The Divinity of the Senses - The Metaphysics of Color And The Other Senses

What is the nature of our experience in the senses?  Key issues concerning this question include issues with the multidimensional map of physical reality in terms of non-physical reality.  To what extent one or the other blurs into each other is a question of metaphysical substantiation.

Our concepts of the spirit world are really quite fuzzy.  But, I seriously doubt that the afterlife experience is anything but fuzzy in experiential reality.  The question of the nature of physical vs. non-physical is somewhat subjective to issues of dimensionality. What this means is we don't know if 4th, 5th, and higher dimensions up to infinity do or do not exhibit physical properties such as impassable boundaries.  It is highly conceivable that they may and do under certain circumstances, those circumstances being undefined in our analysis of those realities.  

It is a highly regarded hypothesis that the other side of reality, the afterlife, offers a clearer and more realistic view of our experience, and experience in general, than is available to the human being while they live in this world.  And this does offer a degree of intelligence in terms of generally understood notions of spiritual progression and development.  However, the nature of these experiences have not been substantiated as being proven in the eyes of the Western mind, although for most people the point is irrelevant simply because they will or will not have these experiences, in their own understanding, and assume that they will find out when they do or do not have these experiences in the afterlife, if any exists. 

What can be said thus must be said from the position of mathematical analysis and speculation concerning what I have referred to as "field theory" or the conceptual framework of thought as we consider it in our analysis.  My general hypothesis is that a thorough investigation of our immediate reality and our own thought and emotional processes will uncover that these processes are, by their nature, multidimensional.  This concept goes to the heart of isolating elements of consciousness as individual experiences.  It deals with such issues as Platonic ideals, colors, numbers, abstractions, words, dimensionality, psychic phenomenon, reincarnation, and quite a few very abstract metaphysical notions as a secondary consideration to the primary analysis. 

The Divinity of the Senses
Issues of isolation of such phenomenon as color, sound, etc demonstrate the absurdity of 3D analysis as a root system of understanding experience as a process.  In our analysis we expose the clear duality of theoretical frameworks of consciousness as a function of ideological assumption (not political ideology mind you, but the kind that makes assumptions about reality as we know it).  This duality is a classic one encountered by all serious philosophers in the study of the matrix of the world we call the universe.  On one hand we have hardened die hard materialists and on the other hardened die hard spiritualists.  Most people fall somewhere in the middle, but if one is to undertake a journey in philosophy and thought in order to understand the nature of the physical universe one must also clearly see that the materialist and spiritualist schools offer two primary premises which must be dissected as we study the nature of the universe of 3-D phenomenon. 

Returning now to the idea of color in which we see that color is an experiential phenomenon.  There is no color in the electron clusters (see Mark McCutcheon's the Final Theory) that make up light.  Color is somehow an emergent property of the brain or a property of the mind.  Color can be isolated in consciousness by looking at it externally or visualizing it internally.  Yet we must return to the idea as we consider color that either it is the brain that creates it or it is a non-physical universal property of mind that is stimulated indirectly by the brain or that somehow the brain emulates.  Because no physical property "blue", "yellow", "red", "green", "purple", etc exists in the known universe, it is hard to argue that these colors are entirely 3-d since they cannot be said to be properties of objects.  Turn off the lights, and this is proven, as objects do not generate light automatically unless they have heat content which itself is essentially stored light/electricity/heat.  It may then be argued that color is a property of light.  However, as McCutcheon's theory shows, electron clusters that we call photons do not have an inherent property of color, it requires, at the least, a brain to interpret their sizes/masses/densities (we aren't sure which yet). 

If color is then the property of a complex system, like a brain, then what mechanism could such a property emerge through.  The spectrum of dark and light do not create color so that if we see light as light, then a greyscale emerges.  Various shades of grey have either more or less light vs. dark, but none of these creates color.  It is, in my opinion, easy to see how a brain might create a grey scale pixilation of what we see in our eyes using layers of membranes to interpret electrical vibrations passing through in some fashion created by the interaction of light photons with the eye membrane.  Yet no amount of greyscale imagery will produce color as a phenomenon as a visual experience.  Color is clearly a separate property from black and white.  Yet, how is this property derived?  We cannot derive it physically using any known system of manipulation.  This, in and of itself, should be astounding to us.  Yet, it is largely ignored as something that is mundane and ordinary because we do not think about it.

Colors can be said to be bright or dark, and this may be a first clue.  Yellow is clearly the brightest color and purple or blue the least, but this is still not the same as white and black.  No amount of white will make yellow.  No amount of black will make blue.  No amount of mixing white and black will make anything other than grey.  The problem still remains even if we use this simple analogy of brightness of different colors to attempt to explain away the odd and unique property of color.  In a compounding resonance to the greater issue of relating physical properties to brightness as a function of electromagnetic properties of light, when we look at the color spectrum vs. the size of photons/vibrations, we don't see yellow at the bottom or top of the chart as we would expect if there was any direct correlation.  The brightest color, yellow, is above red and below blue.  While this probably tells us something about neurology in the eyes and brain, it tells us nothing about the mysterious property we call color.

Traditional metaphysists would be laughing at me at this point, but philosophers of science should take note.  Without a physical property that can be isolated in the senses, we are left with a bit of a conundrum.  What exactly is color, and how does it relate to the question of reality?

If we consider this question from the point of view of the mind, we come to a different set of conclusions than if we consider the apparently physical properties of physical objects themselves.  The mental hypothesis would state that color is a property of mind.  This is simple and easy.  However, to materialists, it is considered somewhat akin to screaming the Pope is the antichrist in a crowded Catholic cathedral.  We certainly don't want to be shouting that unless we can prove it.  What we have seen is that the physical property of color cannot be isolated in consciousness as a phenomenal manifestation of the sense we call vision using solely logical physical means (using mechanical analogies) to create the property color that we register with said sense of vision.  This is a major statement of limitation.

But, however, I will go further.  I will now argue that there is no physical property that can be isolated at all.  Not only is color not a property of physical objects, neither is sound a product of physical systems as it cannot be isolated either.  Using the very same analysis that I have given for color, the same set of arguments can be made for sound as being essentially products of consciousness, and as such, not isolatable in consciousness.  The property B sharp resonates to a particular frequency of sound waves being generated by a particular music instrument.  Yet, the sound waves themselves do not make the sound!  And while the brain may receive the impression of the wave, it is impossible to generate a sound by mashing waves together (as the brain is itself made of waves of expanding electrons in McCutcheon's theory or if we use the Quantum model it is made of Schrodinger's waves plus or minus some Dirac or Heisenberg contributions to the matter on the mathematical side).  

We can't isolate sound or color then.  The same is true for the basis for color, pure white light itself.  There is nothing light about light.  Again, it is either McCutcheon's electron clusters or Quantum Physics waves of some sort.  There is no light in it.  So where is all that light coming from?  How does your brain generate something like that, when the brain itself has no light (as a property) in it either?  Well obviously you see I'm going to make the same argument against smell, taste, and touch.  So, now, we are stuck with a really big philosophical problem.  We have a bunch of matter that has no properties at all, but we are living in a universe entirely made of this stuff interpreted through a brain also made of this stuff which shows us that this matter which has no properties appears to have a great number of properties that we cannot explain, nor can we isolate in our senses.  Are our senses lying to us?  What the heck is going on here anyway?

Again, if we return to the idea of mind and thought we consider for a moment the question of properties of sense.  We know that we see yellow, green, blue, red or hear B sharp, G, A or smell bacon or rose perfume.  What we do not know is where these properties that we are sensing come from.  It can be said that the brain creates the perception of these properties as it filters the external stimulus of our senses through the billions of neurons and thousands of membranes and billions of fluid spaces in its cavernous interior.  Yet the properties themselves could be said to be universal properties of harmony in tune with a certain field of ideals.  (Harmonics)  The field of ideals is the realm from which we derive the existence of Plato's ideals, which are objects that exist as real entities entirely as pure thought as a universal abstract principle of perfection.  For those who aren't familiar, Plato proposed that all chairs were sort of like copies of a universal ideal form of a chair which existed as a non-physical thought object that was accessed somehow by the genius of the creator of whichever chair was being made in the physical world.  Yet the ideal chair existed a-priorii (before) the first real chair was ever made.  It existed as an object in thought, even though it wasn't discovered until the first chair maker visioned this chair.

In such a way any individual color must also exist as a universal function of the cosmic property color of which we only know so much about.  Theoretically there should be, as far as an expandable universal property, an infinite number of colors.  But our feeble brains can only process perhaps a few hundred of the shades of the primary and secondary colors.  While we use photons passing through our eyes to create the necessary data that our brain interprets for our mind to create the impression of color, there is still no known physical property of color.  Color cannot be isolated in 3D logic, thus it is something that must be a 4D process.  It could be further argued that color is thus properly an etheric phenomenon created by the clash in 3D fields interpreted through a higher function of irrational meta-consciousness. 

Color is not rational.  In fact neither is sound, taste, touch, or smell.  All of these are fixed properties of experience that occur below the level of rational conscious psychology.  They could be called unconscious, as certainly they are in and of themselves, but instead subconscious is the better term here.  

(It is possible that a sense of wholeness is involved here in some way coming from simple eucaryotes (or even procaryotes) evolved as a cell and a full sensory function of self.  Cell perhaps equals self in simple organic consciousness.  )

No properties can be considered rational.  Reason does not consider properties, only the why of the existence of those properties while logic considers the how of those properties.  We know that a color scheme is convenient for biology as organisms can interact intelligently and detect dangers and such using the property of color.  This is the why.  Yet the logic of how, the mechanics of color as a function of the eye, the neuron, and the brain, remains the greatest problem of materialist interpretations of how color comes to be in the first place in the materialist world view.  It is a standing testimony that perhaps there is still a possibility for a non-physical explanation that does not involve 3-d physics and pure 3-d logic in order to explain it.  Yet can a 4-D explanation offer what a 3-D explanation cannot?  Certainly not with pure math alone.  The biggest problem with physics is that you can't remove the physics from physics.

Instead we are stuck with the conundrum of properties as a function of association.  While we cannot explain properties such as color, sound, taste, smell, or touch, we can isolate the physical associate of these properties and the source of these physical associates.  Color comes from light which comes from stars or various hot objects.  Sound comes from objects moving in a fluid environment such as an atmosphere or under water.  Taste comes from different chemicals in food.  Properties are convenient.  We don't have to know how they come about to use them effectively.  The associations of these properties with certain things give us something valuable, data.  We know where things are and what those things are based on the data associations with properties. 

Which brings us to another possible theory of non-physicality or non three dimensionality, which is that data exists independently of objects as well.  Indeed, we extract the information about these objects as we see them, but we can just as easily conjure up phantasms in our imagination that are almost as real to us (in some cases more real).  Yet we use data to navigate our world.  Our brains (and possibly minds) hold maps of where we have been, even if this data is not up to date.  We know data exists independent of objects because we can manipulate it in our minds, but some forms of data appear quite hard coded such as the map of where you are which you use as a sense of direction. 

So we see that much of our world and our experience are unexplained from the point of view of logic.  Our brain, mind, or brain/mind combo is capable of associations that allow us to conveniently navigate our world.  Yet the question of the true nature of properties are the most mind boggling puzzle of our own nature as physical beings or spiritual beings having a physical experience as the case may be.  Is there a universal knowledge of color, sound, taste, touch, or smell that we somehow tap into as a function of universal mind on a basic etheric level?  Is this universal set of properties something we have somehow forgotten as we have been born as physical beings?  Are the properties that we know as senses merely the tip of a vast infinite suite of these five senses that we are only beginning to explore as beings?  Or is our sensory experience merely another manifestation of complex physical interpretation mechanisms involving brain membranes and cross electrical currents generating internal flashes in our brain that we will discover with time and more scientific research on the question.  Perhaps we will even discover that blue, red, green, yellow, purple, orange and all their shades are in fact universal properties of physical brains that are created by electrical currents or that what we are seeing in terms of these colors and other phenomenon are in fact internal properties of very complex physical, electrical, and magnetic systems in motion.  That these systems generate these phenomenon internally through some kind of holistic field interpreter

As a token to Metaphysicists and non-materialist philosophers none of this can or will truly eliminate the question of the nature of the property in and of itself or remove the question of how the property became associated with the logical physical mechanism in question.  Nor will it eliminate the necessity of the question: what is blue, yellow, red, etc?  It will, however, allow someone to finally just go to nice fireworks display and enjoy all the pretty colors without having to worry too much about the hideously complex existentialist questions that plague the mind of those who just can't live well enough alone without a clear and concise answer.  For those with faith in God or Goddess or some sort of Divine Truth of some sort, it would probably be enough simply to state that color is what it is and will be forever and ever.  And if you have any doubt about it, just pop on by the great cosmic color wheel once you've taken your trip to the other side.  Oh, and, don't leave the lights on by accident before you do.  Goddess bless those cute analytical philosophers, they sure are a thick lot.
Extended Notes Regarding the Senses and Dimensionality
Hypothesis:  Color, Sound, Sense are multidimensional processes.  
Relations to Sense, Metaphysics, and - Mathematics and dimensionality.  Complex relations involving philosophy, metaphysics and mathematics.  All the senses are potentially 4th dimensional properties of (matter (?)).  Are senses emergent properties and/or 4th dimensional properties?   
What is the framework to understand the sense?  Is a mechanical framework possible?  What does it look like?  Sound doesn't seem to create a problem but what about color?  4th Dimensional properties?  
What are the multidimensional processes?  Related to Planes of Interaction (in Principles File).  
Grails of science - one of which is the senses because color and other senses cannot be explained by pure logic or pure reason.
Sound - Focal point must be sound.  Sound is the easiest to understand from the point of view of an internal sensory operation through vibration within a sphere, object, bounded by a membrane (like the brain).  
Senses but specifically as an example for Vision - The Heisenberg (modified) uncertainty principle may apply because unless something crosses your plane of interaction, you can't prove it is physically real.  
The proof of photons existence when it enters your eye and disappears to create a sensory experience when it enters your eye past the plane of interaction which is the boundary of your eye.
The proof is in the senses or the experience itself.  

Planes of Interaction and Psychic Investigation - When we investigate psychic phenomenon we cross planes of interaction and in order to have solid results we have to define those planes of interaction and define the nature of our experience to our own mind so that we can properly filter the information sets and derive exacting sources (causality) for the nature of unusual/strange phenomenon outside the bounds of conventional/mundane thinking.  
Color through mechanical means -
What form of derived process in 4th dimensional space can create the phenomenon of color?
The 4th dimensional property of color?
Objects don't have colors in three dimensions.  
We need a construct and a framework to understand how this is all possible...
Is the dimensional interpreter in the brain or is it a .. holographic animation of divinity?
Holographic animation of divinity - Divinity of the Senses and the Holistic Interpreter
What's the construct for the holistic interpreter?  Interpretations of Kabala and the tree of life uses the kabala as a holistic interpreter in metaphysical frameworks.   In these diagrams the tree of life takes color and places color in a relation within the tree of life framework so that in a map of sphere (sephiroth) on the tree of life sphere 1 is white, sphere 2 is black, combining to create sphere 3 as grey, sphere 4,5,6 primary colors, sphere 7,8,9 secondary colors and brown at 10.  Much has been made of these sorts of relations in metaphysical speculation and many associations which prove to be useless in other regards.  Is there a relation between the way these explorations of derived kabalahism demonstrate the relations in the tree of life diagram and the way in which these colors truly exist as aspects of a larger reality?
Logic and reason using mechanical methods cannot isolate the senses.  
With Planes of Interaction you can create a holographic map of what is going on..
An internal consciousness of the unconscious observer that can codify color as a portion of interpretive psychology which has within itself the logic of color..your unconscious mind exists at a level that is metaphysical in that color can be known and projected through association which is part of the theory of the etheric.  This is the psychology of the etheric body.  The etheric is built on a pre-existing logical construct that has no basis in existence in physical reality.  It exists as a planer space/state psychology or a psychedelic  field where the color patterns and the nature of possible color and distinctions exist as a framework of some kind of dimensional pressure analog..because where two objects or where two fields interact through collision there is pressure on that field and through that internal holistic interpreter which derives the experience into consciousness.  Hence the existence of the metaphysical overlay of the physical (hypothesis).  
This then relates to can it be isolated in the brain..the holistic field interpreter (if so sound is the key).  
If you can't design the holistic field interpreter conceptually then you are dealing with something that is beyond mechanical physics in metaphysics or the physics of complex relation in multiplicity through consciousness.  Abstracts of quantification (numbers) and of the "abstract" senses (colors, sounds, etc).  These abstracts exist a-priorii to your existence here (Platonic forms and other derivatives of these concepts).
(Metaphysical Speculation) Is this the Mind of God interpreting reality for you through this interpreter..or is the mind of you as a separate divine being doing the interpretation?  This leads to the Theory of Archons and multiple divine sources in Gnostic Science.  
Expansion on discussion of this issue:  One possible outcome in the argument between absolute materialists and the spiritualist argument presented here is to postulate that electrical fields or magnetic fields have integral properties of color, sound, etc. contained within them.  However, again this does not follow from a purely physical 3d model of a mechanical nature (using Mark McCutcheon's system) as the emergent property has no valid geometrical reason for its appearance.  
Another plausible explanation is the theory of the etheric where higher dimensional fields exist stacked one on top of the other above the 3d physical.  Advancing beyond Mark's basic theory the ethers could in fact determine the fixed expansion rate of the physical electron, though the means of doing so requires a complex model of relations due to the uncertain questions regarding the nature of the expansion itself.  For instance the etheric could interpret the physical through its relation in space external to it and from a coherent individuated boundary around any system within its field.  Similarly, a magnetic field could also substitute for this possibly physically as it contains within it the originating body in which it is embedded.  
Odd thought - It is possible to conjecture that the four elements of traditional occult thinking can be related here.  Color may be the only property of water, i.e. fluid field, in 4th dimensional space.  Sound may be the only property of earth, i.e. solid field, in 4th dimensional space.  Touch/taste/smell may be the only properties of air, pure 4th dimensional contained (?) space.  Fire would have no properties.