Saturday, July 23, 2011

The Metaphysical Signification of Physics

I.  BOOK:  Imagine a book regarding The Metaphysical Signification of Physics:  Consider general possibilities that should number among its concerns.


1.  SUPERPOSITIONING:  Super positioning of all Substance of physics with an active (qualitatively interfunctioning) field of metaphysics.

2.  RELATIONSHIPS OF SUBSTANCE AND ENTANGLEMENTS OF PERSPECTIVES:  Relational Entanglement of all of Substance.  Spooky Action at a distance:  When two substantive relations are symmetrical, polarized, and entangled, then significantly separated from all other relations: will any effect that is Apprehended regarding one, that is not perceived to combine or convert it with any other, necessarily be perceivable as having a like effect on the other, even across a leap of non-proximate space?


1.  NECESSARY ASSOCIATIONS:  Are entanglements among relative representations of Substance necessarily implicated with the signifying, storing, sensing, and/or potential for conveying Information among perspectives of Consciousness?

2.  UNCERTAINTY:  Are uncertainty and fuzziness at the most precise levels of quantum measure associated with inherent incapacity for any particular perspective to measure any exact perspective of Substance, because Substance is not measurable as a thing in itself, and instead consists necessarily in relations of feedback between wholes and parts, waves and particles?

3.  DOMINANT DIRECTION OF IDENTITY:  Must every relation that finds expression exist as a relative entanglement, whose dominant measure is necessarily associated with or responsive to a most clear, consistent, and coherent consensus of shared relative perception?  For any identifiable perspective of Consciousness to be relatively effective, must it somehow intuit and impress the more powerful among perspectives with which it shares an entanglement?

4.  FAITH AND META PROPERTIES:  May meta properties abide beyond our logical comprehension, to fill us with purpose, awe, empathy, and intuitive capacity to strengthen apprehensions with faith?  May there abide a meta "Force," which reconciles, synchronizes, and guides us in how to be strong, moral, purposeful?  A source of renewal of I-ness?  May there abide some meta substance, which has capacity beyond our world modeling, in respect of relations among apprehensions of patterns of wholes and parts, to flux and present relative representations to the significations, interpretations and modelings of Substance, Information, and Consciousness --- depending on perspective, point of view, and context?  Yes, mortal modeling of Substance can be astonishingly practical, yet it can never be non-trivially complete, coherent, and consistent, in a quantitatively measurable way.  For concerns that are qualitative, we constitute only intuitive, sensing, tools.  We are not our own calculations.   Perhaps we should try to leave most of the synchronizing, reconciling, and precise Quantitative calculating of moral judgments to God, subject to respectful, Qualitative receptivity to guidance.

5.  GOVERNMENT AND THE REGULATION OF MORALITY:  How can or should decent civilization teach and protect the ignorant, gullible, weak, and unlucky?  Perhaps more by protecting voluntary, experimental charities and moral churching, and less by "final solutions" based on detailed and forced governmental redistribution?  May good distinctions be made regarding voluntary associations of clubs, charities, businesses, political parties versus involuntary governments, to rationally justify the moral deployment of some forms of social regulation more so than others?  Should government constitute itself just enough to protect viable charities, and regulate itself just enough to avail decent protection against national, international, and non-national corporations of sociopaths who prey on the weak minded, weak provisoned, and weak bodied, thereby to elevate themselves to power over their moral bettersWhen should it be deemed necessary for decent government to play a moral or taxing role in limiting and regulating incentives for the propagation and reproduction of imbeciles, addicts, strange religious fanatics, and libertine hedonists?

6.  REGULATING RACKETS:  Has government-regulated legalism now brought forth, via the corporate form, a world ruled by a new aristocracy, i.e., gangs of international, non-competitive, merit-irrelevant corporatists?  Should the corporate form be redefined, closely monitored, and deprived of privacy, in order to reduce its aristocratic power to protect gangland turf with government licensed monopolies and franchises?  In an age of trillion-function computers, should corporately owned patents and secrets continue to be recognized and protected?  Can the corportate form be redefined and reduced, so that it better recognizes national, social, and individual empathies, and so that it will compete more responsibly and with greater accountability to higher morality?

7.  FREEDOM AND DIGNITY:  How can independence, self reliance, and individual self esteem be squared with decent equality?  With equality of opportunity versus equality of distribution of economic wants?  How can inequality in distribution of wants be decently reduced, while preserving meaningful freedom of activity?  What should be the respective roles of the corporate form, the national form, the sect form, etc.?  How may such purpose meaningfully relate to us?


1. LOGICAL INCOHERENCE OF ULTIMATE PARTICLES AS THINGS EXISTING IN THEMSELVES: Is the notion of a fundamental, Substance-based building block of physics inherently incoherent (especially if attempted to be related to moral issues)?

2.  THE MEANINGFULLY TRUE:  What distinguishes the trivially true from the non-trivially insightful?

3. LIMITS OF LOGIC:  What may limit forms of bivalent and trivalent Logic and the rule of non-contradiction, as applied to interrelationships among Consciousness, Information, and Substance?

4.  POWER OF ENLIGHTENMENT:  Can Enlightenment enhance paranormal power over Substance?  If so, to what social purposes should enlightenment merit to be applied?

5.  UNFOLDING POSSIBILITIES AND SYNCHRONIZATION:  What meta, logical, qualitative, quantitative, or substantive relationship may govern conscious apprehension, will, cause, associative cause, informational fuzz, synchronization, and reconciliation?

6.  PHYSICAL BLINDERS:  What important concerns are poorly addressed by a monopolizing tendency among substance-based physicists?  Are those concerns worth discussing, considering, factoring?

7.  SIGNS AND LOGOS OF GOD:  How does Physics arise?  What accounts for physics?  Are worthwhile aspects quantitatively hidden, yet qualitatively intuitable, among and between the measurable leaps and transpositions of physics?  Why and how does measurable Substance occur?  What are the philosophical limits of measurability?

8.  RELATIVISTIC REPRESENTATION, MANIFESTATION, SIGNIFICATION, AND MEASUREMENT:  Is there a mathematical law or prevailing rule of thumb that functions to give mass its quantifiable signification?  May a notion of ultimate quanta of Substance make complete and consistent coherent sense, for all worthwhile purposes?  May a bivalent notion of yin-yang, 1 - 0 representationalism, coherently, as Information, represent all of Substance?  How do patterns of feedback come qualitatively to be signified and recognized, in respect of systems of wholes and parts?

9.  DETERMINISM AND WILL:  Can meaningfully coherent and consistent distinctions be made among (1) Indifferent determinism, (2) Random determinism, (3) Evolutionary fittest determinism, and (4) consciously guided or Chosen determinism?  Between autopilot-preset, random-unfolding, intermittant-guidance, and subsequent active free will?  Between holistic Will and individual perspectives of Will?  Does there abide a concept of holistic Will that makes reasonable, NOMA, and coherent sense, even in respect of measurable physics?

10.  GOD:  Does reason arm faith in a concept of an Holistic, Empathetic, Purposeful God?  Can a concept of God or Holistic Consciousness make sense, as intermediary between The Source and all perspectives of Consciousness?  Does God Learn?  Does God's meta Power increase as God's Potential does not?  What is the potential of God?

11.  CIVILIZATION:  What is requisite to sustain a decent, viable civilization?  Why are there both suffering and joy?  If a worldwide cataclysm today would not constitute "evidence" of loss of God, why not?

12.  RELIGION:  What is "religion?"  Are forced conversions the "practice of religion?"  What is proper role for religion?  What should limit the free exercise versus the establishment of religion?

13.  ASTOUNDING POTENTIAL FOR CONSCIOUSNESS TO TINKER WITH SUBSTANCE:  Why is tinkering with notions of physics and orders of magnitude and degrees of signification so practicably effective and astounding?

14.  WHAT PROPERTIES DISGINGUISH CONSCIOUSNESS, INFORMATION, AND SUBSTANCE:  Is there a relatively clear way to distinguish among properties of Consciousness, Substance, and Information?

15.  SUBSTANCE AS LOGOS:  How is Substance guided to effect significations (signs), as placeholders for storing Information and conveying communication among potential perspectives of Consciousness?  How may God reasonably be conceptualized as synchronizing Substance, Information, and Consciousness?  Does it reasonably seem that God gets "buzzes of ideas," tests them  through various perspectives and significations, evaluates feedback, and somehow selects as "the fittest," perhaps factoring in some way that is only qualitatively intuitive to us, that which may be: interesting, shared, consistent to a more encompassing self, empathetic, evolutionary , meaningful, passionate, reconciling, accepting, receptive, beautiful, sensible, consistent with vehicles for communicating significations, and so on?

16.  IDENTITY AND PURPOSEFULNESS: Is there a worthwhile distinction between noise and music, between non-trivial truth and beauty? What is Morally right or just? Are there purely qualitative aspects to Information and Consciousnss? May Substance, Information, and Consciousness intertranspose? May any quantitative law of conservation limit Consciousness and Information? What is the relation among Consciousness, Information, and Substance? What is "I-ness"? Of what may innate intuition of I-ness be evolutionary? Does "I" revivify?

D.  MERIT:  Ultimately, it seems that merit is not to be found solely in signs of relative wealth, pretensions of fashion, or displays of power. More reasonably, merit may be intuited to be related to how one interfunctions as a conduit that is receptive to unfolding apprehensions of God. The desired civilization is the civilization that accords with that approach. Indeed, if merit were solely derivative of measurable interrelations and displays of Substance, and if such displays came to have no relation to any higher value, but could be accorded merely on whims of pill or interventions of genetic operation, then merit, so measured, would come not only to be devoid of Qualitative merit, but also devoid of Quantitative merit.

@Thus spake Dlanorrenrag.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

What sort of ignorant or corrupt person or creed seeks to destroy allegiance to traditionial American values? How and from whom do such rats benefit? Do they have the least apprehension of what lies behind the curtain of their ideal? Why do they presume it is wrong for anyone not to tolerate them? At whose knee did they learn to justify the transposing of short term pleasures into long term ideals? At what point must they be turned out, if they are not to destroy the house?