The Emergence of Consciousness vs. Clinical Scientific Theory. 

Maintaining the “experience” of hyper-awareness long enough to derive a moment of intuitive conscious clarity of it and overlaying meta-scientific principles (that have yet to receive objective consensus from the clinical, data driven scientist,) The awareness is not the consciousness however.

The scientist who has yet to factor-in his observation of said phenomena as the very catalyst required to transcend so called

awareness or the quantum barrier, from particle to wave function in 4D, 5D, where a metaphysically, energetically shared meta-consciousness permeates the very fabric of the ‘space-time label’ and beyond it. Objective data is generated when the “mind” is calibrated to silent, absent resistance, which tends to want to label everything in its wake while conducting the experiment instead of attenuating the quantum field barrier around your consciousness 😇.… A quantification can only be made in the present moment through qualitative reasoning. The quantum laws also dictate the limitations when clinically labeled by the mind, as the mechanics in flux cannot be directly observed by his or her ego, (as the physicist) unless she/he become the meta-physicist as such, to experience the hyper-states in flux behind the quantum veil.

Where objective knowledge the ancient scientist or (philosopher) observed in fleeting moments. To a degree, without the pre-determinism / clinical taboo the modern scientist has walled up against the ability to possess and compress the experimental data back into the confine of words. As such the present moment produces a ramble which can never be directly conveyed in words without consent of the eye behind the reader. .. Science, as a “perspective” is flawed.. I admit I didn’t even read the article this time