD (2021).

The Materialist Response

Materialists have offered up a number of psychological and physiological models for NDEs, but none of them fits all the data. These include:

People's overactive imaginations. Sabom (1982) was a skeptical cardiologist who set out to prove this hypothesis by asking cardiac arrest survivors who did not experience NDEs to imagine how the resuscitation process worked, then comparing those accounts with the veridical NDE accounts. He found that the veridical NDE accounts were highly accurate (0% errors), whereas 87% of the imagined resuscitation procedures contained at least one major error. Sabom became convinced that NDEs are real. His findings were replicated by Holden and Joesten (1990) and Sartori (2008) who reviewed veridical NDE accounts in hospital settings (n = 93) and found them to be 92% completely accurate, 6% partially accurate, and 1% completely inaccurate.

NDEs are just hallucinations or seizures. The problem here is that hallucinations and seizures are phenomena with well-defined clinical features that do not match those of NDEs. Hallucinations are not accurate descriptions of verifiable events, but veridical NDEs are. Also, it would be extraordinary to say the least that so many people would be hallucinating in similar ways.

NDEs are the result of electrical activity in the dying brain. The EEGs of experiencers in cardiac arrest show that no well-defined electrical activity was occurring that could have supported the formation or retention of memories during the NDE. These people were unconscious and should not have remembered anything.

NDEs are the product of dream-like or REM activity. Problem: many NDEs occur under general anesthesia, which suppresses dreams and REM activity. So this explanation cannot be correct.

NDEs result from decreased oxygen levels in the brain. Two problems here: 1) The medical effects of oxygen deprivation are well known, and they do not match the clinical presentation of NDEs. 2) The oxygen levels of people in NDEs (e.g., during general anesthesia) has been shown to be the same or greater than people who didn’t experience NDEs.

NDEs are the side effects of medications or chemicals produced in the brain (e.g. ketamine or DMT). The problem here is that people who are given medications in hospital settings tend to report fewer NDEs, not more; and drugs like ketamine have known effects that are not observed in NDEs. The leading advocate for the ketamine model conceded after years of research that ketamine does not produce NDEs (Greyson 2021, pg. 110).

Summing Up

In coming to the end of this series, let's sum up what we discussed.

Consciousness might be wired into the physical universe at fundamental level, as an integral part of quantum mechanics. Certainly several leading figures in physics thought so - Schrodinger, Heisenberg, Von Neumann, and more recently Nobel Laureates Roger Penrose, Eugene Wigner, and physicist Henry Stapp.

Materialist propaganda notwithstanding, neuroscience is no closer to identifying Neural Correlates of Consciousness (NCCs) than it was when it started. The source of consciousness remains one of the greatest mysteries in science.

Meanwhile, medical evidence continues to pile up that there is something deeply amiss with the materialist assumption that consciousness is produced by the brain. In a sense, the challenge that NDEs and Terminal Lucidity pose to consciousness science is analogous to the challenge that Dark Energy poses to physics, in that they suggest that the mind-brain identity model of classic materialist psychology may need to be rethought to adequately explain these phenomena.

Ever since the Greeks, science has sought to explain nature entirely in physical terms, without invoking theism. It has been spectacularly successful - particularly in the physical sciences - but at the cost of excluding consciousness along with the gods (Nagel, 2012). What I have tried to show in this series is that a very credible argument can be made that materialism has the arrow of causality backwards: the brain is not the driver of consciousness, it's the steering wheel.

I don't think we are yet ready to say what consciousness is. Much more research is needed. I'm not making the case for panpsychism, for instance - but I do think consciousness researchers need to throw off the assumption drag of materialism before they're going to make any real progress.

It will be up to you, the scientists of tomorrow, to make those discoveries. That's why I'm posting this to Tumblr rather than an academic journal; young people need to hear what's being discovered, and the opportunities that these discoveries represent for up and coming scientists.

Never has Planck's Principle been more apt: science advances one funeral at a time.

Good luck.

For Further Reading

Barušs, Imants & Mossbridge, Julia (2017). Transcendent Mind: Rethinking the Science of Consciousness. American Psychological Association, Washington DC.

Barušs, Imants (2023). Death as an Altered State of Consciousness: A Scientific Approach. American Psychological Association, Washington DC.

Batthyány, Alexander (2023). Threshold: Terminal Lucidity and the Border of Life and Death. St. Martin's Essentials, New York.

Becker, Carl B. (1993). Paranormal Experience and Survival of Death. State University of New York Press, Albany NY.

Greyson, Bruce (2021). After: A Doctor Explores What Near-Death Experiences Reveal about Life and Beyond. St. Martin's Essentials, New York.

Kelly, Edward F.; Kelly, Emily Williams; Crabtree, Adam; Gauld, Alan; Grosso, Michael; & Greyson, Bruce (2007). Irreducible Mind: Toward a Psychology for the 21st Century. Rowman & Littlefield, New York.

Moody, Raymond (1975). Life After Life. Bantam/Mockingbird, Covington GA.

Moreira-Almeida, Alexander; de Abreu Costa, Marianna; & Coelho, Humberto S. (2022). Science of Life After Death. Springer Briefs in Psychology, Cham Switzerland.

Penfield, Wilder (1975). Mystery of the Mind: A Critical Study of Consciousness and the Human Brain. Princeton Legacy Library, Princeton NJ.

Sabom, Michael (1982). Recollections of Death: A Medical Investigation. Harper and Row Publishers, New York.

van Lommel, Pim (2010). Consciousness Beyond Life: The Science of the Near-Death Experience. HarperCollins, New York.

[fashionlandscapeblog]

A significant part of the U.S. population is just so unaware and oblivious of the responsability they have with their votes. It's not just about their country, it's about the whole wide world.

I am so confused by all the Americans who refuse to vote, allegedly because of some super bizarre concept of morality that is just a tad paradoxical.

So lemme get this straight: You won't vote to have a good conscience, amirite? Yet if you don't vote and let Trump win, everyone will be literally screwed (even the ones that don't think they are, i.e. his own supporters) and especially women, minorities, immigrants, LGTB people and everyone that has been scapegoated by the wacko Christian fundamentalist wing of the Republican party. Trump literally, literally caters to their every wish and that is his biggest and loudest fan base.

If Trump wins, please remember that he told Netanyahu that he would let him "finish the job in Gaza" and Netanyahu consequently supports Trump. So once again, what is this conscience thingy you were talking about? Your bizarre concept of a 'good consciousness in not voting' is the epitome of a paradox if you value your super weird sense of 'moral' comfort more than actual human lives counting on you actually voting. If you still didn't get a cognitive dissonance from this argument, you have no hope and ironically have no moral compass whatsover, regardless of what you think about yourself.

[omegaphilosophia]

The Philosophy of Consciousness, Subconsciousness, and Unconsciousness

The study of consciousness, subconsciousness, and unconsciousness is central to philosophy, psychology, and neuroscience. Philosophers and scientists have long debated the nature of the mind, self-awareness, and the layers of mental activity that influence behavior, perception, and cognition. Here's an overview of the three concepts:

1. Consciousness

Definition: Consciousness refers to the state of being aware of and able to think about one’s environment, existence, thoughts, and sensations. It is the subjective experience of the mind, or what is often called "phenomenal experience"—what it feels like to be you at any given moment.

Philosophical Theories:

Dualism (René Descartes): Descartes famously proposed that the mind and body are two fundamentally different substances. According to Cartesian dualism, the mind is immaterial, and consciousness is a non-physical property of the mind. The body, on the other hand, operates like a machine.

Materialism/Physicalism: Materialists argue that consciousness arises from the brain's physical processes. According to this view, consciousness is a product of neuronal activity, and there is no separate, immaterial mind. Contemporary neuroscientific approaches align with this view, seeking to explain how brain activity correlates with conscious experience.

Phenomenology (Edmund Husserl, Maurice Merleau-Ponty): Phenomenologists focus on the first-person experience of consciousness. For them, consciousness is always consciousness "of" something (intentionality), and they explore how the mind structures experience.

Hard Problem of Consciousness (David Chalmers): Chalmers distinguishes between the "easy" problems of consciousness (understanding brain functions) and the hard problem, which is explaining why and how physical processes in the brain give rise to subjective experiences, such as the sensation of color or pain.

Panpsychism: This is the view that consciousness is a fundamental and ubiquitous feature of the universe, meaning that all matter has some degree of conscious experience, not just humans or animals.

2. Subconsciousness

Definition: The subconscious refers to mental processes that occur just below the level of conscious awareness. These processes influence thoughts, behaviors, and perceptions without being actively noticed by the individual.

Philosophical Perspectives:

Freudian Subconscious: Sigmund Freud introduced the concept of the subconscious (often used interchangeably with "preconscious" and "unconscious" in his early work). For Freud, the subconscious includes thoughts and desires that are not currently in conscious awareness but can become conscious when triggered (e.g., through memory or slips of the tongue).

Dual-Process Theories: Modern cognitive psychology divides thought into two systems: System 1 (fast, automatic, subconscious thinking) and System 2 (slow, deliberate, conscious thinking). Subconsciousness is often associated with System 1, where many decisions and impressions are made without conscious deliberation.

Carl Jung’s Collective Subconscious: Jung expanded on Freud's idea of the subconscious with the collective unconscious, a layer of the unconscious mind shared by all humans, filled with archetypes and universal symbols.

3. Unconsciousness

Definition: The unconscious refers to mental processes, desires, and memories that are entirely outside of conscious awareness and typically inaccessible to introspection. In psychological theory, the unconscious is thought to hold repressed feelings, unresolved conflicts, and primitive desires.

Philosophical and Psychological Perspectives:

Freudian Unconscious: Freud proposed that the unconscious mind is a repository for desires, fears, and memories that are too painful or socially unacceptable to acknowledge consciously. These repressed elements of the mind influence behavior in subtle and sometimes disruptive ways.

Id, Ego, and Superego: In Freud's structural model of the psyche, the id represents unconscious primal desires, the ego navigates reality, and the superego represents moral standards. The unconscious mind contains both the id and parts of the superego.

Jungian Unconscious: For Carl Jung, the unconscious mind is divided into two parts: the personal unconscious, which is unique to the individual, and the collective unconscious, a shared repository of human experience. The collective unconscious holds archetypes, symbols, and motifs that recur across cultures and history.

Philosophical Issues with the Unconscious: Some philosophers question whether it makes sense to speak of unconscious mental states. If a thought or desire is not accessible to conscious awareness, can it truly be said to be "mental"? This challenges traditional notions of mind and cognition.

Key Questions in the Philosophy of Consciousness, Subconsciousness, and Unconsciousness:

What Is the Nature of Conscious Experience? Philosophers debate whether consciousness can be fully explained through physical processes or whether something irreducible remains. The hard problem of consciousness remains one of the most pressing and unsolved issues in philosophy.

To What Extent Do Subconscious and Unconscious Processes Influence Behavior? How much of our decisions and perceptions are shaped by thoughts and feelings outside of our awareness? Psychological experiments have demonstrated that subconscious cues can powerfully affect behavior, challenging the belief in fully rational decision-making.

Is the Unconscious Real? Philosophical skepticism exists about whether unconscious thoughts and desires are truly "thoughts" if they cannot be directly experienced or known. Others argue that the unconscious is a necessary concept for understanding repressed feelings and psychological disorders.

Relationship Between the Three:

Consciousness represents active awareness, decision-making, and self-reflection.

Subconsciousness includes processes just below the level of awareness, such as habits, reflexes, or memories that can be brought into consciousness.

Unconsciousness involves deeper, hidden aspects of the mind, inaccessible to conscious introspection but influential in shaping desires, emotions, and behaviors.

The philosophy of consciousness explores self-awareness, subjectivity, and the mind-body problem. Subconsciousness refers to mental processes that influence behavior outside of immediate awareness. Unconsciousness deals with repressed desires and memories that operate beyond conscious thought. Each concept has rich philosophical implications for understanding the mind, free will, identity, and the nature of human experience.

[compneuropapers]

Interesting Reviews for Week 43, 2024

Tests for consciousness in humans and beyond. Bayne, T., Seth, A. K., Massimini, M., Shepherd, J., Cleeremans, A., Fleming, S. M., … Mudrik, L. (2024). Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 28(5), 454–466.

Anesthesia and the neurobiology of consciousness. Mashour, G. A. (2024). Neuron, 112(10), 1553–1567.

Curiosity and the dynamics of optimal exploration. Poli, F., O’Reilly, J. X., Mars, R. B., & Hunnius, S. (2024). Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 28(5), 441–453.

Consciousness and sleep. Tononi, G., Boly, M., & Cirelli, C. (2024). Neuron, 112(10), 1568–1594.

[chicago-geniza]

Did you guys know. There are SO many Bridgerton Chappell Roan songfics. Feels like a distinct time- and culture-bound phenomenon that I will look back on in a couple of years, если буду жив, and about which I will think "that was quintessentially 2024"

[sanctiphera]

...and the pendulum swings

Liked the wrong tweet, voted for the wrong candidate, praised the wrong movie, had the wrong opinion about Black Lives Matter, had a bad date, wore the wrong Halloween costume, and that was it. If you defended someone who wore “blackface” on Halloween once, you are a convicted racist, and you must apologize profusely or lose your job, sometimes both.

Who gets to stay and who has to go has been the sick little game we’ve all been playing, like we’re trapped in an episode of the Twilight Zone and are one wrong opinion away from being wished into the cornfield.

You, too, can now be humiliated in the public square. You can get your name on a list. You can get fired or not hired. Who would want a little monster like you on their team anyway? Not I, said the fly. Not me, said the bee.

Here we are, stuck with hundreds of thousands of young people graduating our universities who do not understand the difference between terrorism and war. So, who is teaching these kids?

These students didn’t “make anti-Israel statements.” They blamed Israel for the slaughter, suggesting it was justified. That’s like saying the Columbine or Newtown massacres were justified because the shooters had been bullied.

Or that the Manson murders were justified because Charles Manson had been treated so poorly. Or that the mass murder of children in the daycare center at the Oklahoma City Federal Building was justified because of what our government did to David Koresh.

Would you want someone working for you who said Hitler had a point in his mass genocide against the Jews because the United States did not deliver on its promise to help rebuild Germany after WWI?

Let this moment serve as a reality check and a warning to those naive young students that there is a difference between criticizing Israel, even protesting its war on Gaza, and justifying what Hamas did in Israel. Ignorance is no excuse. If your news is failing you, then find better news. Do the work. Educate yourself, as the kids like to say.

[...]

Welcome to the real world, kids. Remember all those “consequences” you’ve been shrieking about? Well, here they are! Come and get ‘em while they’re piping hot.

[raffaellopalandri]

Daniel Dennett (1942 - 2024)

Many of us today woke up to a world that felt a little less vibrant, a little less intellectually stimulating. Daniel Dennett, a philosopher who revolutionized our understanding of the mind, science, and consciousness, passed away yesterday. Daniel Dennett, image taken from Wikipedia For me, Dennett was a guiding light in his study field. His work, particularly his early books “Content and…

[geometrymatters]

Buckminster Fuller: Synergetics and Systems

Synergetics

Synergetics, concept introduced by Buckminster Fuller, is an interdisciplinary study of geometry, patterns, and spatial relationships that provides a method and a philosophy for understanding and solving complex problems. The term “synergetics” comes from the Greek word “synergos,” meaning “working together.” Fuller’s synergetics is a system of thinking that seeks to understand the cooperative interactions among parts of a whole, leading to outcomes that are unpredicted by the behavior of the parts when studied in isolation.

Fuller’s understanding of systems relied upon the concept of synergy. With the emergence of unpredicted system behaviors by the behaviors of the system’s components, this perspective invites us to transcend the limitations of our immediate perception and to perceive larger systems, and to delve deeper to see relevant systems within the situation. It beckons us to ‘tune-in’ to the appropriate systems as we bring our awareness to a particular challenge or situation.

He perceived the Universe as an intricate construct of systems. He proposed that everything, from our thoughts to the cosmos, is a system. This perspective, now a cornerstone of modern thinking, suggests that the geometry of systems and their models are the keys to deciphering the behaviors and interactions we witness in the Universe.

In his “Synergetics: Explorations in the Geometry of Thinking” Fuller presents a profound exploration of geometric thinking, offering readers a transformative journey through a four-dimensional Universe. Fuller’s work combines geometric logic with metaphors drawn from human experience, resulting in a framework that elucidates concepts such as entropy, Einstein’s relativity equations, and the meaning of existence. Within this paradigm, abstract notions become lucid, understandable, and immediately engaging, propelling readers to delve into the depths of profound philosophical inquiry.

Fuller’s framework revolves around the principle of synergetics, which emphasizes the interconnectedness and harmony of geometric relationships. Drawing inspiration from nature, he illustrates that balance and equilibrium are akin to a stack of closely packed oranges in a grocery store, highlighting the delicate equilibrium present in the Universe. By intertwining concepts from visual geometry and technical design, Fuller’s work demonstrates his expertise in spatial understanding and mathematical prowess. The book challenges readers to expand their perspectives and grasp the intricate interplay between shapes, mathematics, and the dimensions of the human mind.

At its core, “Synergetics” presents a philosophical inquiry into the nature of existence and the human thought process. Fuller’s use of neologisms and expansive, thought-provoking ideas sparks profound contemplation. While some may find the book challenging due to its complexity, it is a testament to Fuller’s intellectual prowess and his ability to offer unique insights into the fundamental workings of the Universe, pushing the boundaries of human knowledge and transforming the fields of design, mathematics, and philosophy .

When applied to cognitive science, the concept of synergetics offers a holistic approach to understanding the human mind. It suggests that cognitive processes, rather than being separate functions, are interconnected parts of a whole system that work together synergistically. This perspective aligns with recent developments in cognitive science that view cognition as a complex, dynamic system. It suggests that our cognitive abilities emerge from the interaction of numerous mental processes, much like the complex patterns that emerge in physical and biological systems studied under synergetics.

In this context, geometry serves as a language to describe this cognitive architecture. Just as the geometric patterns in synergetic structures reveal the underlying principles of organization, the ‘geometric’ arrangement of cognitive processes could potentially reveal the principles that govern our cognitive abilities. This perspective extends Fuller’s belief in the power of geometry as a tool for understanding complex systems, from the physical structures he designed to the very architecture of our minds. It suggests that by studying the ‘geometry’ of cognition, we might gain insights into the principles of cognitive organization and the nature of human intelligence.

Systems

Fuller’s philosophy underscored that systems are distinct entities, each with a unique shape that sets them apart from their surroundings. He envisioned each system as a tetrahedron, a geometric form with an inside and an outside, connected by a minimum of four corners or nodes. These nodes, connected by what Fuller referred to as relations, serve as the sinews that hold the system together. These relations could manifest as flows, forces, or fields. Fuller’s philosophy also emphasized that systems are not isolated entities. At their boundaries, every node is linked to its surroundings, and all system corners are ‘leaky’, either brimming with extra energy or in need of energy.

Fuller attributed the properties and characteristics of systems to what he called generalized principles. These are laws of the Universe that hold true everywhere and at all times. For instance, everything we perceive is a specific configuration of energy or material, and the form of this configuration is determined by these universal principles.

Fuller’s philosophy also encompassed the idea that every situation is a dance of interacting systems. He encouraged us to explore the ways in which systems interact within and with each other. He saw each of us as part of the cosmic dance, continually coupling with other systems. This coupling could be as loose as the atoms of air in a room, or as flexible as molecules of water flowing.

We find that precession is completely regenerative one brings out the other. So I gave you the dropping the stone in the water, and the wave went out that way. And this way beget that way. And that way beget that way. And that’s why your circular wave emanates. Once you begin to get into “precession” you find yourself understanding phenomena that you’ve seen a stone falling in the water all of your life, and have never really known why the wave does just what it does.

Fuller’s concept of precession, or systems coupling, is a testament to his deep understanding of systems and their interactions. He described how we sometimes orbit a system, such as a political movement or an artistic method. Our orbit remains stable when the force that attracts us is dynamically balanced by the force that propels us away. This understanding of precession allows us to comprehend phenomena that we have observed all our lives, yet never truly understood why they behave as they do. Fuller’s teachings on systems and their inherent geometry continue to illuminate our understanding of the Universe and our place within it.

[itsgerges]

The Gravitational Waves Reflection Analysis (Revised)

or

or

or

Paper 1st hypothesis

The gravitational waves are produced by the planet motion energy and Not by the gravitational field- Moreover- the sun doesn't produce a gravitational field -Shortly- the planet motion produces energy (1/2 mv^2) and this energy is stored in the space as moving waves – these are the gravitational waves- also the gravitational waves are reflected in the solar system and the wave reflection causes to square the wave velocity

Paper 2nd hypothesis

The Sun Is Not Doing Nuclear Fusion To Produce Its Rays– Because

This Is Extraordinary: Gravity Can Create Light, All on Its Own

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/this-is-extraordinary-gravity-can-create-light-all-on-its-own/ar-AA19YL5d?ocid=hpmsnHYPERLINK "https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/this-is-extraordinary-gravity-can-create-light-all-on-its-own/ar-AA19YL5d?ocid=hpmsn&cvid=620db4352aa943e2b454919a7b724604&ei=83"&HYPERLINK "https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/this-is-extraordinary-gravity-can-create-light-all-on-its-own/ar-AA19YL5d?ocid=hpmsn&cvid=620db4352aa943e2b454919a7b724604&ei=83"cvid=620db4352aa943e2b454919a7b724604HYPERLINK "https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/this-is-extraordinary-gravity-can-create-light-all-on-its-own/ar-AA19YL5d?ocid=hpmsn&cvid=620db4352aa943e2b454919a7b724604&ei=83"&HYPERLINK "https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/this-is-extraordinary-gravity-can-create-light-all-on-its-own/ar-AA19YL5d?ocid=hpmsn&cvid=620db4352aa943e2b454919a7b724604&ei=83"ei=83

This new article tells the gravitational waves can move by speed of light and can produce a light beam- I claim the sun rays are produced based on this method by the gravitational waves motions and not by the sun nuclear fusion process- also –No star rays is produced by the nuclear fusion process but all rays are created by the gravitational waves motions energies as the article states.  

Paper 3rd  hypothesis

The planets Motions use different rates of time – the rate of time depends on the velocities rate – example- Mercury velocity = 1.6 the Earth velocity because of that (One Second Of Mercury Clock  = 1.6 Seconds Of The Earth Clock)

Paper 4th  hypothesis

Neptune motion caused to create relativistic effects in the solar system because

This Is Extraordinary: Gravity Can Create Light, All on Its Own

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/this-is-extraordinary-gravity-can-create-light-all-on-its-own/ar-AA19YL5d?ocid=hpmsnHYPERLINK "https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/this-is-extraordinary-gravity-can-create-light-all-on-its-own/ar-AA19YL5d?ocid=hpmsn&cvid=620db4352aa943e2b454919a7b724604&ei=83"&HYPERLINK "https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/this-is-extraordinary-gravity-can-create-light-all-on-its-own/ar-AA19YL5d?ocid=hpmsn&cvid=620db4352aa943e2b454919a7b724604&ei=83"cvid=620db4352aa943e2b454919a7b724604HYPERLINK "https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/this-is-extraordinary-gravity-can-create-light-all-on-its-own/ar-AA19YL5d?ocid=hpmsn&cvid=620db4352aa943e2b454919a7b724604&ei=83"&HYPERLINK "https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/this-is-extraordinary-gravity-can-create-light-all-on-its-own/ar-AA19YL5d?ocid=hpmsn&cvid=620db4352aa943e2b454919a7b724604&ei=83"ei=83

the new article tells the gravitational waves can move by speed of light-

and the gravitational waves move by speed of light but Neptune caused to decrease the wave speed by 1% and by that the speed be equal 99% of speed of light (=297000 km/s) which caused to created relativistic effects in the solar system- also- Neptune caused to create two wave reflections in the outer planets which one reflection only was enough- means- if Neptune is removed from the solar system the wave reflections in the outer planets will be one reflection only and not two reflections 

Paper Main Argument

The Physicist Vision Contradicts The Nature System 

I study the solar system Geometry since long years- and- I have found the physicist and astronomer can't understand the solar system designer vision– in fact their vision contradict the designer vision- let's prove that in following  

The Physicist Vision

The physicist supposes that there's (a unit of building)- by that- the physicist sees the mass (for example) as wall and this wall is consisted of bricks (small similar units) and for that the physicist searched for this (unit) because it's the (unit) by which the wall is building (the mass is building)– this is the physicist thinking direction- he believed there's a small unit by which the great building is built

For that the physicist searched and found the particle and then the particle is divided into Molecules then the Molecule is divided into atoms and the atom is divided into nucleus and electron moves around and the nucleus is divided into proton and Neutron- and the proton is divided into quarks …etc

The physicist searches for the building unit- the unit by which the building is built – or the unit by which the mass is built – for that the physicist divides (any thing) to see its contents till reach to the unit which can be used as the building unit. 

The Designer Vision

The designer aims to create integration- as the marriage – male and female- the relationship will cause to give birth for a child

INTEGRATION this is the word inside the designer Mind

No building unit- the marriage answers- because in marriage both (male and female) are required and no one of them better than the other – both work together and give equal effects on the same one process and give together one result- I explain the idea by the marriage because it's easy to understand- I want to put the word (Integration) as the basic concept in the designer mind.

And

I want to explain how the physicist causes fatal error for the research method

While the physicist divides the elements one after one (from matter to particle to molecule to atom to proton to quarks …etc) this division from out into inner till reach to very small unit which he considered the building unit – that causes to destroy the geometrical design of the integration process

Let's return to the marriage- the marriage requires two players (male and female)- they have different bodies and the process give birth for children- Suppose we remove one player what would happen? (where can we find a woman pregnant by herself?)

I want to say- the division from (matter to particle to molecule to atom to proton to quarks …etc) destroys the general geometrical design which uses the integration process- let's give other examples

Example No. (1)   

Einstein told us (He can't find slightest meaning for the word SPACE) by that he can't define (what's the space) and also he found the space has no mechanical features because no definition causes these features – this is the physicist vision - Let's see the designer vision

Planet moves and its motion produces energy (1/2 mv^2) and where's the energy? the planet can't store its motion energy inside its body because this energy would raise the planet temperature and no planet temperature is raised by its motion- so- where's the planet motion energy? logically we suppose that- the energy is stored in the space in waves form- means- the planet moves and its motion energy creates waves in the space (as the fish swims in the sea and its motion creates waves in the sea water) similar to that the planet motion produces energy and this energy creates waves in the space- by that we can define the space and conclude the space nature and features- simply we conclude the space has mechanical features because the energy is stored in the space as moving waves- the gravitational waves prove the space has motion- why we can solve the question which Einstein couldn't solve? Because he supposed the planet is independent from the space- the integration concept is not known by him

Notice

The waves are produced by the planet motion energy are the gravitational waves, the paper first hypothesis proves these waves are produced by the planets motions energies and not by the gravitational field also the hypothesis proves the Sun doesn't produce a gravitational field.   

More examples are provided after the hypotheses explanations 

PAPER FIRST HYPOTHESIS

Paper first hypothesis

The gravitational waves are produced by the planets motions energies and not by the gravitational field (Moreover the sun is not producing a gravitational field) and

The gravitational waves are reflected three times in the solar system (from Pluto and Neptune to Saturn) and (From Uranus to Jupiter) and (from Venus to Mars) –

The gravitational waves reflection causes changes in the planets data- and these changes are repeated with each reflection- means- these changes are found by rules because it's repeated with each reflection clearly- that shows the planets use similar behaviors to create their data which proves one reason causes to create all this data

Also- the wave energy reflection causes to square the wave velocity – the velocity square is the most important feature of the energy reflection because it enables the waves to move by speed of light- that explains how the gravitational waves can move by speed of light in the solar system- the motion by speed of light is produced only by the wave energy reflection (and without the reflection this motion can't be done)     

Paper 1st hypothesis (The objective of the hypothesis)

I prove that the gravitational waves are produced by the planets motions energies and these waves are reflected in the solar system three time and the reflection of the wave energy causes to square the wave velocity (the velocity squaring is the important feature I prove in the paper because the light beam is reflected but its speed is NOT squared and that means the wave velocity squaring is feature of the space) and it's very important to prove the wave velocity is squared by the reflection because this process enables the waves to move by speed of light and that explains how the gravitational waves can move by speed of light – as this new article states

This Is Extraordinary: Gravity Can Create Light, All on Its Own

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/this-is-extraordinary-gravity-can-create-light-all-on-its-own/ar-AA19YL5d?ocid=hpmsnHYPERLINK "https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/this-is-extraordinary-gravity-can-create-light-all-on-its-own/ar-AA19YL5d?ocid=hpmsn&cvid=620db4352aa943e2b454919a7b724604&ei=83"&HYPERLINK "https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/this-is-extraordinary-gravity-can-create-light-all-on-its-own/ar-AA19YL5d?ocid=hpmsn&cvid=620db4352aa943e2b454919a7b724604&ei=83"cvid=620db4352aa943e2b454919a7b724604HYPERLINK "https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/this-is-extraordinary-gravity-can-create-light-all-on-its-own/ar-AA19YL5d?ocid=hpmsn&cvid=620db4352aa943e2b454919a7b724604&ei=83"&HYPERLINK "https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/this-is-extraordinary-gravity-can-create-light-all-on-its-own/ar-AA19YL5d?ocid=hpmsn&cvid=620db4352aa943e2b454919a7b724604&ei=83"ei=83

The article tells, the gravitational waves can move by speed of light and can produce a light beam- here I explain how the gravitational waves can move by speed of light (please note the article still believes the gravitational waves are produced by the gravitational field – I refuse this idea – the gravitational waves are produced by the planets motions energies but the article states that the gravitational waves can move by speed of light and can produce a light beam and I accept this idea and I explain and prove how the gravitational waves can move by speed of light) 

Paper 1st hypothesis Proof (The Proving Method)

I compare between the planets data in the three reflections of the wave- I put the planets data in comparison to each other for each reflection to prove the planets use similar behaviors to define their data and this similar behavior proves one force (or one reason) is found behind- and this one reason is the wave energy reflection which causes to create all this data –

The wave energy reflection effect on the solar system design (A Summary)

The reflections cause defined changes in the planets data – and

The most important change is (the wave velocity square) – and this velocity squaring is very important because it enable the gravitational waves to move by speed of light – the motion by speed of light is very effective on the solar system design because it defines the planets distribution between the sun and Pluto– this fact is explained in point no. (**) 

Paper 1st hypothesis Explanation and Proof Discussion

Paper 1st hypothesis Explanation and Proof Discussion

The explanation is discussed in two parts

1ST PART

I- Preface

II- The Comparison

III- The explanation of the wave energy reflection effect on the solar system design

2nd PART

The Gravitational Waves Reflection Detailed Discussion

(Paper 1st hypothesis Explanation) 1ST PART

I- Preface

(1)

Planet Motion Energy Analysis

Planet motion produces energy (1/2 mv^2), where's Planet motion energy? the planet can NOT store its motion energy inside its body because it would raise its temperature and No planet temperature is raised by its motion- logically- the planet motion energy is stored in the space in waves form- means- Planet motion energy creates waves in the space- the planet motion in the space is similar to a fish swimming in the sea- as the fish swimming creates waves in the water the planet motion energy creates waves in the space- let's see this picture clearly- the fish swims because it hits the water by its body and that creates waves in the water- we conclude, the water waves move by a velocity equal the fish velocity because of the reaction force- similar to that- Planet moves in the space and its motion energy creates waves in the space and these waves move by velocity equal the planet velocity- for example- Mercury (47.4 km/s) moves and its motion energy creates waves in the space and these waves move by equal velocity (47.4 km/s)- based on this idea- All planets move and their motions energies create waves in the space where each wave moves by velocity equal its planet velocity

(2)

These Waves Are The Gravitational Waves (My Hypothesis)

Mans- the waves are produced by the planets motions energies- these waves are the gravitational waves- it's my paper 1st hypothesis- the gravitational waves are not produced by the gravitational field (moreover the sun doesn't produce a gravitational field) instead the gravitational waves are produced by the planets motions energies 

AND

The planets revolve around the sun in the same one direction and for that their motions energies create waves in the space and these waves move perpendicular on the revolution direction (Toward Pluto orbit)

AND 

In Pluto orbit these waves are unified together into one unified wave- this wave moves by a velocity = 205.8 km/s why? The 9 planets velocities total=176 km/s but I add the Earth moon velocity (29.8 km/s) that makes the total to be 205.8 km/s – I add the moon velocity because the energy is stored finally in the moon orbit-

Note- The moon and the Earth revolve around the sun together for that the moon velocity is considered equal the Earth velocity relative to (the sun) –

The 1st Conclusion

The Planet Motion Energy Creates Waves In The Space

Means - The Space Must Have Moving Waves  -

Now -the scientists had discovered waves in the space- And- they considered these waves are produced by The Sun Gravitational Field – BUT Why?

The planet motion energy analysis proves the waves must be produced by the planets motions energies- Now let's refute the sun gravitational field theory- the refutation gives support for the conclusion – the gravitational waves are produced by the planets motions energies and NOT by the gravitational field because there's NO Gravitational field.

(3)

The Refutation Of The Sun Gravitational Field

The Sun Doesn't Produce A Gravitational Field Nor Has Massive Gravity – let's prove that in following

(i)

The sun rotation period is (25.4 days– at equator) and (34.4 days – at pole) that shows the sun has no massive gravity nor even ordinary gravity equal any planet gravity otherwise the sun would rotate around its axis in one period of time- 

(ii)

No Planet Moves By The Sun Gravity–Newton is wrong- because- the planet moves by the force caused its creation- means- the planet creation and motion is done by one force only- because- if two forces have effects on the same one planet this planet would be broken- now- suppose the planet is created (by any force) and the sun gravity attracted this planet and forced it to revolve around the sun by the sun mass massive gravity (as Newton imagined) that would force the planet to move against its inner structure and will cause this planet to be broken- this is similar to a human is forced to walk on his hands in place of his legs and when this human refuses to do that (they told him we can force you by our power) for that this human walk on his hands forcedly and later this human is dead by this motion- shortly- the planet is NOT broken by its motion because the planet creation force is the force causes this planet motion- it's one force caused the planet creation and motion-

Newton mistake is that he didn't know how the planet is created and by that he didn't realize that planet creation and motion are done together by the same one source- simply- the sun didn't cause to create any planet and for that the sun doesn't cause any planet to move- this analysis shows logical base but left us with puzzles to know (by what rule the planet moves?) and (Why is the sun found in the solar system if it doesn't cause the planets motions?) these questions are answered in the paper abstract and discussions.  

(iii)

The mass gravity force can NOT cause any motion- again Newton is wrong- the mass gravity creates a bond between two masses- (the Earth and the moon are bond by the mass gravity)- by that they are similar to a lorry and its trailer – if the lorry moves the trailer will move with the lorry- but the mass gravity can NOT cause any motion- why? suppose the moon moves by the Erath gravity force- the moon moves and produces energy (1/2mv^2) and we have to ask from what source this energy will be provided?- from the mass itself- means if the Earth causes the moon to move the Earth and the moon masses should be decreased by the motion energy- this is a wrong definition for the mass gravity- the mass gravity creates a bond between two masses (The Earth and the moon) if some outer force causes the Earth to move the moon will move with the Earth and in this case the outer force will provide the motion energy for the Earth and the moon-

(iv)

The planets order contradicts Newton gravitation equation- where- the gravitation equation tells (greater mass necessitates shorter distance)- clearly- Jupiter the greatest mass is not the most near planet to the sun- means- the planets order contradicts the equation- when we asked the physicist told us this problem is done by (the initial conditions)- all these are nonsense clearly- planet orbital distance does NOT depend on the sun mass nor on the planet mass- planet orbital distance depends on the neighbor planet orbital distance – my equation proves this fact- let's see it

Planet orbital distance equation (my 1st equation)

d^2= 4do (d-do) where d= planet orbital distance and do= its neighbor distance

Example (1) Venus orbital distance (108.2)^2 = 4 x 57.9 x (50.3)                              

d= 108.2 million km = Venus Orbital Distance

d0= 57.9 million km  = Mercury Orbital Distance

50.3million km=The Distance Between Venus And Mercury  Venus Depends On Mercury

Example (2) Saturn orbital distance (1433)^2= 4 x 778.6 x 655

d= 1433 million km    = Saturn Orbital Distance

d0= 778.6 million km  = Jupiter Orbital Distance

655million km=The Distance Between Saturn And Jupiter Saturn Depends On Jupiter

All planets orbital distances are defined based on their previous neighbor planets orbital distances- the equation is correct perfectly and all planets orbital distances are defined by it- my paper tests and discusses this equation

Shortly- planet mass has no any effect on this planet orbital distance definition.

Notice

Planet orbital distance definition depends on its neighbor orbital distance this fact is proved by many other different methods my equation is one method only of them, all these methods don't use any planet mass- all planets orbits are defined based on their neighbor orbits- (Please note- Newton gravitation equation is wrong- I don't critic it by many critics to short the discussion- but- the fact is that- the light beam created all planets orbits before any planet creation- the light created each planet orbit depends on its neighbor orbit- I prove this fact in the paper discussion- logically this fact kills the gravitation equation because the orbit is created before the planet creation)  

Notice -Newton is so far from the truth- let's give one more example- Newton told us planet moves by the sun mass gravity- the fact is that- the Sun itself is created by the planets motions energies- that's why Newton ideas are not interesting for discussion because his ideas are imaginary have no part of truth-

(v)

Also-Newton told-planet motion depends on its mass- means-planet velocity depends on its mass- this also is imaginary idea- I define planet velocity in the paper abstract- planet velocity is defined by many rules all of them don't use any planet mass- at all Planet mass has no rule in this planet velocity definition.

The 2nd Conclusion

The Gravitational Waves Are Produced By The Planets Motions Energies And Not By The Sun Gravitational Field- Also-There's No Gravitational Field At All

(4)

The Wave Reflection Trajectory

Let's remember what we know till now

(a)

Planet motion produces energy (1/2 mv^2) and this energy creates waves in the space and each wave moves by its planet velocity- these waves move toward Pluto (perpendicular on the revolution direction) and in Pluto orbit these waves are unified into one unified wave moves by velocity = the planets velocities total = 205.8 km/s  

Means- while the planets revolve around the sun in their orbits by their velocities- there's one unified wave revolves around the sun moving by 205.8 km/s and this unified wave revolves around The Sun In Pluto Orbit-this unified wave is The Gravitational Wave  

Now- this unified wave is reflected from Pluto to Venus orbit- Means- the unified wave is reflected and sent from Pluto to Neptune to the next planets till reach Venus 

The unified wave is reflected three times in the solar system

(from Pluto and Neptune to Saturn) and

(from Uranus and Jupiter) and

(from Venus to Mars)

With each reflection of the wave defined changes are done for the planets data

But let's refer to the general design behind these three reflections in following

(b)

We remember this new article

This Is Extraordinary: Gravity Can Create Light, All on Its Own

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/this-is-extraordinary-gravity-can-create-light-all-on-its-own/ar-AA19YL5d?ocid=hpmsnHYPERLINK "https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/this-is-extraordinary-gravity-can-create-light-all-on-its-own/ar-AA19YL5d?ocid=hpmsn&cvid=620db4352aa943e2b454919a7b724604&ei=83"&HYPERLINK "https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/this-is-extraordinary-gravity-can-create-light-all-on-its-own/ar-AA19YL5d?ocid=hpmsn&cvid=620db4352aa943e2b454919a7b724604&ei=83"cvid=620db4352aa943e2b454919a7b724604HYPERLINK "https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/this-is-extraordinary-gravity-can-create-light-all-on-its-own/ar-AA19YL5d?ocid=hpmsn&cvid=620db4352aa943e2b454919a7b724604&ei=83"&HYPERLINK "https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/this-is-extraordinary-gravity-can-create-light-all-on-its-own/ar-AA19YL5d?ocid=hpmsn&cvid=620db4352aa943e2b454919a7b724604&ei=83"ei=83

The article tells, the gravitational waves can move by speed of light and can produce a light beam-

My hypothesis tells (the reflection of energy causes to square the wave velocity)

Let's put the ideas beside one another to see the general design

The gravitational waves can move by speed of light AND can produce a light beam – How?? if the motion is done by speed of light (C=300000 km/s) how can this motion produce a light beam? Because the light beam is produced from the value (C^2 = squared speed of light) – here we see the energy reflection effect- the wave moves by speed of light and when this wave is reflected its velocity is squared and produced the value (C^2 = squared speed of light) from which the light beam is created-

Means

The machine needs one reflection to change the speed from (speed of light C=30000 km/s to the value C^2 =squared speed of light) and by that the light beam is created

Now – let's ask -

How can the wave moves by speed of light?

We remember- the one unified wave (the gravitational wave) moves in Pluto orbit with velocity 205.8 km/s – how can this gravitational wave moves by speed of light? 

By another reflection of energy – let's see that in following

300000 km/s = (205.8 km/s)^2 x 7.1

This equation tells

The unified wave (the gravitational wave) moves by 205.8 km/s and it's reflected, the waves reflection causes to square the velocities

(205.8 km/s)^2 = 42683 km/s

Means the gravitational wave after the reflection moves by a velocity 42683 km/s

BUT

If a particle moves by speed (=0.99 C=297000 km/s), this high velocity motion causes to create relativistic effects specially Lorentz length contraction effect with rate 7.1

Means- the distances should be contracted by the rate 7.1

BUT

The waves reflection causes to reflect the geometrical effects and by that the rate (7.1) will cause to increase the length in place of the length contraction- means- the distances will be increased with (7.1) as a result for Lorentz length contraction effect

The velocity 42683 km/s will be 42683 x 7.1 = 300000 km/s (Speed Of Light) 

That explains how the gravitational waves move by (205.8 k/s) can move by speed of light (C=300000 km/s)

Here we see clearly that

The machine needs one energy reflection only to accelerate the wave velocity from 205.8 km/s to move by speed of light (C=300000 km/s)

And

The machine needs one more reflection only to change the wave speed from the speed of light (C=300000 km/s) to (C^2 =squared speed of light) by which the light beam is created

Shortly -the machine needs only two reflections of energy to produce the light beam from the gravitational waves motions

Now – let's ask– Why Are There Three Reflections Of Energy In The Solar System? If The Machine Needs Just Two Reflections Why The Machine Uses Three Reflections? 

Because of Neptune negative effect on the solar system motion- Neptune caused to repeat the energy reflection and by that the solar system uses 2 reflections in the outer planets and one reflection in the inner planets- this result is done by Neptune negative effect on the solar system motion – as explained in details in the third hypothesis.   

(c)

Please note- the two reflections in the outer planets are done to produce a result of one reflection only and for that the two reflections are complementary one another as we will discuss- shortly- we can say there's one unified reflection of the wave in the outer planets and one single reflection of the wave in the inner planets because the two reflections in the outer planets are complementary each other and produce a result of one reflection only – spite of that- the planets data prove clearly there are three reflections in the solar system- means- while the wave reflections are three they do effect of two reflections only – as we will discuss in details in following

(5)

 The Wave Acceleration Process

Now we know the unified wave velocity is 205.8 km/s and this wave is accelerated to move by speed of light (C=300000 km/s) by one reflection and then this wave moves by speed of light is accelerated one more time to produce the value (C^2= squared speed of light)  by another reflection   

But where's this happened? In which planets orbits this is happened?

Shortly

The wave moves by 205.8 km/s in the orbits of Planets (Pluto – Neptune and Uranus) and

The wave velocity is accelerated to move by speed of light in Saturn orbit

Means- Starting from Saturn orbit the unified wave moves by speed of light – the wave speed is speed of light in all orbits from Saturn to Venus

And

Venus reflected the wave to Mars and that causes to accelerate the wave velocity from the speed of light (C=300000 km/s) to (C^2= squared speed of light)- in the moon orbit between Venus and Mars    

(6)

 Planet Definition 

(A)

The physics book defines the planet as (Planet is solid body created independently from the space and the other planets)–if so- how can the gravitational waves reflection have effects on the planets data??

My definition for the planet is

Planet is a geometrical point carried on the moving energy (or Planet is a geometrical point found on a light beam) – let's explain this definition in following

The matter and space both are created from the same one energy- means

The planets matters and their distances both are created from the same one energy- the matter and space move depending on the motion of this energy from which they are created-means- the matter isn't moving by the mass gravity – Newton is wrong- the matter moves by the motion of the energy from which the matter is created- 

Based on this idea

The space is similar to the sea of water- and the matter is similar to a whirlpool (vortex) is found on the sea page- the matter creates for itself a geometrical frame (a distinguished form from the space) and moves by a different velocity from the space motion- as the whirlpool (vortex) on the sea page- it's created by the sea water but it has a distinguish form from the sea waves and it moves by a different velocity from the sea waves- this explanation shows how the moving energy can effect on the matter creation data- for example- we have a whirlpool (vortex) its diameter is 2 meters how is this whirlpool created? and why does its diameter equal = 2 meters? The diameter is created as a result for the water motion velocity, pressure, amount and motion angle and many other features of (the moving water)- the moving water creates this whirlpool with diameter 2 meters and as long as the water motion is not changed this diameter will not be changed also-   

Let's give another example

The energy motion is similar to the blood motion in a creature body- suppose- we examine now a liver of human - the blood motion causes this liver to work perfectly but if the blood motion is changed that would cause changes for the liver cells and job – suppose the blood have some poison the liver will be dead- suppose the pressure is raised- I want to say- the liver is a piece of body (matter) but it depends on the blood motion and this blood motion defines this liver dimensions and data- 

Shortly–the matter is similar to a muscle in a creature- the muscle may be so strong as a rock but it depends on the blood motion (similar to that the matter is found depending on the motion of energy from which this matter is created)

That explains how the gravitational waves reflection have effects on the planets data- still the planet is a solid body and the wave is a wave- the wave can be reflected but the solid body can NOT be reflected spite of that the planets data is reflected one another because the reflected waves have effects on the moving energy by which this planet (solid body) is created-

(B)

We should see the depth of this new definition-

The definition tells us

The matter (planet) is created by energy and the matter moves with this energy- means- this energy is the mother of this matter- this energy created the matter and caused this matter motion-BUT- this definition tells- the matter motion is defined before the matter creation- means- Planet motion is defined before this planet creation- How can that be possible? Because –

The energy is found alone in motion (the sea water was in motion) and the energy created the matter and this matter dimensions and data is defined based on the energy motion features (as discussed before- the whirlpool "vortex" is created with diameter 2 meters and this diameter is defined by the water motion features "velocity- pressure- angle- amount …etc") by that the matter dimensions are defined by the mother energy motion features - AND after the matter creation, the matter moves with the mother energy- by that- the created matter moves the same motion based on which this matter dimensions and data is defined- that explains how the planet motion is defined before the planet creation-

This fact is proved by my planet diameter equation because it proves strongly that the planet diameter is created based on its velocity- means- the equation proves – for example – Neptune diameter is 49528 km because Neptune velocity is 5.4 km/s and Neptune velocity is defined before Neptune diameter- let's remember this equation

My Planet Diameter Equation (v1/v2)= (s/r)= I

v = Planet Velocity                                                         

r = Planet Diameter

s= Planet Rotation Periods Number In Its Orbital Period

I= Planet Orbital Inclination        (example, 1.8 degrees be produced as a rate 1.8)

v2, s, r and I are belonged to one planet and v1 is belonged to another planet

The planet (v1) is defined by test the minimum error 

Earth Equation uses Neptune velocity

Mars Equation uses Pluto velocity

Jupiter Equation uses the Earth moon velocity

Saturn Equation uses Mars velocity

Uranus Equation uses Neptune velocity (As Earth)

Neptune Equation uses Saturn velocity

Pluto Equation uses the Earth moon velocity (As Jupiter)

Example    

Neptune Equation (89143 /49528) = 9.7/ 5.4 =1.8                

89143          = Neptune rotation periods number in Neptune orbital period

49528 km     = Neptune diameter

9.7 km/s      = Saturn velocity

5.4 km/s      = Neptune velocity

59800 days  = Neptune orbital period (and Neptune rotation period =16.1 hours)

1.8 degrees = Neptune Orbital Inclination

The Equation Concept (A Summary)

Planet diameter should be a function in its orbital distance –otherwise- this planet would be broken by its motion- BUT- the designer can't create a function has only 2 variables (Planet diameter and its orbital distance)- because– If this planet changes its orbital distance its diameter would be broken also because the diameter is a direct function in the orbital distance without any other variables -As A Result  

The designer created the planet diameter as a function in this planet rotation period and the planet rotation period is created as a function in this planet velocity and the planet velocity is created as a function in this planet orbital distance- by that- the function Planet diameter and its orbital distance is created but also it contains many variables (rotation period, orbital period and velocity)- by that- if a Planet changes its orbital distance- this planet orbital period, and velocity and rotation period would be changed but its diameter will be saved-

(C)

The previous explanation helps us to see how the planet is created- also we remember Kepler rule (Planet Orbit Defines Its Velocity)  

The orbit is created at first and the orbit defines the motion velocity and the planet diameter is created based on this velocity –means- the space is created before the matter creation- Shortly- The planet orbit is created (from the mother energy) before this planet creation and the planet is created later (by this energy motion features) and the planet data is defined based on this motion features and the planet moves after Creation with this mother energy motion- and– in case any planet after creation changes its orbit the planet motion data be changed but its creation data is saved- we should note that the space must be created based on a geometrical design-means- the solar system space (all orbits) is designed based on one geometrical design before any planet creation

(D)

The planet is a geometrical point on the mother energy and moves with it –Or

The planet is a geometrical point on the same light beam and moves with it

That tells

The solar planets are geometrical points found on the same one light beam and move with this light beam motion

By that- the planets are similar to carriages in one train –and the light beam (the mother energy) is the engine of this train- the light moves and causes all planets motions  (as the sea water moves and causes all ships motions)

Here we conclude that the planets motions are similar to the chess board motions because it depends on geometrical rules in all details- that's why the analysis is so useful because it can show the geometrical design found by the planets motions integration.

(E)

The planet definition answers the question

If The Gravitational Waves Are Reflected Why This Reflection Have Effects On The Planets Data?

Because the waves reflection causes to define the energy motion direction and by that the planets data is changed and effected by the moving energy through these planets-

The effects on the planets data is very useful because it proves the reflection is a fact as we discussed later

(7)

 The Energy Distribution In The Solar System

Now we know

The unified wave (the gravitational wave) moves by 205.8 km/s in the orbits of Pluto, Neptune and Uranus and

The unified wave motion is accelerated to move by speed of light (C=300000 km/s) in all planets orbits Starting from Saturn to Venus

And Venus reflected the wave to Mars and by that the speed of light is squared to produce (C^2= squared speed of light) by which the light beam is created  

Can The Wave Different Speeds Have Effect On The Solar System Design? YES

The three planets (Pluto, Neptune and Uranus) have great areas because the wave velocity is 205.8 km/s means massive amounts of energy is stored in these orbits as waves move by 205.8 km/s-

But

Starting from Saturn orbit the wave moves by speed of light (C=300000 km/s) that doesn't need great areas because the energy is found in waves move by speed of light that explains why the planets orbits be small orbits (from Saturn to Venus) and even the inner planets have very small orbits because the energy is not stored in the inner planets orbits but the energy is used directly to produce the sun rays- that shows the planets distribution between the Sun and Pluto is related to the wave velocity changes

(8)

 Planet Motion Definition

Let's ask

This Is Extraordinary: Gravity Can Create Light, All on Its Own

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/this-is-extraordinary-gravity-can-create-light-all-on-its-own/ar-AA19YL5d?ocid=hpmsnHYPERLINK "https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/this-is-extraordinary-gravity-can-create-light-all-on-its-own/ar-AA19YL5d?ocid=hpmsn&cvid=620db4352aa943e2b454919a7b724604&ei=83"&HYPERLINK "https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/this-is-extraordinary-gravity-can-create-light-all-on-its-own/ar-AA19YL5d?ocid=hpmsn&cvid=620db4352aa943e2b454919a7b724604&ei=83"cvid=620db4352aa943e2b454919a7b724604HYPERLINK "https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/this-is-extraordinary-gravity-can-create-light-all-on-its-own/ar-AA19YL5d?ocid=hpmsn&cvid=620db4352aa943e2b454919a7b724604&ei=83"&HYPERLINK "https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/this-is-extraordinary-gravity-can-create-light-all-on-its-own/ar-AA19YL5d?ocid=hpmsn&cvid=620db4352aa943e2b454919a7b724604&ei=83"ei=83

The article tells, the gravitational waves can move by speed of light and can produce a light beam- now we ask- if the gravitational waves move by speed of light- why is it necessary the gravitational waves move by speed of light relative to the sun point of Space? Or let's ask this question by another method

Pluto velocity is 4.7 km/s relative to what? relative to the sun

All Motions In The Solar System Are Done Relative To The Sun – let's explain why

Let's remember how the sun point is created

We understand the space is similar to the sea of water and it's in continuous motion and NO stationary point can be found in it- the sun point of space should be a stationary point- for that the sun point of space creation needed specific procedure 

The planets were found before the sun creation and the planets revolve around a point in space (any point in space) the revolution creates two velocities on both sides of the revolution- the two velocities are equal in value opposite in direction- the total be Zero- means- the revolution motion creates a stationary point in the revolution center-

By that the sun point of space is created as a stationary point- and the sun point is the only stationary point in the solar system- for that all motions are done relative to the sun point of space- but let's ask

What does mean Pluto velocity is 4.7 km/s? it means – the sun point of space is a stationary point and its velocity is 1 km/s (Zero approximately)- and that means- the space around the sun has waves move by velocity 1 km/s while Pluto velocity is 4.7 km/s and that means the space around Pluto has waves move by 4.7 km/s  and by Pluto motion the waves around the sun moves by 4.7 km/s because of Pluto motion effect

Shortly- the sun is the stationary point in the solar system and all motions are done relative to the sun because it's the minimum velocity in the solar system.

II- The Comparison

The gravitational waves are reflected in the solar system three times

(From Neptune to Saturn) This Is The First Reflection

(From Uranus to Jupiter) This Is The Second Reflection

(From Venus to Mars) This Is The Third Reflection

Here we compare among the data of these planets- the comparison provides 7 groups of data in each group we compare the planets data because I want to prove that the planets use similar behaviors to produce their data – means- this all data is created based on geometrical rules which proves that there's one reason caused to create all this data and this reason is the gravitational waves reflection- In the comparison I start by Venus reflection (the 3rd one) then Uranus reflection (the 2nd one) and Neptune reflection (1st one) because Venus is very simple data and can be understood easily-

The Data Changes

 The gravitational waves reflection causes basic changes in the planets data let's refer to these changes in following

What's used as (A) before the reflection will be used as (1/A) after the reflection.

What's used as (a distance) before the reflection will be used as (a period of time) after the reflection

The velocities be squared –the rate (v1/v2) before reflection will be (v1/v2)^2 after the reflection.

The energy direction is changed by the reflection

The players of the rates of time are reflected also –

Notice – the gravitational waves reflection needs three planets –as we have discussed- the 1st reflection (from Neptune to Saturn) and between them Uranus – also the 2nd reflection (from Uranus to Jupiter) and between them Saturn–  and also the 3rd reflection (from Venus to Mars) and between them The Earth– that shows three planets are used in each reflection- the middle planet is effected also by the wave reflection as we will see in the data discussion – shortly – No reflection can be done by two neighbors planets - 

These changes are done with each reflection for the gravitational waves- the planets data proves this fact as we will see in the comparison of the data and the detailed analysis for the wave reflection.

Group Data No (I)

(1)

The gravitational waves are reflected from Venus to Mars – For that

Venus orbital circumference 680 mkm is Changed Into Mars orbital period 687 days

And

687 days x 2π        = 4331 days (Jupiter orbital period)

687 days x 4π        = 10747 days (Saturn orbital period) x 0.8

687 days x 6π x 2  =  25920 years (The Precession Cycle)

(2)

The gravitational waves are reflected from Uranus to Jupiter– For That 

Jupiter orbital circumference 4900mkm is Changed Into The  period4900 days

And

4900 days x 2π      = 30589 days (Uranus orbital period)

4900 days x 4π      = 59800 days (Neptune orbital period) (error 3%)

4900 days x 6π      =  90560 days (Pluto orbital period) (error 2%)

(3)

The gravitational waves are reflected from Neptune to Saturn–

BUT

The distance 1433 mkm is still a distance And

(1410 mkm = Pluto Neptune Distance)

1433 mkm               = Mars orbital circumference

1433 mkm   x 2π    = 9010 mkm (Saturn Orbital Circumference)

1433 mkm   x 4π    = 18048  mkm (Uranus Orbital Circumference)

1433 days   x 8π     = 37100 days (Pluto orbital Circumference) (error 2.5%)

Discussion

(1)

The data shows the following

The Gravitational Wave Reflection From Venus To Mars Defines Mars, Jupiter And Saturn Orbital Periods

(Saturn orbital period is effected by the rate 0.8 we should discuss later)

The Gravitational Wave Reflection From Uranus To Jupiter Defines Uranus, Neptune And Pluto Orbital Periods

The Gravitational Wave Reflection From Neptune To Saturn Defines Saturn, Uranus, Neptune And Pluto Orbital Circumference

This data proved my planet definition (the planets are geometrical points carried by the same one energy- or- the planets are geometrical points found on the same one light beam- and the planets move with this light beam motion- and the planets are created depending on each other and No planet is independent from the others in its creation and motion) – means- the planets are similar to whirlpools (vortex) found on the sea water page- we can imagine many whirlpools (vortex) are found on the same one sea and they are near to each other- this picture is very similar to the planets nature- that explains how the reflection of energy for one time can define the orbital periods for three planets (or 4 planets) together-

Here we imagine there are 4 whirlpools (vortex) on the sea page near to each other and then one strong wave of water passed through these 4 whirlpools (vortex), and this water wave motion causes effects on the 4 whirlpools-

This information is so important because one motion only (one wave reflection) can cause to define three or four planets data that proves strongly the planets Can NOT be independent neither in Creation Nor in motion- the planets are created and moving depends on each other because all of them are created from the same one energy and they move with this same energy motion-

NOTICE Let's imagine we have 4 whirlpools (vortex) on the sea page near to each other and one strong water wave passes through these 4 whirlpools (vortex)  - now – suppose we put some red color on this strong water wave- what would happen? The water color will be red and the red water will pass through these 4 whirlpools (vortex)  

We pay attention here because one reflection of energy can define the orbital periods of three planets – Means – all of them must be dependent on this reflected energy.

That tells the planets are NOT independent but they are dependent on the mother energy from which they are created and that caused they to be dependent on each other –

Now let's analyze each reflection individually

(1) The Third Reflection (The Wave Is Reflected From Venus To Mars)

224.7 days (Venus orbital period) is changed into 227.9 mkm (Mars orbital distance)

AND-

680 mkm (Venus Orbital Circumference) is changed into 687 days (Mars orbital period)- (max error 1.5%) –

As the rule tells (what's used as distance before the reflection be used as a period of time after the reflection and vice versa)

The orbital periods definition

687 days x 2π = 4331 days (Jupiter orbital period)

687 days x 4π = 10747 days (Saturn orbital period) x 0.8

687 days x 6π x 2  =  25920 years (The Precession Cycle)

We don't discuss the precession cycle here

(Saturn orbital period is effected by the rate 0.8 we should discuss later)

The data shows, the planets orbital periods are defined by the rates (2π, 4π, 6π)

It's not clear yet why the design uses these rates to define the planets orbital periods but this is the rule we will see it in the other two reflections of energy.

The important notice here tells that- the gravitational wave reflection for one time defines 3 planets orbital periods – this fact is proved strongly by the data and it disproves the wrong idea tells (Planet is created independently from the other planets) 

(2) The Second Reflection (The Wave Is Reflected From Uranus To Jupiter)

Here we have a clear problem – let's see the data

Jupiter orbital circumference 4900 mkm is Changed Into The  period 4900 days

And

4900 days x 2π      = 30589 days (Uranus orbital period)

4900 days x 4π      = 59800 days (Neptune orbital period)                    (error 3%)

4900 days x 6π      =  90560 days (Pluto orbital period)                       (error 2%)

We see clearly, the data distribution is typical to the previous data of the third reflection- let's compare them

Venus orbital circumference 680 mkm is Changed Into Mars orbital period 687 days

Jupiter orbital circumference 4900mkm is Changed Into The  period 4900 days  

687 days x 2π = 4331 days (Jupiter orbital period)

4900 days x 2π = 30589 days (Uranus orbital period)

687 days x 4π = 10747 days (Saturn orbital period) x 0.8

4900 days x 4π = 59800 days (Neptune orbital period) (error 3%)

4900 days x 6π = 90560 days (Pluto orbital period) (error 2%)

The comparison shows clearly the data is almost typical- by that- we have to suppose- the gravitational wave is reflected from Jupiter to Uranus- It is NOT Fact–because

The gravitational wave is reflected from Uranus to Jupiter (and then to Venus) – we see clearly the problem where the data distribution is reversed the wave reflection direction-

Notice - please note clearly that – we deal with one gravitational wave only- there are NOT three gravitational wave and each wave is reflected in one reflection- it's NOT Fact – the fact is that- it's one gravitational wave reflected three times in the solar system- the comparison next data proves this fact and gives no area for any doubt-

It's one gravitational wave sent from Pluto to Neptune and reflected to Saturn then this same wave is sent from Saturn to Uranus and Uranus reflected the same wave to Jupiter and Jupiter sent the same wave to Venus and Venus reflected the same wave to Mars- One Gravitational Wave moves through all these planets        

The Conclusion

The planets data is distributed in the reversed direction for the reflected energy- the energy is reflected from Uranus to Jupiter but the data is distributed from Jupiter to Uranus- there's a geometrical reason for this behavior we should discover later.

(3) The First Reflection (The Wave Is Reflected From Neptune To Saturn)

We still have another problem- let's remember this problem reason

The gravitational wave first reflection is done from Pluto to Neptune, supposing Neptune would send the energy to Uranus but Neptune didn't send the energy instead Neptune kept the energy inside its orbit and prevent it to move toward Uranus – also Uranus itself couldn't release the imprisoned energy from Neptune orbit – and that necessitated Saturn itself to create interaction with Neptune to release the imprisoned energy for that the energy is moved toward Saturn immediately by that this reflection of the wave is considered the first reflection because the energy is released from Neptune to Saturn directly – Shortly- the wave energy is sent from Pluto to Neptune and the energy is reflected from Neptune to Saturn and this is the first reflection of the energy (the gravitational wave first reflection)

Let's see the data - The distance 1433 mkm (Saturn orbital distance) is still a distance And (1410 mkm = Pluto Neptune Distance)

1433 mkm               = Mars orbital circumference

1433 mkm   x 2π    = 9010 mkm (Saturn Orbital Circumference)

1433 mkm   x 4π    = 18048  mkm (Uranus Orbital Circumference)

1433 days   x 8π     = 37100 days (Pluto orbital Circumference) (error 2.5%)

The data follows the rule (2π, 4π, 8π) perfectly as the other two reflections but the data shows 2 problems which are

1st problem

The data distribution is in the reversed direction of the energy motion direction- because the reflection is done from Neptune to Saturn but the data shows the orbital circumferences of (Saturn, Neptune, Uranus and Pluto) are defined by this reflection which supposes the energy is reflected from Saturn to Neptune and that's NOT Fact 

This behavior is typical the behavior of the second reflection from Uranus to Jupiter-

Means- this behavior is repeated in the two reflections of energy which tells that the behavior depends on a geometrical reason.

2nd problem

The distance is not changed into a period of time as the other reflections but stayed as a distance! How and why?? let's see deeply this data

If the energy is reflected from Saturn to Neptune, Saturn orbital circumference 9010 mkm should be changed into a period of time to be 9010 days and then

9010 days    x 2π    = 2 x 28244 days (28244 mkm = Neptune orbital circumference)

9010 days    x 4π    = 113223 days

9010 days    x 6π    = 169840 days

We see the data gives NO real values- means- this is not the direction of the data creation- Instead – the distance 1433 mkm or the circumference 9010 mkm is still distance and then

1433 mkm   x 2π    = 9010 mkm (Saturn Orbital Circumference)

1433 mkm   x 4π    = 18048  mkm (Uranus Orbital Circumference)

1433 days   x 8π     = 37100 days (Pluto orbital Circumference) (error 2.5%)

And

1433 mkm               = Mars orbital circumference

We understand that, the data provides a distance (1433 mkm) and not a period of time then we have to ask again why this distance is not changed into a period of time?

We understand that the outer planets have 2 reflections (first reflection from Neptune to Saturn) and (the second reflection from Uranus to Jupiter)- also we understand that the solar system needs one reflection only in the outer planets and one reflection only in the inner planets and also we know the outer planets have two reflections because of Neptune negative effect on the solar system- means if Neptune is removed from the solar system the outer planets would have one reflection only – for that- the designer caused the two reflections in the outer planets to be complementary one another – the reflection from Uranus to Jupiter defines the planets orbital periods and the reflection from Neptune to Saturn defines these same planets orbital circumferences

 The designer caused to make the two reflections complementary one another and by that the two reflections can be unified into one reflection and based on that the machine will work by one unified reflection in the outer planets and one single reflection in the inner planets- but how the energy motion produces the distances in place of the periods of time? this question is hard to answer because we don't see deeply how the reflection of energy can define each planet orbital period (or orbital circumference) by using the rates (2π, 4π, 6π) we just discovered the rule but more geometrical analysis is required to see how this rule works

NOTICE

In the third reflection (from Venus to Mars) – let's remember the data

Venus orbital circumference 680 mkm is Changed Into Mars orbital period 687 days

687 days x 2π        = 4331 days (Jupiter orbital period)

687 days x 4π        = 10747 days (Saturn orbital period) x 0.8

687 days x 6π x 2  =  25920 years (The Precession Cycle)

We have asked- why Saturn orbital period is effected by the rate (0.8)?

Let's try to answer – let's see the data 10747 /9800 = 9800/9010 where

10747 days  = Saturn orbital period and 9010 mkm   = Saturn orbital circumference

9800 mkm   = 2 x 4900 mkm (Jupiter Orbital Circumference)  

We know 4900 mkm and 4900 days is the player in the second reflection from Uranus to Jupiter- means- Saturn has effect also in the second reflection for that the second reflection has effect on Saturn data and caused its orbital period to be produced under the effect of the rate (0.8) which is the reflection rate as we will see in the next data 

Group Data No (II)

(1)

3.024 mkm (Venus motion distance per solar day) x 0.8   = 2.4 mkm

2.57 mkm (Venus motion distance per solar day)              = 1.0725 x 2.4 mkm

2.57 mkm x 0.8 = 2.082 mkm (Mars motion distance per solar day)

(2)

1.1318 mkm (Jupiter motion distance per solar day) x 0.8 = 2 x 1.0725 x 0.421 mkm

(3)

0.838 mkm (Saturn motion distance per solar day) x 0.8 = 2 x 1.0725 x 0.3129 mkm

Discussion

We discuss the data no. (2) and (3) at first

DATA NO. (2)

1.1318 mkm (Jupiter motion distance per solar day) x 0.8 = 2 x 1.0725 x 0.421 mkm

(0.421 mkm = Uranus motion distance in its rotation period)

DATA NO. (3)

0.838 mkm (Saturn motion distance per solar day) x 0.8 = 2 x 1.0725 x 0.3129 mkm

(0.3129 mkm = Neptune motion distance in its rotation period)

MORE DATA

0.5875 mkm (Uranus motion distance per solar day) x 0.8 = 0.46688 mkm

(0.466884 mkm = Jupiter motion distance in its rotation period) And

0.46688 mkm (Neptune motion distance per solar day) x 0.8 = 0.3736 mkm

(0.3736 mkm = Saturn motion distance in its rotation period) And

0.46688 mkm (Pluto motion distance per solar day) x 0.8 = 0.3248 mkm

(i)

The rate (0.8) is created by the waves reflection and the planets velocities are defined based on each other by this rate as discussed in the planet velocity definition-  here the data shows the rate (0.8) defines each planet motion distance based on the other planet motion distance (in the same one reflection) –

let's explain that in more details

(1st reflection From Neptune to Saturn) for that

Saturn motion distance per solar day (0.838 million km) by the rate (0.8) defines Neptune motion distance in its rotation period 0.3129 million km

Also

Neptune motion distance per solar day (0.46688 million km) by the rate (0.8) defines Saturn motion distance in its rotation period 0.3736 million km

AND

(2nd reflection From Uranus to Jupiter) for that

Jupiter motion distance per solar day (1.1318 million km) by the rate (0.8) defines Uranus motion distance in its rotation period 0.421 million km

Also

Uranus motion distance per solar day (0.5875 million km) by the rate (0.8) defines Jupiter motion distance in its rotation period 0.46688 million km

AND

In the 3rd reflection we will see Mars motion distance per solar day is defined by Venus motion distance per solar day- follows the same rule  

Notice

We note the data No. (2) and (3) show the data is distributed in the reversed direction for the energy motion because the energy is reflected from Neptune to Saturn and from Uranus to Jupiter- But data is distributed in the reversed direction-

In the third reflection we will see the data moves in the same direction with the energy distribution

Also  

In Venus data we will see that it uses the square value (0.8)^2 and we will explain why the rate is used in square value

(ii)

Why is the rate (1.0725) found in the data? because the gravitational wave  moves by speed of light (300000 km/s) in Saturn orbit and in all planets orbits till Venus orbit-

Shortly

the wave velocity was 205.8 km/s through Pluto, Neptune and Uranus orbits BUT

The wave velocity is accelerated in Saturn orbit and its velocity be = speed of light =300000 km/s, for that reason the rate (1.0725) is created because this is (Lorentz length contraction effect rate) and it can be produced only by motion with speed=(99% speed of light =297000 km/s)- shortly- the wave velocity be equal=speed of light = 300000 km/s in Saturn orbit, for that the rate (1.0725) is produced in the orbits of Saturn and Jupiter as the data shows (and also in Venus data we will see it)

(iii)

The previous data shows the planets distances are rated by the rate (0.8) for the planets players in the same wave reflection- but- this picture is not complete yet – because the planets which aren't players in the same reflection shows equal distances also but this distances equality doesn't depend on the rate (0.8) let's give examples

Jupiter motion distance in its rotation period = Neptune motion distance per solar day =0.466884 million km

And

Saturn motion distance in its rotation period 0.3736 mkm x π = Uranus motion distance per solar day 0.5875 mkm x 2

And

The Earth motion distance per solar day = Pluto motion distance in its rotation period = 2.574 million km

This distances equality must be produced also by the waves reflection but the rule is not clear yet- I want to say the effect of the rate (0.8) on the planets distances is part of greater rule explains how this distances equality is produced and the useful result of it –

Please note–I analyze this data in details in 2nd part of this 1st hypothesis explanation-

Now

Let's discuss the data No.(1)

DATA NO. (1)

3.024 mkm (Venus motion distance per solar day) x 0.8 = 2.4 mkm

2.57 mkm (The Earth motion distance per solar day)                  = 1.0725 x 2.4 mkm

2.57 mkm x 0.8 = 2.082 mkm (Mars motion distance per solar day)

2.57 mkm = The Earth motion distance per solar day= Pluto motion distance in its rotation period

Means

3.024 million km x (0.8)^2 x 1.0725 = 2.082 million km where

3.024 mkm  =Venus motion distance per solar day

2.082 mkm  =Mars motion distance per solar day

Notice

2.57 mkm = The Earth motion distance per solar day

2.57 mkm = 1.0725 x 2.4 mkm The moon motion distance per solar day

2.59 mkm = Pluto motion distance in its rotation period

The data tells Mars motion distance per solar day depends on Venus motion distance per solar day – here all distances are defined by the solar day- 

In the third reflection- the wave is reflected from Venus to Mars- here also Venus motion distance per solar day (3.024 mkm) defines Mars motion distance per solar day (2.082 mkm)- but the definition depends on the squared value (0.8)^2 

That shows Venus reflection follows the same rule used by the other reflections – where the sender planet motion distance per solar day defines the receiver planet motion distance

Perfectly the rule is followed BUT Why does Venus use the square value (0.8)^2??

Because of the reflections order – let's explain that

The two reflections in the outer planets are complementary each other and by that they are unified and can be considered as One Unified Reflection in the outer planets

Means- there is one unified reflection in the outer planets and one single reflection in the inner planets and these are two reflections- means – Venus reflection should be considered the second reflection that causes to square the value (0.8)- that explains why Venus uses the squared Value (0.8)^2

Notice

This is a proof for my theory that (one gravitational wave is reflected three times)- means- this wave is reflected before and effected by the rate (0.8) and this same wave is reflected again for that the rate (0.8) be in its squared value  (0.8)^2

The Conclusion

The gravitational waves reflection causes the sender planet motion distance to define the receiver planet motion distance as seen in the data- the definition depends on the rate (0.8) – here we see one rule proves the receiver planet motion depends on the sender planet motion- 

Group Data No (III)

(1)              

5.56 = (568/102) = (59800/10747)

(2)              

21.8 = (1898 /86.8) = 30589 /1407.6

(3)              

(4.87/0.642) ^2 = (7.6)^2 and (7.6)^2 x 224.7 days = 2π^2 x 687 days

And

π^3 = 31 = (5.56)^2 = 4x 4.75 (but between 7.75 and 7.6 the error 2%)

Discussion

Data No. (1)

5.56 = (568/102) = (59800/10747)

568 x 10^24 kg      = Saturn Mass

102 x 10^24 kg      = Neptune Mass

59800 days            = Neptune orbital period

10747 days            = Saturn orbital period

In the first reflection the gravitational wave is reflected from Neptune to Saturn

This behavior shows second rule– for the planets in the same reflection- we see the masses rate defines the orbital periods rate and this behavior is used by the other two reflections- means- the gravitational wave reflection between two planets cause these two planets masses rate to define their orbital periods rate – let's see the rest data

Data No. (2)

21.8 = (1898 /86.8) = 30589 /1407.6                   (notice1407.6π =4331 error 2%)

1898 x 10^24 kg    = Jupiter Mass

86.8 x 10^24 kg     = Uranus Mass

30589 days            = Uranus orbital period

4331 days              = Jupiter orbital period

In second reflection the gravitational wave is reflected from Uranus to Jupiter

It's the same rule and behavior, the planets masses rates defines their orbital periods

Just Jupiter orbital period 4331 is divided by (π) – no any other change in the rule proves that the rule is a fact and used with the planets of the same reflection

Data No. (3)

(4.87/0.642) ^2 = (7.6)^2 and (7.6)^2 x 224.7 days = 2π^2 x 687 days

4.87 x 10^24 kg     = Venus Mass                          and 0.642 x 10^24 kg= Mars Mass

224.7 days             = Venus orbital period              and 687 days= Mars orbital period

In the third reflection the gravitational wave is reflected from Venus to Mars

Here also we see the planets use the same rule and the same behavior – the masses rate defines the orbital periods rate-But the rate is squared! Why?   

Venus Mass = 7.6 Mars Mass but the data uses the squared rate (7.6)^2 –

We should pay attention for this rate because the other planets used their masses rate but NOT squared value – Why does Venus use the squared value (7.6)^2?

We have solved this question in the distances discussion when Venus used (0.8)^2 and the other planets use (0.8) only- here also is similar to that- let's remember the reason

We agreed that the two wave reflections in the outer planets are complementary one another and by that they are unified together into one unified reflection and by that the outer planets has one unified reflection and the inner planets has one single reflection and these are considered as two reflections and for that Venus reflection is considered the second one in the solar system (and the final one) for that Venus uses the squared Value – where we know the wave reflection causes to square the value

Notice - 5.56 = (568/102) = (59800/10747) = (10/1.8) =9010/1622 where 1.8 deg = Neptune orbital inclination and 10 =4 x 2.5 deg (Saturn orbital inclination) and -9010 mkm= Saturn orbital circumference and 1622 mkm = Neptune Uranus Distance

Notice π^3 = 31 = (5.56)^2 = 4x 4.75 (but between 7.75 and 7.6 the error 2%) – this data is discussed in the next point

The Conclusion The Wave Reflection Causes The Sender And Receiver Planets Masses Rate To Define Their Orbital Periods Rate.

Group Data No (IV)

(1)

12104 km (Venus diameter) /6792 km (Mars diameter) = 3.4 deg /1.9 deg = π^0.5

(2)

142984 km (Jupiter diameter)/51118 km (Uranus diameter) = 2.79 =5.56/2

(3)

378675 km (Saturn Circumference)/49528 km (Neptune diameter) = 7.6

Discussion

Notice

π^3 = 31 = (5.56)^2 = 4x 4.75 (but between 7.75 and 7.6 the error 2%)

This data shows the rates (5.56) and (7.6) are found based on the value (π^3=31) I try to prove that it's one energy (one value π^3=31) and the different rates as (5.56 and 7.6) are found depending on (this one value π^3=31) by geometrical reasons – that proves it's one energy (one wave) is reflected three times in the solar system – the value (π^3 = 31 =) is very important because all rates depend on it

The group data shows the planets diameters rates depend on the value (π^3 =31)- let's examine it in following

Data No. (1)

12104 km (Venus diameter) /6792 km (Mars diameter) = 3.4 deg /1.9 deg = π^0.5

3.4 degrees = Venus Orbital Inclination

1.9 degrees = Mars Orbital Inclination

The data shows the two planets diameters are rated with rate equal their orbital inclination and this rate equal π^0.5

Notice

177.4 degrees (Venus axial tilt) = 1.9 deg (Mars orbital inclination) x 93.4

90+ 3.4 = 93.4 deg

Data No. (2)

142984 km (Jupiter diameter)/51118 km (Uranus diameter) = 2.79 = 5.56

We remember 31 = (5.56)^2

Data No. (3)

378675 km (Saturn Circumference)/49528 km (Neptune diameter) = 7.6

Also we remember 31/4 = 7.75 (and the difference between 7.75 and 7.6 is 2%)

The data shows the diameters rates depend on the value (π^3 = 31 =) as the masses do

Means- the planets masses and diameters are created rated to one another based on this same value (π^3 = 31 =)

I try to prove that – one energy is found behind all this data- the value (π^3 = 31 =) refers to one energy and this energy is effected by different geometrical reasons and that causes this energy (π^3 = 31 =) to show different rates as (5.56) and (7.6)

Shortly – we deal with one energy reflected three times in the solar system and the planets data are defined by the effect of this energy on them

Please note- we can imagine one river of water moves through different cities and each city deals with the river based on its own data- one city has great soil and this uses the river water to plant vegetables and fruits- another city its ground has many holes and caves the river water will cause all these holes to be filled of water and that will create many moors in this city and that will not be useful for it –

We have here the same picture-

One energy moves through the solar system and reflected three times in it and this reflection causes changes for the planets data for that the different rates (5.56 and 7.6) are created from this one energy (π^3 = 31 =) by geometrical reasons have effects on it. (CONT)  

Gerges Francis Tawdrous +201022532292

Physics Department-  Physics & Mathematics  Faculty 

Peoples' Friendship university of Russia – Moscow   (2010-2013)

Curriculum Vitae                   https://www.academia.edu/s/b88b0ecb7c

E-mail                             mrwaheid@gmail.com, mrwaheid1@yahoo.com

                                      gergesgerges@yandex.ru                   

ORCID                           https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1041-7147

Facebook                       https://www.facebook.com/gergis.tawadrous

VK                                 https://vk.com/id696655587

Tumblr                           https://www.tumblr.com/blog/itsgerges 

Researcherid                   https://publons.com/researcher/3510834/gerges-tawadrous/

Google                                https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=2Y4ZdTUAAAAJ&hl=en

Livejournal                      https://gerges2022.livejournal.com/profile

Pocket                                                                     https://getpocket.com/@646g8dZ0p3aX5Ad1bsTr4d9THjA5p6a5b2fX99zd54g221E4bs76eBdtf6aJw5d0?src=navbar

PUBLICATIONS

box                                 https://app.box.com/s/47fwd0gshir636xt0i3wpso8lvvl8vnv

Academia                        https://rudn.academia.edu/GergesTawadrous

List of publications          http://vixra.org/author/gerges_francis_tawdrous

Slideshare                             https://www.slideshare.net/Gergesfrancis

[thebardostate]

The Myth of Dreamless Sleep

Consciousness never "switches off" because it isn't generated by the brain. Its sensory inputs can be switched off - during sleep or general anesthesia, for instance - but your consciousness is still there. For example, a small but consistent number of patients report out-of-body experiences (OOBEs) or near-death experiences (NDEs) while under general anesthesia.

[ismailfazil1-blog]

The Human Brain vs. Supercomputers: The Ultimate Comparison

Are Supercomputers Smarter Than the Human Brain?

This article delves into the intricacies of this comparison, examining the capabilities, strengths, and limitations of both the human brain and supercomputers.

[omegaphilosophia]

The Dance of Perspectives and Beliefs: Shaping Our Worldview

Our lives are a delicate interplay of perspectives and beliefs, two elements that quietly sculpt the contours of our worldview. As we navigate the complex tapestry of existence, our perspectives serve as the lens through which we view the world, while our beliefs lay the foundation upon which our decisions and actions are built.

Perspectives Shape Beliefs: Our perspectives, which are influenced by our upbringing, culture, experiences, and personal values, play a significant role in shaping our beliefs. When we encounter new information or ideas, our existing perspectives filter and interpret that information, leading to the formation or reinforcement of our beliefs.

Beliefs Influence Perspectives: Conversely, our beliefs also influence our perspectives. When we strongly hold a particular belief, it can color the way we perceive and interpret the world around us. This can lead to confirmation bias, where we tend to seek out information that supports our existing beliefs and filter out information that contradicts them.

Openness to New Perspectives: Philosophically and intellectually, being open to new perspectives is a key aspect of critical thinking and personal growth. It involves being willing to challenge and reconsider our beliefs when presented with new evidence or alternative viewpoints. Without this openness, perspectives can become rigid and closed.

Diversity of Perspectives: A diverse range of perspectives in society is essential for a well-rounded and vibrant exchange of ideas. When people with different perspectives come together, it can lead to constructive dialogue, innovation, and a deeper understanding of complex issues.

Cognitive Dissonance: When our perspectives and beliefs come into conflict, it can create cognitive dissonance — a state of mental discomfort. This discomfort often motivates individuals to either adjust their beliefs or seek out information that confirms their existing beliefs, depending on various factors such as the strength of the belief and the individual's willingness to confront contradictions.

Worldview: Our perspectives and beliefs collectively form our worldview, which is the overarching framework through which we interpret and make sense of the world. A worldview encompasses our views on ethics, reality, purpose, and the nature of existence, among other things.

In summary, perspectives and beliefs are deeply intertwined, with each influencing and being influenced by the other. They shape our understanding of the world, our values, and our interactions with others, making them essential components of human cognition and experience.

[compneuropapers]

Interesting Reviews for Week 27, 2024

Consciousness in the cradle: on the emergence of infant experience. Bayne, T., Frohlich, J., Cusack, R., Moser, J., & Naci, L. (2023). Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 27(12), 1135–1149.

Environmental statistics and experience shape risk-taking across adolescence. Ciranka, S., & Hertwig, R. (2023). Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 27(12), 1123–1134.

Neural Circuit Transitions Supporting Developmentally Specific Social Behavior. Ferrara, N. C., Che, A., Briones, B., Padilla-Coreano, N., Lovett-Barron, M., & Opendak, M. (2023). Journal of Neuroscience, 43(45), 7456–7462.

Perceptual-Cognitive Integration for Goal-Directed Action in Naturalistic Environments. Fooken, J., Baltaretu, B. R., Barany, D. A., Diaz, G., Semrau, J. A., Singh, T., & Crawford, J. D. (2023). Journal of Neuroscience, 43(45), 7511–7522.