resonator that can have its energy raised or lowered a certain quantal amount by absorbing a photon at the right wavelength. Well, that defines a communication channel. So if you have two electrons that have that same bandgap-say between state N and state M-then that defines the communication channel that can be traversed only by a photon of precisely that energy.
Well, obviously the brain is full of this stuff. It’s hard to imagine engineering a better sensor for the energies of nature. In spite of all the thermodynamic arguments to the contrary, which I regard as archaic nineteenth century science, I think that this is going on all the time inside our brain. The brain is a photonic or a radio transceiver, which is communicating with itself over distance at the speed of light, in addition to everything else it’s doing. And probably this phenomenon extends from one brain to another, in a much, much weaker way in relation to how in tune those brains are by virtue of their own structures.
Of course, everything I’ve just said could be disproven by a suitable experiment. There are other explanations you get by going in the Bell’s theorem direction. If it’s photonic or radio communication, then it’s taking place at the speed of light. Well, maybe it’s not, and there are paradoxical properties about this. Does your sympathetic communication with a significant other fall off with physical distance? Maybe it increases with d istance. Well, then you have to start looking for non-local phenomena, which are not signal transmissions by energy, so consequently they’re not limited by the speed of light. But then causality, the order of “he thought, then she thought,” is lost. As Penrose elucidated the phenomenon of quasi-crystallization, coordination over distance is indistinguishable from action backward in time. The vision causes the events that lead up to it. I take this as the paradigm of metaprogramming.
There’s the quantum theory. There are also subquantum theories. “Is a quark a quantum?” for instance. It takes several quarks to make each of those elementary particles, which are the subject of classical quantum theories, so where does it go from there? A physicist I used to hang out with, David Finklestien, said that there’s a certain level where you stop getting smaller and smaller parts. He said that at this level it’s as if you take a watch and you smash it with a hammer, and instead of a bunch of watch parts flying all over the room, you get a bunch of watches. (laughter) See, that’s again at the level where the logic of the physical world breaks down. It breaks down in the mind in isolation, and it breaks down at the quantum level, where you have the epistemic basis of existence, because the knowledge or communication process that creates physical existence doesn’t follow the logic of the physical world. A thing isn’t necessarily composed of parts that are smaller than itself; rather, it might be composed of parts that are larger than itself. Same thing in the mind. So it’s gone full circle. A consciousness as big as yours might be responsible for a single dot at the end of this line.