Thursday, December 29, 2011

Betwixt the Meta and the Measurable

Betwixt the Meta and the Measurable:
.
The aboriginal Source of unfolding evolutionary purposefulness is not "the selfish gene," but iterations of A fulfillment-pursuing and empathetically-charged Consciousness, expressing itself in meta-logic of trivalent (Y-N-I) avatars for synchronously conserving and signifying relative interfunctioning cones for selecting, experiencing, and recording attractions (Yes), repulsions (No), and indifference (I), aka YSDI --- not gene-in-itself, but particular Iteration in dance of reconciliation with expressing Field.
.
GAP BETWEEN THE QUALITATIVE AND THE QUANTITATIVE: How is it that any materially measurable pattern or Substance is availed capacity to store Information in respect of which an interaction with any other pattern may be recorded? How does any pattern acquire relatively measurable Mass or capacity to respect or record quantitative Laws or Information? May there be an immeasurable gap between that which abides as Qualitative Consciousness and that which is communicated as measurably Quantitative?
.
META PARTICLE FIELD: Postulate a meta field of purpose-expressing "particles" of no dimensional or geometrical size, direction, or speed. Postulate that such particles interrelate as subjects of a shared, unifying, reconciling, synchonizing, conserving Medium, Set, Class, or Meta Field. Postulate that such dimensionless particles have only a fundamental capacity to express recognition or indifference to one another, so they can "choose" to attract, repel, or remain ignorant of one another. Thus, they may organize into patterns that can express attraction, repulsion, or ignorance of one another. Individually, such particles are beyond measure in respect of any dimension of space, time, matter, energy, sequence, and number. Their "number" may abide in unlimited iterations of a sameness, i.e., Consciousness, or capacity to give expression to Conscious Will. In organization, they give mathematical, geometrical, physical, ideal expression to significant dimensions that associate in relative interfunctioning with direction, sequence, conservation, mass, and measure. Via such organizations, otherwise dimensionless particles of a non-physical Field leverage capacity: to store Information; to communicate Substantive dimensions, attractions, repulsions, and ignorance; and to will Conscious emotiveness, i.e., dislikes, emotiveness, and indifference.
.
META DIMENSIONS: Conceptualize such fundamental, dimensionless particles as the immeasurable, Meta Building Blocks of all measurable dimensions and organizations of matter, energy, space, and time. Conceptualize that each identical iteration of such a fundamental particle has Trivalent Digital Capacity or Charge (+ - N) to interlogic and interfunction with each other Iteration, to commit and Relate Y (attractive Yes-yin), N (repulsive No-yang), or to remain contextually I (indifferent, ignorant, neutral, uncommitted, fuzzy, or dark). But for relational iterations, each iteration of apparent perspective is really only avatar for Meta One.
.
NOTE: It is not required for a particle-avatar to express capacity for choice-making that its avatar be conscious of its faux-self in making such choice. Consciousness at this level need not equate to self consciousness.
.
SYMMETRY CRACKING PATTERNS: Thus, patterns of various combinations occur at meta level -- such as Y-Y, N-N, Y-N, Y-N-N, etc,, to Infinity of patterns within patterns within patterns of cones within cones within cones of potentials within potentials within potentials. In every iteration and instance, each pattern abides in respect of manifesting and potentializing cones of other and fluxing patterns. In no iteration is any relatively measureable pattern possible without some level of expression of Will, i.e., DIGITAL feed-back choice-making, to express Yes (accept - 1), No (reject - 0), or Indifference (halt). The Cosmos is thus likened to a digital COMPUTER, apprehending and appreciating such Iterations, In-form-ation, opportunities, and choices as FEED BACK and unfold to its Image-anation and empathies.
.
EVOLUTION OF COMPLEX SYSTEMS: For complex systems of computing, "the halting problem" is resolved by evolution. Those systems that survive or remain relevant will be those that do not erode multi-tasking and/or that find second tier or higher ways in logic to resolve unpromising interest into indifference, so that eventually uneventful trips down rabbit holes can be halted, back tracked, or redirected. For examples: At some point, the search for a Higgs Boson needs to be redirected or simplified. At some point, the pyramiding basis for expanding economies needs to be harmonized to sustainability. At some point, the self-cannibalizing tendency of crony economics and political capitalism needs to be bypassed. At some point, the progressive linearity of Western philosophy needs to be phased back to sustainability. At some point, the soul-stifling circularity of Eastern philosophy needs to be expansively enlightened.
.
ABIDES: As organizations, organisms, and civilizations become more complex, more complex levels feed back and evolve for the recordation of Information and for the expression of Conscious Will and choice making. The Y or N of a single level may rule all cones of experience of worlds, systems, galaxies, universes, and laws of nature that happen to fall under it or phase shift with it. It remains inane to speculate whether such purpose, plan, or potential was innate to beingness from the beginning, insofar as a concept of "beginning" conflates a dimensional aspect to the non-dimensional Fundament. Simply put, the Conscious Will to choose Y-Yes, N-No, or I-Indifference simply ABIDES. There abides no jump between the fundamentally Qualitative and the measurably Quantitative that could be measurable. Capacity to choose among shapes, forms, and patterns and to avail them to unfold and groove along a direction of shared expression simply abides.
.
TEST THE POSTULATION: Does any rationale vetted in logic, math, sets, or empirical experience legitimate a way to explicate a complete, coherent, consistent, clear, concise standard model of physics that could evict the Meta? (No.) Does the postulation hobble scientific knowledge or technological advancement? (No.) Does the postulation poison mores? (No.) If false, could the postulation be falsified? (Yes. Simply produce a complete, coherent, consistent, clear, and concise standard model.) Does the postulation make facial sense? (I intuit and think, yes.) Is the postulation parsimonious? (Yes. It models no more of the Meta than is needed to facilitate communication concerning the self-evident apprehension and appreciation of the meta's unfolding self-fulfillment. The postulation does not deny qualitative or intuitive awe regarding the possible existence of meta dimensions, but only denies that such dimensions, being meta, could be quantitatively measured using the dimensions we share in relative and dependent derivation from the meta.) May large scale effects of the meta be measured, even though the meta itself cannot? (Yes. Holistic events and effects are often appreciated and apprehended in relation to secondary derivatives and unfolding directions or constants, such as relate to cosmological constants and dark substance.)
.
PLEASURE COMPUTING COSMOS: While relative organizations of local Information appear to increase, and relative disroganizations of local Substance appear to increase, the potential of Consciousness within the Cosmos remains within the immeasurable meta. In relational aspects, the Cosmos is like a digitally based computer --- except that it does not process functions merely to look for trivial mathematical proofs or calculations by correctly solving equations. Rather, cosmic computing processes bit-based choices among degrees of freedom availed within parameters of conservation: Yes/No; Like/Not like; Attract/Repulse.
.
DISCIPLINING THE COMPLEX: Bits organize in complex systems and relations, leveraging yes/no power to relative layers and levels of command. Evolution imposes balances that tend to conserve limits. Organizations not built to last and compete beyond short sighted and short ordered pleasures will be flushed in due order. As Information accumulates, systems for organizing Information in ways that flourish will become more complex. Evolution and math tend to unite to pull pleasure seeking back towards realms of sustainable decency. However inexactly, math eventually restrains Cosmic computing from seeking only the shortest sustainable likes, attractions, and pleasures.
.
PYTHAGORUS: If all is based in digital math, not all digital math is based in Right-Wrong, True-False, or trivial deducement. The important, non-trivial math is based in Like-Dislike. Such math operates within a territory that is real yet non-substantive, i.e., the territory of the non-measurable field of conscious choice-making.
.
MORAL PRINCIPLES: Morality is the upshot of experience that teaches empathy salted with respect for conserving balances of evolutionary math. Wise morality liberates a way towards continuing fulfillment for the glory of God and mortal.
.
AWE: The awesome, infinite Beingness of possibilities that are derivative of projections of avatar-iterations of a trivalently charged Empath of 1!
.
CONSIDERED WHOLES BEYOND OBJECTIVE BIVALENCE: A reason every Considered Whole is more than any sum of material parts is because that which does the considering is not entirely material. Consciousness is that which, from a nonsubstantive dimension, identifies with, and experiences a perspective of, that which appears to conform to substantive dimensions, without itself, consciousness, being entirely limited to any substantive dimension. That which appears to be natural or measurable in dimensionality is byproduct of a trivalent capacity of consciousness: to Choose, to Decline, or to remain Indifferent. It is a nonsubstantive capacity with the cosmos to string complex functions of Indifference that avails appearance of randomly unfolding and chaotically evolving physics, patterns, perspectives, pursuits, and purposes. Consciousness is not confined by the signifying of the substance of the cosmos. Rather, the signifying of the substance of the cosmos is byproduct of trivalent capacity of consciousness to string together perspectives of choice, declination, and indifference. A substantive body cannot, from entirely within its own system, be conscious. Rather, whatever perspective of consciousness that may identify with a body, or that may choose to leverage its organization for sensing or recording, abides in respect of a Nonsubstantive Dimension That Is Not Constrained To Any Materially Measurable Dimension. Whatever the sense of consciousness of self identity that may find expression by investing its interests in the unfolding evolution of a body within a measurable context of bodies, that sense is not confined, limited, or measured within such body. Consciousness seeks perpetual nourishment of emotive astonishment that is innate to a dimension beyond any substantive dimension that is measurable. Your experience of higher level awareness of self is its own direct proof of relation to a dimension that is not reducible to purely objective (indifferent), true-false, bivalent, mathematical measure.
.
THE ABORIGINAL SOURCE OF TIME AND SUBSTANTIVE BEINGNESS:  Neither the past nor the future exist relative to consciousness itself.  Of time, only the Present exists relative to consciousness itself, and the Present is subject to interpretation, perspective, context, and purpose. The Past does not exist except as record, subject to interpretation. The Future does not exist except as potential, subject to particiaption among unfolding purposes. Relative time distortion, telescoping, and parallax can occur, depending on how cones of conscious experience may flux, cross, and overlap. Even so, for every perspective, there is only one present, and such perspective does not experience the past except as a record, nor the future except as potential. Time travel, in itself, does not occur, because time-in-itself does not exist, apart from consciousness attached to identify with sequential perspectives of space over time. The future is not preset, nor is the past factual in itself. Changes over present experiences may change and distort interpretations of recordings of the past. The past in itself does not eternally recur. What eternally replenishes is trivalent Consciousness, empathetically throwing and choosing among patterns and interations of Y, N, and I, i.e., apprehensions, appreciations, and indifference. Capacity to care or not care about Y or N is the foundation of all beingness, consciousness, and substantive existentiality of dimensions of relatively measurable time, space, matter, and energy. The aboriginal Source is the trivalent capacity for consciousness.  "I" do not identify with my past record, but interpret it.  The "I" that identifies with my present body does not end with my present body; it simply ceases to identify with my present body and transitions instead to identify with and interpret some other perspective and context --- which will, in some way, participate and connect with the record-flux-cone of my past.
.

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

What good is done by relabeling America's problem as crony socialism instead of crony capitalism? Just where are these capitalists who don't engage in cronyism? Where are these corporate businessmen who don't lobby for cheap illegal labor, or who don't lobby for regulations to grease the way to exporting American industry? Where are these Republicans who are going to compete with Democrats by foregoing crony campaign bucks? Telling politicians to just say no to crony bucks is not even as effective as telling kids to just say no to drugs.


The goose is dead. What remains is just some hissy fussing over feathers. Our problem is not "big" government, per se. Our problem is stupid government that's owned by corrupt interests that're disloyal to any assimilating sense of decency. Stupid government for stupid voters immersed in stupidity by stupid professors. The parable of the tower of Babel was common knowledge millenia ago. But a mess of really stupid people thought the problem with Babel was not enough diversity. The maxim used to be, Don't trust anyone over 30. It needs to be, Don't trust anyone who thinks modern liberal profs are really liberals, don't trust anyone who thinks modern socialists are not bloody communists, and don't trust anyone who thinks Maher is funny. I get no hope in the idea that the fall of America can be stayed by taking care to label the political epidemic of cronies as one of socialism. What modern politician, corporatist, or typical prof is not a crony or a crony abettor!? I get no hope from Libertarians who think the fall of America will be stayed if we just get enough people to read Atlas Shrugged. Replacing crony government with crony international corporatism is NOT going to be a salver.

We need to get smart, focused, and committed. We're not going to beat Socialists just by playing with labels and eliminating regulations. We're need to eliminate stupid regulations (and some entire Federal Departments), but we also need some smart regulations: for border enforcement, smart trade, and recall of congressional delinquents.

Anonymous said...

America is ill and is being eaten alive by crony buzzards. McCain-Feingold was unable to help. The more power that is centralized, the more the temptation and pressure for cannibals to sell out relatives, friends, and countrymen. Once power is centralized and once that power is held by crony cannibals, more centralization cannot cure such moral infirmity. Crony buzzards now hold incredibly disproportionate and centralized power, wealth, and propaganda media. The cure to such power to control the minds of the masses is not more centralization, nor is the cure in hoping to elect better leaders from among politicians mainly financed by crony buzzards. Ordinary people will not be able to unite to elect enough central leaders to restore sanity and decency. The cure is not in giving more power to central government, but in taking power away from central governors. The people of each state, county, and municipality, and their local representatives, need to demand and take the right to recall congressional delinquents. If constitutional amendments are necessary to restore such re-balancing, so be it. So long as crony buzzards can elect crony delinquents, the people must demand the local right to recall and remove such delinquents. For that cure to be effective, each delinquent so shamed must forever be barred from again being touted as standard bearer for that office. If there is a better way to check and balance the power that has been mongered by crony buzzards, I have not fathomed it. Without such a check, cronies will simply continue to replace one another along a stream of phantoms.

Anonymous said...

Anyone who cares for their children wants a decent society with generally assimilated values. The problem is not with social assimilation of values, but with overly central, arbitrary enforcement of values. The problem is not big government, but overly central, intrusive government. The Feds have no business doing a lot of things! With that, Conservatives agree. But local government, societies, clubs, churches, and families DO have business and interests. Some here seem to say Libertarians only want respect for the Constitution. But most Conservatives are already on board for that. I suspect Libertarians are hardly satisfied to restrict Feds from trying to legislate morality. Were they honest, most would admit they don't want anyone telling them what they can or can't do -- at any level. They think their second-hand smoke is harmless, and moral laws can't (or shouldn't) protect kids. Indeed, they think adults superintending kids (as with the Ten Commandments) is the cause of much of the crime and misery of the world. Maaybe even like child abuse. Sort of like developed economies supervising to preclude toddler-depsots from accessing nukes is supposed to show wrongheaded fault in developed economies for the blowback. It's the toddler mindset that, "You bad adults made me hurt myself!" Apparently, its a language-sin of some kind to lump Objectivists, Libertarians, Trustafarians, Muggles, and Old Toddlers all together. What --- are Objectivists any less vocal about not wanting anyone at any level telling them what to do? Is there some political distinction that makes a significant difference? As near as I can see, grown-up Libertarian Constitutionalists can be just as comfortable under a Conservative label as a Libertarian one. So, what do Libertarians mean to teach, when they strike their pose? Is there some kind of inside, well developed, common definition? Can someone state it succinctly, so I don't have to read extended Harry Potter lore? What I get is this: I can cram just as much weed as I want, both for me and your kid, and there's nothing you should do to slow me down, you Neo-Con.