TRINITY:
With any appearance of two of (measurable) [1] Mass (“Father,” in its fuzzy, pre-measurably observed collapse?), [2] Consciousness (“Son”?), and [3] Information (“Holy Ghost”?), the third is a necessary accompaniment. Of the Trinity, none can exist by itself, though each may reflect a different perspective of itself in respect of its interrelation to the other two. Each will most subjectively and intimately sense itself to be conscious, and will objectify the other two as consisting in mass and information. Yet, each may intuit that it also may be objectified by the other two, and not directly or measurably be sensed by them as being conscious.
Intuitively, the only possibility is to have perspectives for all three: mass, consciousness, and information. So information is a constant accompaniment to the existent Trinity. No matter the form or perspective by which information is expressed, any such expression must necessarily be synchronized (“finely tuned”) in respect of its Source, i.e., the Trinity.
Information entails a mathematical and sequential perspective for an organization of the “eternal-present,” and necessarily implicates mass and consciousness. This implicates inherent potential for expressing sequential arrangements. Time is purely a derivative, which, without information, would connote no meaning as anything in-itself. In accompanying capacities for reacting to feedback (mathematically and alternatively, both discretely and continuously) as information is organized, information implicates plural perspectives of consciousness. May Information (Holy Ghost?) also implicate a singular Consciousness (Son?) of perspectives?
In respect that meta-mass (fuzzy, un-collapsed mass) is not measurable, could “math-in-itself” (Information; Holy Ghost?) “be the territory” for objectifying relationships? But how could a meta-math which pertains only to other math, thereby and on its own, constitute the superior Source from which all other relationships, reactions, signs, sensations, and perspectives of consciousness are tricked out, translated, and derived? Must not any such meta-math implicate some essence or Source which has aspects beyond mere math, beyond mortal capacity to sense, measure, or comprehend? Must not such Source (aka, “God”) consist with that which mortals subjectively intuit, appreciate, empathize with, and remain generally receptive to, but unable to measure or objectify?
Mass-in-itself does not exist. In relation to Information or Consciousness, Mass does exist. It exists in holistic relation, and also in lower, derivative, particular relation. In holistic relation, it is meta, i.e., beyond our precise measure or reduction. “Meta-holistic-mass-energy” is inherent with our being’ness. But it is not quite like the practical, relational mass that mortals measure or deal with on a practicable basis. Rather, to us, in its meta-holistic sense, it is “spiritual.”
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
In death, all particular perspectives of consciousness must eventually become collateral damage from the unfolding purposes of the field of consciousness. Our material world is not the best of all possible; we are only its gardeners, always pursuing communion, and perhaps eventual merger, with a happier state of being.
2 comments:
ABOUT TRIUMVIRATE “TERRITORY”:
With any appearance of two of [1] Mass (in fuzzy, pre-measurably observed collapse), [2] Consciousness, and [3] Information, the third is a necessary accompaniment. Of this triumvirate, no one can exist by itself, though each of the three may reflect a different perspective of itself in respect of its interrelation with the other two. On holistic level, may each intimately sense itself to be conscious, and objectify the other two as consisting in mass and information? If so, would each intuit that it also is objectified by the other two, and not directly or measurably sensed by them as being conscious?
Intuitively, the only possibility is to have perspectives for all three: mass, consciousness, and information. So information is a constant accompaniment to the existent trinity. No matter the form or perspective by which information is expressed, any such expression must necessarily be synchronized (“finely tuned”) in respect of its Source, i.e., the Trinity.
Information entails a mathematical and sequential perspective for an organization of the “eternal-present,” and necessarily implicates mass and consciousness. This implicates inherent potential for expressing sequential arrangements. Time is a derivative, which, without information, would connote no meaning as anything in-itself. In accompanying capacities for reacting to feedback (mathematically and alternatively, both discretely and continuously) as information is organized, information implicates communication, hence plural perspectives of consciousness.
In respect that meta-mass (fuzzy, un-collapsed mass) is not measurable, could “math-in-itself” (Information?) “be the territory” for objectifying relationships? But how could a meta-math which pertains only to other math, thereby and on its own, constitute the superior Source from which all other relationships, reactions, signs, sensations, and perspectives of consciousness are tricked out, translated, and derived? Must not any such meta-math implicate some essence or Source which has aspects beyond mere math, beyond mortal capacity to sense, measure, or comprehend? Must not such Source (aka, “God”) consist with that which mortals subjectively intuit, appreciate, empathize with, and remain generally receptive to, but unable to measure or objectify?
Mass-in-itself does not exist. In relation to Information or Consciousness, Mass does exist. It exists in holistic relation, and also in lower, derivative, particular relation. In holistic relation, it is meta, i.e., beyond our precise measure or reduction. “Meta-holistic-mass-energy” is inherent with our being’ness. In its holistic aspect, it is not quite like the practical, relational mass that mortals measure or deal with on a practicable basis. Rather, to us, in its meta-holistic sense, it is “spiritual.” In that sense, it is not measureable. That is, there is no particulate/field-like Higgs Boson. Rather, there is inherent Mass-Consciousness-Information. Our scientific endeavors will need to come to terms with the inherent uncertainty, intuition, and empathy that flows all ways in respect of that Trinity.
Re: The Atheist and the God Particle, by Edwin Eugene Klingman, 2008; Ch. 19, p. 148: “Most atheists are simply unaware that one can pursue science in the approved fashion without a religious commitment to reductionist materialism.”
Note to say I am enthralled by Gene Man's book! As a layman, I much appreciate the effort to communicate sense in a way that makes the math and techniques of priests of physics more comprehensible to intelligent laity. I consider ramifications of this book's conceptualization to be of immense, timely, and fundamental import, far beyond physics, well into politics.
However, the work pierces so much confusion that I want to read, skip ahead, come back, ponder, and re-read. Only then will I feel remotely satisfied to appreciate your positions. I am enjoying this process considerably.
Meantime, from my own thinking, I have mused as below. So far, I have not apprehended agreement or disagreement. I will be especially pondering the point that “the map is not the territory.”
*****
Musings:
Field of Consciousness: If there were x, assume there would be y, even though, apart from One’s willing (Consciousness’ willing?) of such assumption, and proactive fine tuning to move in a self fulfilling way towards making it practical or “true,” there would be no “physically real” basis for it. Test and tinker with other perspectives, to sense how far and how long one’s Will can transfer and translate one’s assumptions into a practical map or “field of reality,” before running into annihilating contradictions or conflicts.
Steady State of Consciousness: Conceptualize by assuming a Meta-Source of Consciousness exists, at a meta-point. That it finds meaning and interest in experiencing various chronological sequences and interactions among perspectives. That it translates such experiences AS IF there exists a universe of physics. That IT’s interest in each particular perspective peaks and wanes in some Uncertain relation to how far in imaged space and time each perspective of IT senses itself to be from such perspective’s translation of the (big bang) meta point. That all individual perspectives of consciousness eventually wither and fade out (entropy of perspective) as they accelerate out from the meta point. That Holistic Consciousness at the meta point never withers out, but remains in a steady state of consciousness. That, apart from the duration or arrow of individual perspectives, information is not preserved in detail, but in meta-kind. That in-kind information is constantly, continuously, mathematically re-mixed, re-experienced, and re-excited according to the ever unfolding interest of the Meta Source.
In respect, all measurable phenomena of physics (four fundamental forces and red shift) would be artifactual and derivative, within a system that avails conscious freedom of perspective and conscience, subservient to a hierarchical “terrain” of imaged conditions. In other words, such a conceptualization would not be inconsistent with physics, and may in fact help adduce a consistent mathematical interpretation of the reality we experience. Mathematically consistent adducement would be its only “proof.”
Anthropic Principle: No matter “where” imaged in respect of the meta point, each perspective of consciousness will necessarily function only insofar as it respects an interpretation of physics that is (circularly) “fine tuned” to support its position.
As to the Holistic Consciousness: Apart from intuition and empathy, there is no other or objective way to measure or know the degree, extent, quality, or potential of the interaction of the Meta Source.
Information: Within the field of Consciousness, essential parameters for the organization of Information need not change, but specific organizations or sums of Information will. Potential (memory capacity?) does not change, but specific memories are (meaningfully, caringly, interestedly) re-mixed, re-run, and re-animated.
Post a Comment