Universal Oscillation Theory

    thewholeenchiladaThis web site is designed to draw attention to a forthcoming book. THE WHOLE ENCHILADA and UNIVERSAL OSCILLATION THEORY

    No,  this is not Oscillating Universe Theory.  That is one of those BBTs that the universe had a Big Bang and will alternately expand and contract in a cyclic manner. Big Bang/Big Crunch etc. TWE author knows that space does not appear out of nothing and that light loses a little energy as it travels through space. Yes, Alice.,there is "tired light" afterall. Space does not expand. What would it expand into? That would violate logic as well as physics. While we are exploding ridiculous ideas, lets  mention Climate Change,  euphemism for Anthropomorphic Global Warming. The media thinkis it is being subtle. We all know the climate changes. The political agenda and the progressive media think tha simple folk will automatically identify weather and climate change with man's carbon related emissions as the cause. I have news for them. Many know about the Malincovich cylces and the fac that first the Earth warms and then co2 begins to rise. Man's contribution is 1% or so. AGW is a poliical agenda. We will get to these ideas, and others, in more detail in the book and in the 3 Ps you see in the header.

    The Whole Enchilada is a book about worldviews and how those are formed by our foundational concepts. The bedrock of our ideas is or should be an integrated part of the whole. If one stands on a solid foundation, then each level up is a rational rung to stand on. The levels are interconnected and in order. Thought is organized. Each concept is in a context that should relatein a backward relation to the more fundamental views. This way, It is much easier to categorize concepts or “problems”. If there are problems to consider, where exactly do they fit in? When we know the foundation beneath the sequence to come, as the “problem” can be put into perspective and our choices are quickly narrowed to a few. Even very complex problems can be broken down into smaller categories and isolated and analyzed. Sometimes there are no solutions to very complex situations. In that case, we can try to find the most significant ones and know that without solutions to these, the lesser ones hardly matter. At least for now, eventually the tree of knowledge must be in full bloom. One step at a time.

    Besides promoting the book I intend to explain just enough of the theory of Universal Oscillation to claim origin of the idea. (now done. See the Universal Oscillation Theory copyright declaration in Physics). Others may have done similar things, at least in part, but I have not found this idea in anything resembling my conceptualization.

    After several years trying to learn physics as a lay reader of more popular lay types of explanations of physics (see below, for a few of the references) I found a way to reduce the remaining problems in physics to what I call a foundational theory. Mostly, it supports classical and quantum physics but it also points out some of the problems in Einstein’s SRT and GRT, not to forget “spacetime” and a BBT which is based upon GRT and a misunderstanding of what redshift means.

    Gravity has not been explained properly in physics up to this date, but the UOT makes that a simple outgrowth of the foundational theory.

    If you understand more than a bit of physics you will know that at a certain point in our accumulated knowledge we move from metaphysics to physics. This theory, the UOT, is no exception.

    Delving into the physical world, beyond Planck’s constant and its consequences, is to enter the realm of philosophy. Whether a quantum physical perspective will be as far as we can proceed with actual physical measurements and observations that are reproducible by all remains an unknown.

    The rational of the UOT is hard to refute. It makes a strong case for a new paradigm in physics. Paradigms are worldviews.

    The book will be about more than just the physical theory. The reasons for the theory will be presented, which are mostly logical axioms, but it will continue with chapters relating to the effects of a new worldview. There will be a few chapters on some basic understanding of how the mind works, and the thought processes we all use plus on some of the most important aspects of philosophy. I think any serious student of knowledge needs to know a little about the human concerns that are included in the chapter on humanism.

    After the logic,  metaphysics and physics of Ch.1, we turn to the metaphysics of Ch.2. Determinism. Then Ch.3 examines consequences of the first two chapters.

    Since the book is not finished, I hesitate to fill out exactly which chapters are next and in what sequence. There will be a chapter on physics that  will try to show in more depth why BBT and GRT are not completely correct. There deficiencies need to be better understood by the public at large.

    The worldview part of the book will briefly mention evolution and then man's brain, or mind. Next the workings of the mind as in thoughts or thinking. The different sorts of abstract ideas the mind creates from its experiences, and with its particular inherited tools.

    Pehaps some more formal philosphy and physics will be included in the book, or these may be just left for this website, for additions to the book later on. I have not decided at this point.

    Here is the first version of the Epilogue:


    The Conger Theory, the Universal Oscillation Theory is the foundation for all the physics that follows from it.
    The spherical oscillation principle underlies all known phenomena. Literally, everything can be seen as a form of oscillation. Not only day and night; a pattern of 1-2, but yes and no, true and false. Everything oscillates between yin and yang. Even a faulty idea such as the whole universe expanding and contracting reflects the truth of the observation.

    More importantly, quantum physics is built upon the emission and absorption of radiation. Radiation is a form of oscillation. Frequencies are periodic (oscillation) and waves are absolutely continuous  oscillations.

    Newtonian physics is built upon wave mediated velocities and accelerations. A wave of energies flows, but they flow at different levels of energy, otherwise expressed as being at different levels of their potentiality. Forces such as  gravity are different ways to express the same phenomena.

    Even chaotic systems oscillate in and out of being caused by certain non-linear exponential changes that suddenly transform, at certain scalar levels, to stability-and then back to chaos again.

    The real importance of the oscillation based theory is its universality. It applies to everything.

    The importance of TWE is that a solid foundation gives one the  ground that all subsequent thoughts can be based or buildt upon or related to; suddenly, there is a coherence to all things. It all begins with universal oscillation. I hope you enjoyed the chance to open your mind to new ideas.

    Remember….”there are no facts, only interpretations.” -F. Nietzsche. At the very least we got that into our heads.


    Yes, the book is intended for almost anyone to grasp. No college physics will be necessary, although that background would be helpful. Very few mathematics. There are a couple of equations you should be familiar with. They are explained in the non-mathematical language of physics. You will realize that mathematics is a tool of physics. It is a shorthand of sorts and manipulating the symbols and the underlying physics a bit does sometimes give some new insights by that abstract method.

    The UOT will be of interest to all in the physics community. I believe a new paradigm of this sort is needed in order to progress.

     Why should I read this book?

    Most people do not have the faintest clue that a coherent and well-founded worldview sets you up to be right.*n1

    What do you mean by being right? Good question. As Nietzsche said,

    “There are no facts, only interpretations”. -Friedrich Nietzsche, Notebooks. Fn. 1880.*n2

    To be right, in this context, means that when you make a statement it corresponds to facts. It is logically consistent and reflects accurately the world we live in. The statement “coheres” with other information. There should be objective agreement among those listening. E.g. “The sun will most likely rise again tomorrow. “

    The statement may only be a thought you are having yourself. When you consider ideas such as “Should we take down that statue?” There are multiple considerations before acting. Whose property is that? When was it erected? Why? Was that a different time than now, culturally? Does it tell a story? Should we remember the past? Does the past inform us? Should we have reminders? Do others have different perspectives on the value of that statue? Does mine prevail? Why? Why should I perhaps reflect more on this question before acting? You get the point.

    How does a worldview inform me? Why can’t I just take the evidence before me and decide?  

    A worldview is incomplete or insufficient if it does not have a solid foundation.

    A well-founded worldview increases the chances of having the correct sequence of thoughts or making the better decision.

    If the question is coherently presented and all the facts that pertain are considered in the right context as well, you have a good beginning in considering the question. The most appropriate facts relevant and the correct sequence of analyzing them helps us “to be right”. “Right” obviously means to have the most correct, accurate, and pertinent analysis of all the considerations and in the right sequence. This is similar to the idea of “valid” in logic. An argument with true premises and a true conclusion based on true premises is a sound argument. That’s about all that we can ask ourselves or from others.

    To have a solid foundation of ideas that are coherent and correspond with facts helps to ensure that all the considerations are properly founded. What follows next has a better chance of being correct if it follows correctly from all that precedes. What more can we ask? We know that there will not be a uniform agreement because humans do not have all the correct facts or maybe misapplying correct facts that are not pertinent to the question. Faulty logic. Faulty memory. Humans are faulty creatures. Who is always “right”?

    This book does its best to try for that solid foundation. It begins with axioms and presents logically coherent views pertinent to a foundational view. In this case, the foundation is metaphysical. In most cases, any foundational view starts with metaphysical positions. The book is philosophic in tone.

    Philosophy today is now heavily indebted to science. At one time there was little difference, but today we have established facts, theories, histories, and evidence of all sorts. Although we do not have all the answers and that would be impossible, philosophy is much more directed towards analyzing science’s methods and findings today. Much more time is spent on current discoveries and current conclusions than on the more purely metaphysical considerations of the middle ages. We have advanced. We were set on this path by Aristotle in the 4th century BC.

    After a presentation of Universal Oscillation Theory, there are immediate consequences to consider. Those are fundamental consequences and of great import that begin to fill out other concepts. We check on whether we have slightly new or different perspectives on the meaning of x, y, and z. We learn exactly what determinism means. Do we really live in a totally determined universe? Chapter two.

    If and when a worldview is altered there are a multitude of consequences. Those are in Chapter Three.

    Worldviews are constantly under question or should be. We should always be skeptical and careful in what we accept. We have to look at problems or questions from various viewpoints. “All is perspective,” said Friedrich Nietzsche.

    At the time of writing this, the author has not decided on how much support for the arguments in the book need to be present in the pages or appendix. The subject is so vast that many difficult decisions have to be made regarding content. I am leaning towards a leaner book and a more thorough appendix. I see no reason why today the appendix cannot be online for all the supplemental information-pertinent to the material in the book. Right here-online.

    The book is intended for any man but, not everyman. Any thoughtful person should enjoy seeing a new perspective.

    I have tried to make all ideas clear enough for the non-initiated (those who have not spent many hours studying or reading science and philosophy) and yet at the same time explored the depths of our knowledge. This book is meant to be a real test of just how deeply we have examined the content of our minds. No, not just the experience of our lives and how we remember it, but in the sense of our worldview.

    Perhaps it is foolish to try and pull off writing a book for everyman. But, then again there will be a section on just how can we all get along. A favorite question of a friend of mine.

    If I can pull this off, you will enjoy the journey.

    By the way, a forewarning! The subject material is dense in content. Even this brief introduction has footnotes. That should be a forewarning. I mean to say that the concepts presented are what some call “deep”. These concepts require a lot of reflection. This is not a casual beach book. It can, of course, be read at the beach, but only in small bites. Each new concept introduced is somewhat metaphysical. This means a lot of checking with our prior worldview. What does the author mean here? Does he mean this literally or figuratively? Is this what I have previously considered that to be a metaphor? I think he means it literally. How do I view that? Do I accept it or not? If not, why not.

    My own favorite criticism is to say, “Nonsense upon stilts!”*n3. Will you feel that way, once having considered all the evidence? The only way to check your worldview is to examine it. Here is an alternative. Check it out and decide for yourself. This might be much more profitable than merely reinforcing your own prior knowledge, your own biases. Instead, read what is offered and form your own perspective. Reflection is called for in reading this book. It should be with you a while. I suggest a look at a few pages at a time. Some will race through of course. They will get superficial impressions. This book requires some thought by the reader. The beach has its distractions.

    Being “right” is actually not that important*n4. Hopefully we all know that being “right” is a relative term. What is more important is to be able to digest, breakdown, and analyze concepts, ideas, or problems into bits that compare with what you consider “facts”. Life is a journey of learning. If not, you have missed out on a great pleasure while being present for a short while on this planet. Do we consider these considerations is a resignation, a “ressentiment” (Nietzsche) or a re-evaluation of all our values? An expansion of our understanding.

    Logical “atoms” that are pertinent to the problem have already been placed into your worldview. They have a place. The idea fits or does not. This assistance in analysis becomes better with time. Why? Because there is a proven structure or platform that you already know how to use. Pieces fit into places.

    One cannot have all this without a thorough well evaluated worldview.

    Two major goals of the book:

    One is to present the new worldview, UOT, and the second to build a coherent examination of all of the consequences falling out from this new perspective. All the consequences? No, of course not. I am not writing War and Peace. This should be only an introduction to a deeper analysis of our human predicament.

    The brain, of course, does a lot in milliseconds or less, but one of the other real advantages is that in building a coherent worldview most of the hard part of the construction is already done. The current problem may be “false” or just too complex for a quick solution. Some problems need to be explained to others who haven’t been down the particular road before. The point is that a solid logical and consistent structure makes navigation much easier. One already has gotten rid of false channels and detours.

    I find it ( a well-founded worldview) a great assistance in trying to break down knotty problems. Some, of course, can’t be broken down, but again, with a solid worldview, you already knew that.

    Here is another question you may have. “Who is to say what a good worldview is?” I have already answered that.

    A logically consistent and thorough hierarchy of knowledge, built upon a solid foundation is a good worldview.

    “Why should I be interested in yours? Is it the best and only? Is it perfect?” No? But then how would you even know if you would be interested in mine unless you already had one for comparison? And, even better, a good one with which to compare?

    There are lots of reasons to buy the book and to be interested in having a well-oiled brain. A mind that is quick and reliable. Hell, it even knows when to say, “I don’t know the answer to that”. The lack of pretense and the honesty that comes with conviction is a nice tool to have. Consistency comes with being fairly accurate in your assessment. Nobody is one hundred percent accurate and correct of course.

    Let me now ask you a question.

    How could you possibly negotiate this complex, dangerous, and rarely easy road we travel through life without a good worldview?

    Don’t fool yourself. It is very nice to have a solid foundation to assist. Very nice.


    *n1  “Right” of course, is an elusive thing that ultimately only you can claim to know. That is something we will rarely say. The subtleties and complexities of nature can be way too much for us to ever claim that. “Proof”, is equally problematic.

    *n2 Friedrich Nietzsche will be covered, superficially at least, in the appendix. If you have had the pleasure of spending some time with him you know what I mean. If not, be prepared for a great journey of mind opening opinions. He has a reputation, also, of being one of the two greatest users of language in philosophy. Sometimes you wonder, is this a literary excursion or a journey through thought.

    *n3 Thank you, Jeremy Bentham.

    *n4 Nonsense, right here and so quickly. Being “right’ is important. You have heard of how things are all relative? Yes! Being more accurate or more correct is frequently all that we can claim. But that is difficult if possible at all. The point is that most if not all of these things will or will not fit into a solid worldview.


    Universal oscillation theory is the heart of the book. It may become a new paradigm, in time. Nothing this foundational to our thinking has come along in just this way. Physicists, may scoff and say that the book offers them nothing new. I can agree with that sentiment. I understand, however, no one of them has actually said this in this way. I have looked and not found anything quite like this. I had to make up a new metaphysics because no one before went this far in their speculations. David Bohm was almost there but didn’t get to finish his work.

    The theory and its consequences are a new worldview.

    The consequences affect the whole enchilada. The Whole Enchilada is everything. It is our worldview, our metaphysics, our perspective on all things under the Sun, or within an infinite universe-The Whole Universe-The Whole Enchilada-thewholenchilada- the TWE. Take your pick.



    Recently the subject of intelligence came up in a small mixed group. Two of us argued that the essence of it is do to our ability in pattern recognition. So, I saw the need to add to the Chapter Human ALL TOO HUMAN.

    This chapter will be in PRACTICAL TERMS. THE THREE P'S does contain POLITICS, but it is meant to be PRACTICAL HUMAN AFFAIRS, more than just Political views that are consistent with TWE.

    So, untill I reorganize this site to clarify this I will add PRACTICAL VIEWS here!

    The subject of intelligence will be in the Chapter-Human all too Human.


    Dictionary: Origin Late Middle English: via Old French from Latin intelligentia, from intelligere ‘understand’ (see intelligent). The ability to acquire and apply knowledge and skills. ‘an eminent man of great intelligence’-https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/intelligence

    There are other definitions and uses such as information gathering, but we are interested in the essence as in the understanding perspective.

    Here is Wikipedia in a 2017 version:

    Intelligence has been defined in many different ways including as one's capacity for logic, understanding, self-awareness, learning, emotional knowledge, planning, creativity, and problem solving. It can be more generally described as the ability or inclination to perceive or deduce information, and to retain it as knowledge to be applied towards adaptive behaviors within an environment or context.

    Intelligence is most widely studied in humans, but has also been observed in non-human animals and in plants. Artificial intelligence is intelligence in machines. It is commonly implemented in computer systems using program software.

    Within the discipline of psychology, various approaches to human intelligence have been adopted. The psychometric approach is especially familiar to the general public, as well as being the most researched and by far the most widely used in practical settings.[1]


    The definition of intelligence is controversial. Some groups of psychologists have suggested the following definitions:

    From "Mainstream Science on Intelligence" (1994), an op-ed statement in the Wall Street Journal signed by fifty-two researchers (out of 131 total invited to sign):

    A very general mental capability that, among other things, involves the ability to reason, plan, solve problems, think abstractly, comprehend complex ideas, learn quickly and learn from experience. It is not merely book learning, a narrow academic skill, or test-taking smarts. Rather, it reflects a broader and deeper capability for comprehending our surroundings—"catching on," "making sense" of things, or "figuring out" what to do.

    From "Intelligence: Knowns and Unknowns" (1995), a report published by the Board of Scientific Affairs of the American Psychological Association:

    Individuals differ from one another in their ability to understand complex ideas, to adapt effectively to the environment, to learn from experience, to engage in various forms of reasoning, to overcome obstacles by taking thought. Although these individual differences can be substantial, they are never entirely consistent: a given person's intellectual performance will vary on different occasions, in different domains, as judged by different criteria. Concepts of "intelligence" are attempts to clarify and organize this complex set of phenomena. Although considerable clarity has been achieved in some areas, no such conceptualization has yet answered all the important questions, and none commands universal assent. Indeed, when two dozen prominent theorists were recently asked to define intelligence, they gave two dozen, somewhat different, definitions.

    Besides those definitions, psychology and learning researchers also have suggested definitions of intelligence such as:



    Alfred Binet

    Judgment, otherwise called "good sense", "practical sense", "initiative", the faculty of adapting one's self to circumstances ... auto-critique.

    David Wechsler

    The aggregate or global capacity of the individual to act purposefully, to think rationally, and to deal effectively with his environment.

    Lloyd Humphreys

    "...the resultant of the process of acquiring, storing in memory, retrieving, combining, comparing, and using in new contexts information and conceptual skills".

    Howard Gardner

    To my mind, a human intellectual competence must entail a set of skills of problem solving — enabling the individual to resolve genuine problems or difficulties that he or she encounters and, when appropriate, to create an effective product — and must also entail the potential for finding or creating problems — and thereby laying the groundwork for the acquisition of new knowledge.[13]

    Linda Gottfredson

    The ability to deal with cognitive complexity.

    Sternberg & Salter

    Goal-directed adaptive behavior.

    Reuven Feuerstein

    The theory of Structural Cognitive Modifiability describes intelligence as "the unique propensity of human beings to change or modify the structure of their cognitive functioning to adapt to the changing demands of a life situation".

    Legg & Hutter

    A synthesis of 70+ definitions from psychology, philosophy, and AI researchers: "Intelligence measures an agent’s ability to achieve goals in a wide range of environments",[6] which has been mathematically formalized.[17]

    Alexander Wissner-Gross

    F = T ∇ S τ {\displaystyle _{\tau }}  

    "Intelligence is a force, F, that acts so as to maximize future freedom of action. It acts to maximize future freedom of action, or keep options open, with some strength T, with the diversity of possible accessible futures, S, up to some future time horizon, τ. In short, intelligence doesn't like to get trapped".

    Human intelligence

    Human intelligence is the intellectual power of humans, which is marked by complex cognitive feats and high levels of motivation and self-awareness.[19] Intelligence enables humans to remember descriptions of things and use those descriptions in future behaviors. It is a cognitive process. It gives humans the cognitive abilities to learn, form concepts, understand, and reason, including the capacities to recognize patterns, comprehend ideas, plan, solve problems, and use language to communicate. Intelligence enables humans to experience and think.

    Note that much of the above definition applies also to the intelligence of non-human animals.

    Cultural influences on the interpretation of human intelligence

    In animals

    The common chimpanzee can use tools. This chimpanzee is using a stick to get food.

    Although humans have been the primary focus of intelligence researchers, scientists have also attempted to investigate animal intelligence, or more broadly, animal cognition. These researchers are interested in studying both mental ability in a particular species, and comparing abilities between species. They study various measures of problem solving, as well as numerical and verbal reasoning abilities. Some challenges in this area are defining intelligence so that it has the same meaning across species (e.g. comparing intelligence between literate humans and illiterate animals), and also operationalizing a measure that accurately compares mental ability across different species and contexts.

    Wolfgang Köhler's research on the intelligence of apes is an example of research in this area. Stanley Coren's book, The Intelligence of Dogs is a notable book on the topic of dog intelligence. (See also: Dog intelligence.) Non-human animals particularly noted and studied for their intelligence include chimpanzees, bonobos (notably the language-using Kanzi)*n1 and other great apes, dolphins, elephants and to some extent parrots, rats and ravens.

    Cephalopod intelligence also provides important comparative study. Cephalopods*n2 appear to exhibit characteristics of significant intelligence, yet their nervous systems differ radically from those of backboned animals. Vertebrates such as mammals, birds, reptiles and fish have shown a fairly high degree of intellect that varies according to each species. The same is true with arthropods. {Arthropod behavior would be a good argument for pattern recognition. They also exhibit adaptive behavior.}

    g factor in non-humans

    Evidence of a general factor of intelligence has been observed in non-human animals. The general factor of intelligence, or g factor, is a psychometric construct that summarizes the correlations observed between an individual’s scores on a wide range of cognitive abilities. First described in humans, the g factor has since been identified in a number of non-human species.

    Cognitive ability and intelligence cannot be measured using the same, largely verbally dependent, scales developed for humans. Instead, intelligence is measured using a variety of interactive and observational tools focusing on innovation, habit reversal, social learning, and responses to novelty. Studies have shown that g is responsible for 47% of the individual variance in cognitive ability measures in primates and between 55% and 60% of the variance in mice (Locurto, Locurto). These values are similar to the accepted variance in IQ explained by g in humans (40-50%).

    In plants

    It has been argued that plants should also be classified as intelligent based on their ability to sense and model external and internal environments and adjust their morphology, physiology and phenotype accordingly to ensure self-preservation and reproduction.

    A counter argument is that intelligence is commonly understood to involve the creation and use of persistent memories as opposed to computation that does not involve learning. If this is accepted as definitive of intelligence, then it includes the artificial intelligence of robots capable of "machine learning", but excludes those purely autonomic sense-reaction responses that can be observed in many plants. Plants are not limited to automated sensory-motor responses, however, they are capable of discriminating positive and negative experiences and of 'learning' (registering memories) from their past experiences. They are also capable of communication, accurately computing their circumstances, using sophisticated cost–benefit analysis and taking tightly controlled actions to mitigate and control the diverse environmental stressors.

    {This seems to reduce intelligence to sense and response levels. Generally, we think of it as more than that.}


    *n1 Kanzi (born October 28, 1980), also known by the lexigram LexigramKanzi.jpg (from the character 太), is a male bonobo who has been featured in several studies on great ape language. According to Sue Savage-Rumbaugh, a primatologist who has studied the bonobo throughout her life, Kanzi has exhibited advanced linguistic aptitude.

    .. Born to Lorel and Bosandjo at Yerkes field station at Emory University and moved to the Language Research Center at Georgia State University, Kanzi was stolen and adopted shortly after birth by a more dominant female, Matata. Kanzi and his sister (Matata's offspring, now deceased) moved to the Ape Cognition and Conservation Initiative (ACCI), formerly the Great Ape Trust, in Des Moines, Iowa, where Kanzi is the alpha male of the resident community of Bonobos. He turned 36 in October 2016.

    As an infant, Kanzi accompanied Matata to sessions where Matata was taught language through keyboard lexigrams, but showed little interest in the lessons. It was a great surprise to researchers then when one day, while Matata was away, Kanzi began competently using the lexigrams, becoming not only the first observed ape to have learned aspects of language naturalistically rather than through direct training, but also the first observed bonobo to appear to use some elements of language at all. Within a short time, Kanzi had mastered the ten words that researchers had been struggling to teach his adoptive mother, and he has since learned more than two hundred more. When he hears a spoken word (through headphones, to filter out nonverbal clues), he points to the correct lexigram.

    *n2 A cephalopod .. is any member of the molluscan class Cephalopoda… (kephalópoda; "head-feet") such as a squid, octopus or nautilus. These exclusively marine animals are characterized by bilateral body symmetry, a prominent head, and a set of arms or tentacles (muscular hydrostats) modified from the primitive molluscan foot. Fishermen sometimes call them inkfish, referring to their common ability to squirt ink….

    Cephalopods became dominant during the Ordovician period, represented by primitive nautiloids. The class now contains two, only distantly related, extant subclasses: Coleoidea, which includes octopuses, squid, and cuttlefish; and Nautiloidea, represented by Nautilus and Allonautilus. In the Coleoidea, the molluscan shell has been internalized or is absent, whereas in the Nautiloidea, the external shell remains…[Nautiluses are much closer to the first cephalopods that appeared about 500 million years ago than the early modern cephalopods that appeared maybe 100 million years later (ammonoids and coleoids). They have a seemingly simple brain, not the large complex brains of octopus, cuttlefish and squid, and had long been assumed to lack intelligence. But the cephalopod nervous system is quite different from that of other animals, and recent experiments have shown not only memory, but a changing response to the same event over time. -wiki.Cephalopods.]

    Cephalopods are widely regarded as the most intelligent of the invertebrates, and have well developed senses and large brains (larger than those of gastropods). The nervous system of cephalopods is the most complex of the invertebrates and their brain-to-body-mass ratio falls between that of endothermic and ectothermic vertebrates. Captive cephalopods have also been known to climb out of their aquaria, maneuver a distance of the lab floor, enter another aquarium to feed on the crabs, and return to their own aquarium.


    Intelligence is not just pattern recognition but the ability to make those patterns useful in other ways

    However, the importance of pattern recognition is easily seen in this wiki sourced material:

    Raven's Progressive Matrices  From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    The cover of a test booklet for Raven's Standard Progressive Matrices

    Raven's Progressive Matrices (often referred to simply as Raven's Matrices) or RPM is a nonverbal group test typically used in educational settings. It is usually a 60-item test used in measuring abstract reasoning and regarded as a non-verbal estimate of fluid intelligence. It is the most common and popular test administered to groups ranging from 5-year-olds to the elderly. It is made of 60 multiple choice questions, listed in order of difficulty. This format is designed to measure the test taker's reasoning ability, the eductive ("meaning-making") component of Spearman's g (g is often referred to as general intelligence). The tests were originally developed by John C. Raven in 1936. In each test item, the subject is asked to identify the missing element that completes a pattern. Many patterns are presented in the form of a 6×6, 4×4, 3×3, or 2×2 matrix, giving the test its name......

    Problem structure

    An IQ test item in the style of a Raven's Progressive Matrices test. Given eight patterns, the subject must identify the missing ninth pattern

    All of the questions on the Raven's progressives consist of visual geometric design with a missing piece. The test taker is given six to eight choices to pick from and fill in the missing piece.

    Raven's Progressive Matrices and Vocabulary tests were originally developed for use in research into the genetic and environmental origins of cognitive ability. Raven thought that the tests commonly in use at that time were cumbersome to administer and the results difficult to interpret. Accordingly, he set about developing simple measures of the two main components of Spearman's g: the ability to think clearly and make sense of complexity (known as eductive ability) and the ability to store and reproduce information (known as reproductive ability).

    Raven's tests of both were developed with the aid of what later became known as item response theory.

    Raven first published his Progressive Matrices in the United Kingdom in 1938. His three sons established Scotland-based test publisher J C Raven Ltd. in 1972. In 2004, Harcourt Assessment, Inc. a division of Harcourt Education acquired J C Raven Ltd. Harcourt was later acquired by Pearson PLC.


    The Matrices are available in three different forms for participants of different ability:

    • Standard Progressive Matrices: These were the original form of the matrices, first published in 1938. The booklet comprises five sets (A to E) of 12 items each (e.g., A1 through A12), with items within a set becoming increasingly difficult, requiring ever greater cognitive capacity to encode and analyze information. All items are presented in black ink on a white background.[4]
    • Colored Progressive Matrices: Designed for children aged 5 through 11 years-of-age, the elderly, and mentally and physically impaired individuals. This test contains sets A and B from the standard matrices, with a further set of 12 items inserted between the two, as set Ab. Most items are presented on a coloured background to make the test visually stimulating for participants. However the very last few items in set B are presented as black-on-white; in this way, if a subject exceeds the tester's expectations, transition to sets C, D, and E of the standard matrices is eased.[4]
    • Advanced Progressive Matrices: The advanced form of the matrices contains 48 items, presented as one set of 12 (set I), and another of 36 (set II). Items are again presented in black ink on a white background, and become increasingly difficult as progress is made through each set. These items are appropriate for adults and adolescents of above-average intelligence.

    In addition, "parallel" forms of the standard and coloured progressive matrices were published in 1998. This was to address the problem of the Raven's Matrices being too well known in the general population. Items in the parallel tests have been constructed so that average solution rates to each question are identical for the classic and parallel versions. A revised version of the SPM – the Standard Progressive Matrices Plus – was published at the same time. This was based on the "parallel" version but, although the test was the same length, it had more difficult items in order to restore the discrimination that the original SPM had among more able adolescents and young adults when it was first published. This new test, developed with the aid of better sampling arrangements and developments in the procedures available to implement the item response theory, has turned out to have exemplary test properties.

    Uses of the tests

    The tests were developed for research purposes. Because of their independence of language and reading and writing skills, and the simplicity of their use and interpretation, they quickly found widespread practical application. For example, all entrants to the British armed forces from 1942 onwards took a twenty-minute version of the SPM, and potential officers took a specially adapted version as part of British War Office Selection Boards. The routine administration of what became the Standard Progressive Matrices to all entrants (conscripts) to many military services throughout the world (including the Soviet Union) continued at least until the present century. It was by bringing together these data that James R. Flynn was able to place the intergenerational increase in scores beyond reasonable doubt. Flynn's path-breaking publications on IQ gains around the world have led to the phenomenon of the gains being known as the Flynn effect. Among Robert L. Thorndike and other researchers who preceded Flynn in finding evidence of IQ score gains was John Raven, reporting on studies with the RPM.

    A 2007 study provided evidence that individuals with Asperger syndrome, a high-functioning autism spectrum disorder, score higher than other individuals on Raven's tests. Another 2007 study provided evidence that individuals with classic autism, a low-functioning autism spectrum disorder, score higher in Raven's tests than in Wechsler tests. In addition, the individuals with classic autism were providing correct answers to the Raven's test in less time than individuals without autism, although erring as often.

    The Triple Nine Society, a high IQ society used to accept the Advanced Progressive Matrices as one of their admission tests. They required a score of at least 35 out of 36 on or before June 2017 on the RAPM. The International Society for Philosophical Enquiry (ISPE) accepts the RAPM as a qualification for admission, and so does the International High IQ Society.

    Leaked answers

    Since at least 2015, scanned versions of the test booklets of the Colored, Standard and Advanced Progressive Matrices, including the correct answers, have appeared publicly accessible online, rendering future use of the test unreliable. The Standard Progressive Matrices are available as a test online, although it is unclear which norms are used to generate the percentile score.

    See also

    The Importance of Genetic inheritance

    A recent book available on Amazon etc, is The Neuroscience of Intelligence (Cambridge Fundamentals of Neuroscience in Psychology) Paperback – December 28, 2016 by Richard J. Haier (Author)

    This book introduces new and provocative neuroscience research that advances our understanding of intelligence and the brain. Compelling evidence shows that genetics plays a more important role than environment as intelligence develops from childhood, and that intelligence test scores correspond strongly to specific features of the brain assessed with neuroimaging. In understandable language, Richard J. Haier explains cutting-edge techniques based on genetics, DNA, and imaging of brain.

    Will read it soon. -GDC

    Comments welcome! I will reprint comments from others that add to these discussions in a meaningful way. Documented materials from experts especially welcome. 

    Go to Contact.

    © 2015 Your Company. All Rights Reserved. Designed By JoomShaper