A Quantum Theoretical Non-local Model of Human Memory
Nicholas H.E. Prince
ABSTRACT
The possibility of a radically new mechanism to explain the
functioning of human long-term memory is considered.
After reviewing orthodox nodal and connectionist (internal)
memory models, an alternative model is proposed. This
model assumes at the outset that memories are not stored in
the brain at all. Rather it is proposed that the brain operates
more like an aerial rather than an internal memory storage
device. The model assumes also that decoherence effects
do not invalidate a quantum theoretical treatment of the
brain subsystems responsible for memory recall and it is
shown how memories are recovered atemporally (non
locally in time) from at least the past null cone of the
recipient.
The cosmological consequences of the atemporal physics
underpinning the model are reviewed in terms of the nature
and emergence of well defined sub-atomic particles in early
times following the big bang. Also it is explained how the
model gives a quite natural explanation to certain reported
effects such as E.S.P, psychic phenomena and reincarnation
experiences.
We can go philosophically into the ontological status of things which we might find it more convenient intellectually to regard as permanent.
Eg. Laws of physics, Platonic world of maths.
It could be argued that maybe they are not part of sankharas, since we don’t expect the Platonic world of maths to ever change even if there’s another universe with different laws of Physics.
I am not an expert in ontology in philosophy, so I’ll just leave it as, don’t identify anything as self. That’s the teaching.
I don’t know if there’s such a thing as storage, I dunno how past life recall works. So I dunno if it could be lost too.
What we know from the suttas is that there’s limited lifespan, we cannot recall all infinite past lives, so due to practical consideration alone, one could say that too long ago lifetimes are practically lost to us.
Researching more about this word that means the Human Kingdom…
Human beings in Buddhism
Humans in Buddhism (Sanskrit: मनुष्य, IAST: manuṣya, Pali manussa) are the subjects of an extensive commentarial literature that examines the nature and qualities of a human life from the point of view of humans’ ability to achieve enlightenment. In Buddhism, humans are just one type of sentient being, that is a being with a mindstream. In Sanskrit Manushya means an Animal with a mind. In Sanskrit the word Manusmriti associated with Manushya was used to describe knowledge through memory. The word Muun or Maan means mind. Mind is collection of past experience with an ability of memory or smriti. Mind is considered as an animal with a disease that departs a soul from its universal enlightened infinitesimal behavior to the finite miserable fearful behavior that fluctuates between the state of heaven and hell before it is extinguished back to its infinitesimal behavior.
In Buddhism, humans have a very special status: only a human can attain enlightenment as a fully enlightened Buddha. Enlightenment as an arhat can be attained from the realms of the Śuddhāvāsa deities. A bodhisattva can appear in many different types of lives, for instance as an animal or as a deva. Buddhas, however, are always human.[1]
Hello NgXinZhao,
Perhaps, but such scenario has changed for a long time. As a European, what amazes me is that there are still those who do not understand, how absurd it is not to accept the existence of other forms of sentient life as ours or more complex and resourceful in the Universe/ Multiverse. Which includes beings invisible to our naked eye,etc.
Reimagining gods as extraterrestrials is an old thing in sci-fi.
It has been done for decades.
I personally don’t believe in devas or the other paranormal beings described in the Sutta Pitaka.
I would be happy if the names of those types of beings would be left untranslated as the word “gods” have a lot of baggage. Confusing too, as that word is used for both devas and the other type of “god”.
Sakka (ruler of the gods) is the ruler of the Trāyastriṃśa Heaven according to Buddhist cosmology. The following article by Choong Mun-keat may be relevant to the topic/issue (aliens):
"A comparison of the Pali and Chinese versions of the Sakka Samyutta , a collection of early Buddhist discourses on ‘Sakra, ruler of the gods’ ", in Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society , vol. 22, issue 3-4, October 2012 (Cambridge University Press), pp. 561–574.
I think if aliens refer to foreign nationals or living beings who are not citizens or nationals of a specific country, then, they can be devas ‘deities’.
So, the Sagatha vagga of SN/SA records early Buddhist ‘adaptation’ of many general Indian religious beliefs about alines/devas:
Devata, Devaputta, Mara, Brahma, Vana, Yakkha, and Sakka (ruler of the gods), which are featured in the Sagatha vagga of SN/SA.
Also, a group of sequential collections in SN 29-32 about early Buddhist ‘adaptations’ of Vedic mythical beliefs:
Nagas ‘mythical dragons/snakes’, supannas/garudas ‘mythical birds’, gandhabbas ‘fragrant plant devas’, and valahakas ‘cloud devas’. These can be aliens/devas.
The scene of the Trayastrimsa gods noticing something strange when Brahma is about to appear occurs in the DA 3, the Govinda Sutra. Mahagovinda notices it too when Brahma visits him in the story later on in the sutra.
It occurs again in DA 4, the Janavṛṣabha Sutra, when a very similar story is told about Brahma visiting the Trayastrimsa gods.
There are similar passages in DN 16 and DN 18, though it isn’t presented as unexpected or strange.
