Bus2bondi,
The fact that you are familiar with many of the things I have written proves what I have been claiming since the beginning: our approach we suggest is so simple and so common, since we use it constantly in every theoretical activity, that you will realize that you "älready know" all I am about to write to you. When I started , I was a little puzzled, but then (as my mentor had insisted), I began to see that I already had all this knowledge, but I hadn't realized neither I had it nor I used it. Now I am fully convinced (and I can provide you with hundreds of exmples) that we know much more than we think we know. In order to convert our "silent", "subconscious" or "empirical" knowledge into scientific and conscious knowledge all we have to do is manage to express it verbally.
As far as the book is concerned, it will soon be published in Greek. However, we do not have any contacts in U.S.A. in order to publish it there as well, so it may take a little longer. Until it's published, I will discuss with the fora users who are interested in it and try to give them the answers they seek. If we do not manage to publish it in English we will post it on-line.
The first step we have to take in order to find the answers to your questions (or the answers to any search) is the choice of the respective basic truth. The selection of the basic truth, according to my mentor, is similar to the choice of the train on which we will board in the starting point, from which many trains begin their route. With this choice we seal the route we will follow, the stations from which we will pass by and the destination to which we will arrive. We all can imagine that if our choice is wrong, our "path" will also be wrong and we will never manage to arrive at the desirable destination.
Since you have wondered about the basic factors of which cells are consisted and from what you had written I assume that you now that cells have all the known intellectual faculties (and therefore an "organ"which serves these faculties, before we move one we must answer the following question: Are the endogenous cellular fields biologically active? If yes, which is their role?
My mentor, after 25 years of search, has all the necessary evidence to prove that living cells consist of
three basic biological factors: molecules (matter), fields and intellectual (along with its intellectual faculties). The latter 2 (fields and intellect) are the trademark of life: an organism without fields and intellectual faculties is dead. The three unsimilar (both physically and functionally) factors are functionally interconnected and all together form an entity whose abilities supersede
the aggregation of the abilities of the solitary parts. Each factor offers to the total its specialized "services".
The next step is to find the identity of the intellect.
The "organ"which serves intellectual faculties (which we will name "noetic organ"), since it exists and has obvious impacts on the activities of living organisms, it must have a physical hypostasis (substance).
Contemporary science,regarding the identity of noetic organ, is in the same position as it were before Newton "discovered" gravity. Scientists, before Newton, were convinced that material objects used to fall due to their tendency to return to their "natural place". That is to say, scientists believed that gravity was a property of matter. The similarities are obvious: today many scientists believe that intellect is one of the properties of matter.
Noetic organ must be a physical presence, since it gives specific clues and indications that reveal its presence and its role. Besides, if it weren't a natural factor there is no point in trying to locate its identity and know it.
The fact that so far we haven't been able to locate the natural identity of the noetic organ is due to the inadequacy of the basic truths of molecular biology and of psychiatry. The failures themselves clearly show that neirther molecules nor brain serve the intellectual faculties. If those basic truths we should have found and explained at least one of the basic intelelctual faculties by now!!! Please note that the formation and acceptance of these basic truths is has been based on indications, NOT evidence. Their presence (functioning as Procrustes) prevents us from observing and utilizing the existing data and knowledge, which revel, beyond any doubt, the identity of the noetic organ.
One of the facts (which are literally dozens) that prove the incompatiblity of those basic truths is that, despite the long lasting theoretical and research efforts, neither of them has been verified. Another proof is that, if brain WAS the noetic organ, then cells shouldn't be able to perform any ntellectual faculty, since they have no brain. However, those who study the cellular activities has ascertained on their own that living cells have ntellectual faculties and they use them in every activity they perform.
Consequently, in order to locate the identity of the noetic organ we have to start from point zero. During the first phase of our effort we must rely on what we know (utilize the known) in order to approach the unknown. That is to say that we have to gather what we KNOW about the noetic organ in order to find its (unknown) identity. What we know about the noetic organ are its functional properties.
The method is very simple and we can use it to locate the identity of any natural factor. Each factor has two identities: the physical and the functional, namely it has its physical (natural) and functional properties. These 2 identities reflect each other and represent the two sides of the same coin. If we know the former we can use it in order to locate the latter and vice versa.
Consequently, if we form a list consisted of the functional properties that we KNOW that the noetic organ has, we can use this list as a checklist of criteria with which we will evaluate all the candidates that will be proposed for the role of the noetic organ. The factor which, beyond any doubt, has the ability (physical properties) to serve the functional properties of the noetic organ is the most prevailing candidate for the vacancy of the noetic organ. On the contrary, a factor that does not have the physical abilities to serve the functional properties of the catalog cannot be the noetic organ.
In order to move on and give you "food for thought"
, I will give you this clue: the noetic organ is tightly connected to the biological substrate of memory. In other words, noetic organ is the final recipient of all the information that are headed towards the organism and the organ which evaluates and utilizes them. Can a factor be the noetic organ if it does not "possess" the total memory of the organism and the ability to use it n order to perform its faculties?
To sum up, the noetic organ physically identifies with the substrate where memory is stored. If we manage to find the final recipient of information and the organic substrate of memory, we will have located the noetic organ.
This gradual apporach leads to an unexpected and a prima facie unbeleivable answer. Before I reveal the answer along with the data that document it (and maybe provoke some undesirable reactions
), which is the outcome of the long lasting search of my mentor, I would like to underline that its documentation involves data and knowledge coming from various sciences (modern physics, neurophysiology, biology, even technology).
Before moving on, I would like to know if you know a physical factor which we already use in order to store and convey innumerous information and whose speed of function (just like noetic organ's ) approaches the speed of light.
PS psychological approach studies apparent behaviour in order to understand intellectual faculties. On the other hand, neurosciences study brain in order to understand the intellectual faculties. These are their differences. Their similarity is that they are not even close to their goal
. But do have an interest in it. So i truly look forward to your book when its finished - if it happens to be in greek, i'll have to translate it then (no big deal).