CIA-RDP96-00792R000700130001-6

7
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000700130001-6
234
FRANK J. KELLY
References
Fancher, R.E. Psychoanalytic Psychology (The Development of Freud's Thought), W.W. Norton
& Co., New York, 1973.
Freud, S. The Ego and the Id (trans. Riviere, J.), W.W. Norton & Co., New York, 1960.
Freud, S., Beyond the Pleasure Principle (trans. Strachey, J.), W.W. Norton & Co., New York,
1961.
Freud, S., Civilization and its Discontents, W.W. Norton & Co., New York, 1962.
Freud, S., On Autobiographical Study (trans. Strachey, J.), W.W. Norton & Co., New York,
1963.
Freud, S., The Interpretation of Dreams (trans. Strachey, J.), Avon Books, New York, 1965a.
Freud. S., New Introductory Lectures on Psychoanalysis (trans. Strachey, J.), W.W. Norton &
Co., New York, 1965b.
Freud, S., Instincts and Their Vicissitudes. General Psychological Theory (Papers on Meta-
psychology) (trans. Baines, C.M.) Collier Books, New York, 1966a.
.
Freud, S., The Unconscious. Op. cit., 1966b.
Freud, S., Project for a Scientific Psychology. Standard Edition of Complete Psychological Works
of Sigmund Freud (trans. Strachey, J.), 1/ Hogarth Press, London, 1968a.
Freud. S., The Interpretation of Dreams. Op. cit., 5, 1968b.
Freud. S., Instincts and Their Vicissitudes. Papers on Metapsychology. Op. cit., 14, 1968c.
Freud, S., The Unconscious. Papers on Metapsychology. Op. cit., 14, 1968d.
Freud. S., Beyond the Pleasure Principle. Op. cit., 18, 1968e.
Freud. S., Group Psychology and the Analysis of the Ego. Op. cit., 18, 1968f.
Freud, S., The Ego and the Id. Op. cit., 19/1968g.
Freud. S., On Autobiographical Study. Op. cit., 20, 1968h.
Freud. S., The Question of Lay Analysis. Op. cit., 20, 1968i.
Freud. S., Civilization and its Discontents. Op. cit., 21, 1968j.
Freud. S., New Introductory Lectures of Psychoanalysis. Qp. cit., 22, 1968k.
Freud. S., An Outline of Psychoanalysis. Op. cit., 23, 1968m.
Freud. S., The Question of Lay Analysis, W.W. Norton & Co., New York, 1969.
Freud. S., The Origins of Psychoanalysis (trans. Mosbacher, E. Strachey, J.), Basic Books, New
York, 1977.
Freud. S., An Outline of Psychoanalysis (trans. Strachey, J.), W.W. Norton & Co., New York,
1979a.
Freud. S., Group Psychology and the Analysis of the Ego (trans. Strachey, J.), W.W. Norton &
Co., New York, 1979b.
Gill. M.M., Topography and Systems in Psychoanalytic Theory, Interhat. univ. Press, New York,
1963.
Ricoeur, P., Freud and Philosophy: An Essay on Interpretation (trans. Savage, D.), Yale Univ.
Press, New Haven, Conp., 1977.
Sulloway, F.J., Freud, Biologist of the Mind (Beyond the Psychoanalytic\_egend), Basic Books,
New York, 1979.
Psychoenergetics, 1983, Vol. 5, pp. 235-242
0278-6060/83/0503-0235 $18.50/0
@ Gordon and Breach Science Publishers, Inc., 1983
Printed in the United Kingdom
The orbitals of consciousness.
A neurosyntergic approach to the
discrete levels of conscious
experience
JACOBO GRINBERG-ZYLBERBAUM
Facultad de Psicologia, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Ciudad
Universitaria, México D.F. 04510 MEXICO
and
Instituto Nacional Para el Estudio de la Conciencia
A connection is traced from the behaviour of electrons existing only in particular locations
(orbitals) around their nucleus, to discrete levels of conscious experience.
According to the syntergic theory, the structure of experience is the result of an interaction
between an energetic field created by the brain (the neuronal field) and the energetic structure of
space (the quantum field). Conscious experience appears when a central processor focuses this
interaction. It is postulated that this focalization process can only arise in some discrete portions of
the syntergic continuum, thus also activating discrete levels of conscious experience.
1. THEORETICAL INTRODUCTION
When the neuronal field (Grinberg-Zylberbaum, 1982) interacts with the
quantum field (Capra, 1976) a hypercomplex energetic interference pattern is
created (Grinberg-Zylberbaum, 1983). This interference pattern constitutes
the energetic structure of perceptual experience. This energetic structure is
not localized in space and, hence, its conscious appearance as an individual
conscious experience requires a focalization operation. This focalization
involves a new interaction between the interference pattern and the central
processor responsible for activating a hypothetical directionality factor
(Grinberg-Zylberbaum, 1981). The directionality factor stimulates a limited
portion of the interference pattern, transforming its energetic structure into a
qualitatively distinct perceptual experience. The purely energetic structure of
the perceptual experience (the interference pattern in space) is thus
transformed into the dimension of a vividly conscious experience. The central
processor responsible the activity of the directionality factor is intimately
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000700130004-6

236
J. GRINBERG-ZYLBERBAUM
related to the Self, or real observer, known in different traditions as the Being,
Self or Purusha (Ramana Maharshi, 1972; Vivekananda, 1975).
Both the neuronal field and the quantum field, together with their
int@action, are located in a syntergic continuum (Grinberg-Zylberbaum,
19%). The extreme of low syntergy in this continuum is characterized by an
en@getic organization in which each of its elements contains small amounts of
infomation of high coherence, poor connections between parts and restricted
complexity. In contrast, in an organization of high syntergy, each one of
its Dements contains high amounts of information of high coherence, rich
comections between parts and unrestricted complexity (Grinberg-
Zylgerbaum, 1981).
:
Theoretically, it is possible to postulate that the pattern giving rise to the
energetic structure of experience appears throughout the syntergic continuum
in @ analogue, rather than in a discrete, form. Nevertheless, because the
sys@ms of thought that have studied the appearance of consciousness
(Vivekananda, 1975; Epstein, 1978; Aurobindo, 1971) describe discrete
levels of conscious experience, these empirical observations imply the
existence of discrete levels in the creation of an interference pattern, or
discrete levels of interaction between the central processor and a non-discrete
intoference pattern, thus giving raise to quantized levels of conscious
experience.
2. THE ORBITALS OF CONSCIOUSNESS
In grace, the structure of the syntergic continuum is related to the varying
degree of concentration of the information contained in it. A mathematical
abs action, the so-called minimal quantum of space, is of help in under-
starling the syntergic structure. Each location in space can be conceived as a
container, energised to hold some quantity of information. Take, for example,
the visible information of the moon seen from the earth's surface. The minimal
volone of space capable of containing the maximum visible information
about the moon would be the minimal quantum of space for the moon at that
spegfic distance. As the distance increases, the dimension of the quantum
dimmishes until, at an infinite distance from all objects, the minimal quantum
of space is infinitesimal in dimension and contains coherent information relat-
ing& all the universe. This hypothetical place in space would constitute the
extreme of high syntergy - the Aleph (Borges, 1970).
Similar, if not identical considerations, can be made in regard to the
convergent organization of the brain (Grinberg-Zylberbaum, 1978). In it,
relatively dispersed information at the retinal receptors level, converges in
bipolar and later on in ganglionic cells, in which patterns of neuronal activity
237
ORBITALS OF CONSCIOUSNESS
are concentrated in what can be called neuronal algorithms. The same
concentration of information takes place all along the primary, secondary and
tertiary occipital cortex and later on in high integration polisensory structures,
from where abstractions and language processes concentrate in coherent
neuronal algorithms high amounts of previously disconnected information.
Thus, a neurosyntergic continuum can be postulated in the brain.
The neurosyntergic organization of the brain unites with the syntergic
organization of space by the creation, expansion and interaction of the
neuronal field with the quantum field. The neuronal field appears as a result of
all the neuronal interactions taking place inside the brain structure. This
energetic field expands in space and incorporates in its structure the active
neurosyntergic functioning level of the brain.
Nobody has ever recorded directly the neuronal field, nor its interactions
with the quantum field, but all of us see one level of this interaction as the
physical world that seems to surround us. This perceptual world is just one
level of the neuronal-quantum field interaction. Other levels are the
emotional, tactile, aural and the other qualitatively distinct modes of our
conscious experience.
In holography, it is known that the same frequency of laser light used to
create the holographic interference pattern is needed to recreate the
holographic image (Caulfield and Lu, 1970). If another frequency is used, the
resultant recreation is not a clear three-dimensional image but a blurred and
chaotic one. There must be a frequency congruence in order to obtain a
holographic image. Something similar must happen before the central
processor is able to activate a distinct level and quality of experience whilst
interacting with the interference pattern associated with the energetic
structure of our prceptual experience. Probably, the neurosyntergic level of
the neuronal field has to correspond with some level of the syntergic
organization of space in order to create a coherent interference pattern. If,
for example, the syntergic level of space is greater than the neurosyntergic
level of the neuronal field, the central processor would give rise to an image of
transparency in an empty space.
The neuronal field is able to change its levels over a continuum. The same
thing is true of the quantum field. The central processor interacts without
constraint with innumerable levels of energy patterns. What makes conscious
experience behave in a discrete fashion is that the interaction between
neuronal and quantum fields results in a congruent interference pattern only
when both fields share a similar syntergic level. The orbitals of consciousness
correspond to these permitted levels of interaction where the syntergy of the
neuronal field corresponds with some syntergic level of the quantum field. An
extreme example of this correspondence is unitary consciousness. This level
of consciousness will be treated later on in some detail. Here, it is enough to
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000700130001-6

2.38
J. GRINBERG-ZYLBERBAUM
ay that, theoretically, it appears when the neuronal field is able to interact
with the Aleph. In other words, when the neuronal field combines with the
uantum field at the highest syntergic level that the latter is able to reach.
In unitary consciousness, the neuronal and the quantum fields regain their
Original nature by becoming one indivisible field.
. THE CENTRAL PROCESSOR
Recent experimental evidence (Grinberg-Zylberbaum, 1983) indicates that
The neuronal field is able to interact with a crystalline structure whose lattice
dimensions are of the order of the wavelength of x-rays. This finding is the
First known indication relating to the physical characteristics of the neuronal
eld. It suggests that the neuronal field is able to vibrate at the frequency of
x-rays, but it does not say that this is the limit of the frequencies that the
neuronal field is able to reach.
If, as was said before, unitary consciousness implies an identity between the
highest syntergic quantum field level (the Aleph) and the highest neuronal
field level, the limits for the frequencies that the neuronal field is able to reach
must be much higher than the ones associated with X-rays. In fact, these limits
are not calculable for unitary consciousness, because the frequencies that can
be reached by the quantum field are not bounded. If the central processor's
function is to transform the purely energetic structure of experience into
conscious experience, the nature of the central processor must be such that it is
able to include the energetic structure of the interference pattern within itself,
deven when the neuronal field becomes identical with the quantum field at its
highest syntergic level. If this is so, the possibility of a non-physical nature for
The central processor must be considered seriously.
The central processor as a non-physical entity would then be able to
transcend the possibly infinite level of frequency of vibration that the quantum
field reaches in the Aleph. In other words, if the central processor belongs to a
hon-physical reality, then it would be conceivable that it could transcend the
imits of frequency in the physical universe.
How and where a non-physical reality is able to interact with a physical one,
remains a deep mystery that an energetic model (that states that an interaction
Exists between the central processor and the interference pattern) is unable to
solve. The same mystery arises in the kabalistic formulation which states that
God sends emanations from his being which illuminate and give life to the
discrete spheres of consciousness (sephirot) in which we human beings live
(Epstein, 1978).
The central processor can be conceived as pure consciousness. When the
interaction between neuronal and quantum fields has a complex structure, the
1
1
1
239
ORBITALS OF CONSCIOUSNESS
central processor transforms this energetic structure into an image replete
with forms and details. When the interaction reaches its maximum syntergico
level and becomes homogeneous, the central processor experiences every
thing as a reflection of itself and thus the experience that is activated is unitary
consciousness.
Between each one of the qualitatively different modalities of perceptual
experience (sound, light etc.) and unitary consciousness, several orbitals
consciousness exist. Still, consciousness remains unchanged in all the orbitals
The central processor (the observer) is always the same; what changes in ever
orbital is the content of consciousness. This content is determined by brain
activity because the neuronal field is more stable than the quantum field and
the syntergic level (of the neuronal field) is determined by the particular an
specific level of brain activity. Instead, the quantum field varies its syntergi
level over the whole continuum that its syntergy can cover. In fact, the whole
syntergic continuum of the quantum field coexists simultaneously in space
Also, the central processor always remains the same because, belonging to
non-physical reality, its activity does not depend on any syntergic level Or
energetic field. These considerations lead to an important conclusion which is
that, in the absence of brain activity (after death), the central processor is stim
able to interact, but now not with the energetic structure of experience (the.
interference pattern resulting from the interaction between the neuronal and
the quantum fields), but only with the 'bare' quantum field.
The syntergic level with which, after death, the central processor is still abe
to interact, will depend on at which level of brain activity the individual was
able to function while alive and hence, what level of consciousness he was ab
to reach. If the individual was able to experience unitary consciousness, His
post mortem content of consciousness will be pure consciousness. Thy
consciousness of Being does not need any interaction bwtween the central
processor and the quantum field in order to exist.
What determines the level of consciousness in which a human being func
tions is a question that needs consideration from both the psychological and
physical aspects.
4. PHYSICAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS
Prince Louis de Broglie (Beiser, 1968) confronted, in physics, the problem
the existence of discrete orbitals in the atom. His solution was extraordinarily
elegant. He stated that each electron has an associated wavelength and that
only when the perimeter of an orbital is an exact multiple of this wavelength,
does the electron not disappear from the orbital.
Forbidden orbitals are those whose lengths are not an exact multiple of the
Approved_For_Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000700130001-63
Approved For Release 2009/03/07 CIA-RDP96-00792R000700130001-6

240
J. GRINBERG-ZYLBERBAUM
electron's wavelength. In these, the electron suffers a self interference wave
process and hence is unable to exist.
In the realm of consciousness, there are also self interference processes.
Strictly speaking, there is only one energetic field and thus unitary conscious-
Bess should be the most natural if not the only level of consciousness. In it, the
dichotomy between the idea of the existence of a physical versus a non-
physical universe is dissolved in the perception of an all-encompassing and
lobal consciousness, in which everything is included. In other words, the
@luminated human being living in unitary consciousness sees everything as
Bist different levels of the same consciousness. The rest of us do not live in
Unitary consciousness because we are not pure enough and our neuronal fields
pre heterogeneous. Memories, repressions and fears, as energetic components
pollute the neuronal and quantum field interactions. We are the ones that
divide and dichotomize the One consciousness into compartments and
Rections.
Self interference processes appear in the realm of consciousness when the
Civisions which we impose on the world resist unification by ourselves into
Chew wholes. It is as if disperse experiences, each with its own life, became
Antagonistic to one another and thus their unification in higher syntergic
Cpatterns and algorithms became impossible. What could be a new and more
powerful syntergic level, degenerates into a low syntergic pattern in which
Interference, lack of organisation and poor connections between parts
obstruct the achievement of unity. To live in a 'forbidden' level of conscious-
Chess is the result of these self interference processes. The forbidden levels are
She interfaces between orbitals and, in them, open energetic irradiation and
absorption processes are the characteristic experiences. The 'sufferer' in a
ainterface feels himself to be a product of external influences which are beyond
mis control.
I would like now to introduce two other considerations. One is related to
@he cymatic (Jenny, 1974) interactions between fields and structures, and the
other to the Zeeman effect (Beiser, 1968).
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000700130001-6-
Cymatics (1974) is a relatively new experimental approach, in which
patterns that result from an interaction of vibrating fields with structures, are
studied. If a sound at some specific frequency interacts with a metallic plate on
which fine powder is located, the powder acquires the form of a pattern. If the
frequency of the sound is increased, the pattern becomes more complicated
But maintains a basic structure. When the frequency reaches some threshold,
the pattern becomes three-dimensional. If the quantum field is conceived as a
structure with which the vibrating neuronal field interacts, creating cymatic
patterns, the differing levels of consciousness could be related to discrete
cymatic like patterns. On the other hand, in esoteric psychology, it is said that
man has different energetic bodies (Wilson, 1974). These bodies are related to
ORBITALS OF CONSCIOUSNESS
241
discrete levels of consciousness. Perhaps, what is called 'energetic body' is a
stable cymatic pattern. If this is so, some masters (Wilson, 1974) were able to
visualize what is, for the rest of us, invisible cymatic-syntergic interactions."?
I believe that man is in a constant state of evolution towards higher
syntergic levels of functioning, pointing to unitary and the Being conscious
ness. In this evolution, real suffering is a state of dichotomy and lack of
unification. When some contents of experience are dissociated from the
focalization action of the directionality factor of the central processor, the
individual is internally divided and in a state of pain, tension and imbalance. If
on the contrary, he is able to accept all his experiences as real and as a genuine
part of himself, he permits his convergent codifiers to unify everything within
himself into a congruent algorithm that is able to be transformed by the central
processor into an integrated and coherent self-conscious experience. The
secret of achieving unification and high syntergic levels of consciousness i
total acceptance.
We live in a very complex world in which we are stimulated by powerfug
information fields. The interaction of these fields create new levels of
experience.
In physics it is observed that, when an atom interacts with a magnetic field
new spectral lines appear. This phenomenon is called the Zeeman effect
(Beiser, 1968) and is similar to the new experiences that we were discussing -
before.
In fact, when the laws of consciousness are compared with the behaviour o
elementary particles, the feeling is that these two extremes touch each other
How is it possible that such a complex phenomenon as consciousness behaves
in a similar way to atomic particles? The similarity implies that both realms are
a manifestation of One reality.
Other examples of these simil are the radiation or absorption of energy
from and to an atom when the electrons change from one to another orbital
(Beiser, 1968) and similar energetic interchanges when a subject is in an
interface between the orbitals of consciousness. During their quantum jump&
the electrons behave as if they were simultaneously in two orbitals (Beiser
1968). In the realm of consciousness, something similar happens when
change in consciousness occurs and the mind of the observer is still in ars
interface between orbitals. The individual then feels as if he were simulg
taneously in two levels of consciousness and in none of them and, as we have
said, during this process he is open to receive or radiate energy.
5. THE NATURE OF THE CENTRAL PROCESSOR
If the central processor is the Self, it is included within every process and
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000700930007-6

242
J. GRINBERG-ZYLBERBAUM
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000700130001-6
thought of the mind. In fact, the central processor is the observer of the mind.
? It is not affected by thought, emotion, pleasure or pain because it is part of its
"nature to be able to testify all these changes in mind's activity without changing
or losing its capacity to observe them.
- When a human being identifies himself with the Self, he transcends every
and all relative and temporal changes in mind activity and becomes part of a
kind of unchangeable silence from whence experiences appear and are seen as
miraculous happenings standing out from a ground of empty fullness, and at
the same time forming part of an immense and all-encompassing pattern of
relationships. To the question about the individual or collective nature of the
Ncentral processor, nobody can give a final answer, but intuition feels that the
"observer in each one of us is the One Observer, the self in each one of us the
One Self and the central processor in each one of us the One Central
Processor.
To conclude, it is possible to postulate that the central processor does not
abide in any space, is atemporal and belongs to a non physical reality and has
Zno shape or form ..
References
Aurobindo, S., La Vida Divina, Editorial Kier, Buenos Aires, 1971.
Beiser, A,, Conceptos de Fisica Moderna, McGraw Hill, Madrid, 1968.
Borges, J.L., El Aleph, EMECE, Buenos Aires, 1970.
Caulfield, H.J., Lu Sun, The Application of Holography, Wiley Interscience, U.S.A., 1970.
Capra, F., The Tao of Physics, Fontana, U.S.A., 1976.
Epstein, P., Kabbalah, Doubleday, New York, 1978.
Grinberg-Zylberbaum, J., The retrieval of learned information. A neurophysiological
convergence-divergence theory. J. Theoret. Biol., 56, 95-110, 1976.
Grinberg-Zylberbaum, J., El Espacio y la Conciencia, Editorial Trillas México, 1981.
Grinberg-Zylberbaum, J., Psychophysiological correlates of communication, gravitation and
unity. J. Psychophys. Sys., 4, 227-256, 1982.
Grinberg-Zylberbaum, J., Extraocular vision. J. Psychophys. Sys., 5, 141-158, 1983.
enny, H., Cymatics, Basilius Presse Basel, 1974.
Maharishi, R., Talks with Sri Ramana Maharishi, Sri Ramanasramam Tiruvannamalai, India,
1972.
Vivekananda, S., Raya Yoga, Kier, Buenos Aires, 1963, 1975.
Wilson, C., Lo Oculto, Editorial Noguer, Barcelona, 1974.
Psychoenergetics, 1983, Vol. 5, pp. 243-252
0278-6060/83/0503-0243 $18.50/0
@ Gordon and Breach Science Publishers, Inc., 1983
Printed in the United Kingdom
Research notes and comments
Scientific explanation of wave vector
collapse
D.F. LAWDEN
2001/03/07 : CEASRDP96-00792R000700130001-6
In his reply (Villars, 1983) to my research note (Lawden, 1983) on the role of
observing instruments in quantum theory, Villars does little more than ar
that his approach to the problem of wave vector collapse is logically co
sistent. He fails to meet my criticism that he has no scientific explanation
the phenomenon.
Thus, to meet my charge that he fails to provide a principle by which an
observing instrument can be distinguished from all other physical systems, Re
states that such an instrument is recognizable by the circumstance thaft
functions as required of such an Instrument by the axioms of quantum theory.
According to his interpretation of the theory, then, there are two classesOf
physical system, (i) a larger class comprising the generality of physical systecus
to which the Schrodinger evolution law applies, and (ii) a much smaller clados
of observing instruments whose behaviour is governed by other laws. He
admits that he is unable to separate these classes by appeal to any physi 21
criterion and falls back on the definition that an observing instrument is
physical system which behaves as an observing instrument. However, such an
instrument only behaves in this manner in very special circumstances, ve
when it interacts with the specific type of class-(i) system it is designed to
measure + in all other circumstances, it behaves like an orthodox class-
system. Thus, a polarizer is a class-(ii) system when it interacts with photogs
belonging to a properly positioned incident beam, but its behaviour in all oth
circumstances (e.g. when it is heated) is that of a class-(ii) system. Ve
mysterious!
Even though Villars may be able to establish that this interpretation is
logically unassailable, this is not the only requirement of a scientific theory. If
such a theory is to provide an acceptable explanation of the world, it must
eschew occult elements as far as possible. Thus, if it were established that all
babies born on a certain day of the year were more likely to become actors than
243