Levitating With Math

ROMNEY:  I will go with Romney and see if I can help cheer him to the task.
.
CHAOS:  As for chaos:  Is that which manifests out of chaos determined by purely quantitative equations for mixes of Nature, or by a mathematically-conserved reconciliation among qualitative perspectives of Character? To me, the notion of chaos implicates an aspect of unpredictability, yet also of appreciative anticipation.
.
NATURE OF MEASURABLE SUBSTANCE:  No one knows, or has even been able to model or define, a system of terms for purely physical "things" upon which math can operate, which is complete, coherent, and consistent. Take any term to which math is applied, whether it be: real particle, virtual particle, fermion, boson, photon, electron, positron, graviton, matter, energy, mass, information, conservation, dimension, relative direction, relative spin, angular momentum, space, time, curvature, force, attraction, repulsion, neutrality, relative radiation, relative station, point, length, width, depth, sequence, overlap, vector, charge, spin, orbit, roll, relative orbit, clockwise to roll, counterclockwise to roll, polarity, entanglement, wave frequency, wave length, wave amplitude, wave intensity, wave vibration, reinforcement, exclusion, annihilation, direct current, alternating current, order, disorder, expansion, contraction, steady state, discrete, continuous, re-normalization, etc.
.
PRACTICAL TINKERING:  For each term, we have no definition that is complete, coherent, or consistent to any single model or system of thought. For example, all of matter, energy, space, and time may be conceptualized in respect of a system of discrete and continuous spins, orbits, and rolls. Yet we have no way to know, define, or limit that which is being spun, orbited, or rolled, nor that which is doing the spinning, orbiting, and rolling. Inside each spin, there abides no substance apart from spins transitioning within spins. EVEN SO, WE ARE ABLE TO TINKER ALONG WITH OUR PRACTICAL DERIVATIONS AND APPLICATIONS OF MATHEMATICAL RELATIONSHIPS!
.
QUALITY OF THINGS:  In other words, we can usefully derive and apply mathematical equations and relationships without needing to know or believe that there are any "things-in-themselves" (or ultimate particles) to which such math is being applied. Rather, experience of practical application and intuition indicates that Math plus SOME QUALITY (which is not in itself quantitatively definable), is all that is needed in order for us to spin out our lives and applications and to leverage our inventions.
.
ADOPTION OF UNIVERSALLY COMMON THING, PARTICLE, SUBSTANCE, SPIN, GEOMETRY, OR MATH:  This is what leads me to believe that the principle by which mass is transferred is not ultimately related to any particular particle or thing in itself, but instead to an algorithm that is adopted and applied to our universe of qualitatively shared experience. That algorithm will apply regardless of regress of spin.  We act and apply our math AS IF there abide real physical things, yet the ultimate basis for signifying and tracing our interfunctioning seems to abide in respect of communications among particularized perspectives that, in themselves, are derivative of an attraction between the qualitative and an algorithm.
.
NATURE V. CHARACTER:  Battles among political and social moralists seem to relate to intuitions and interpretations regarding what is or should be the character of that qualitative.  I think those battles participate in defining chaos, but I don't think one can avoid such battles by deferring to chaos.
.
*************************
.

SENSE AND NO-SENSE:  There is no sense, spin, representation, or conservation to be spun, represented, or conserved without a system-imposed capacity to sense, spin, represent, and conserve.

.

CROSS SPINNING FORMS:  Imagine a holistic system that entails a form shaped like a circular string in space, with a cylindrical tube in motion around it, which, on closer inspection, shows to consist of a flurry of alternating strings, circulating in opposing directions, away from the center versus towards the center. What would conserve and guide such a system?
.
UNIVERSAL FIELD:  Moreover, suppose the cylindrical tube itself is in a spin-orbit-roll:  Would not that associate with a common field throughout the tube, a sort of universal field?  Would not such field express counter-part particles, associated with a most fundamental spin-particle?  Would not such a fundamental particle manifest standard, relational-transitional properties?
.
UNIVERSAL DRAG, INERTIA, GRAVITY, MASS:  Would not spin-drag and cross-rotation associate with continuous and discrete spatial variations and sequential lags in local expressions and representations of expressions?  Thus, it would seem that no local model or map of space-time geometry could reliably, precisely, completely coordinate with local territory in all respects.

.

UNIVERSE IN CLASS OF ITSELF AS LIVING GEOMETRY:  Yet, there would seem to be no sense to be sensed, without a holistic system of geometry that mathematically reconciles principles for conserving and transitioning geometries for (1) forms being spun, (2) forms associated with the doing of spin, and (3) perspectives of forms representing and sensing forms being spun.  Yet, such reconciliation seems beyond complete decipher to the partial perspective of any mortal.  Is the geometry of the Holism a kind of "living math," i.e., a class of itself, being the only class that can possibly understand its math?

.
SEPARATION IN APPEARANCES OF SIGNIFICATIONS:  The appearance of local variations in geometry is necessary in order to avail separation in perspectives of consciousness.

.

INCOMPLETENESS OF EVERY LOCAL PERSPECTIVE:  Differences in relative angular spin can represent local geometries of direction, curvature, reinforcement, attraction, exclusion, repulsion, annihilation, relative radiation, relative station. Each local part and property of spin is a (incomplete?) representation of a conserving and guiding reconciliation of the whole system. Each local and particular spin within the systemic geometry is simultaneously (1) an expression of its separateness and (2) a (incomplete?) representation of its systemic sponsor. Whether it is alternatively sensed as particle or representation depends on perspective and purpose.  As local particle, it can be quantitatively measured.  As holistic representation, it can be (incompletely) qualitatively appreciated.  Regardless, some aspect of the system itself asserts capacity to factor it, both quantitatively and qualitatively.

.
********************
.
FUNDAMENTAL PARTICLE:  Does the universe, as a class or field of itself, define a fundamental particle to which the math of geometry can be applied, even by mortals, to derive how the universe traces and spins out its paths and relations?

.

DARK SUBSTANCE:  Is the qualitative "thing" that is spinning or being spun Dark Substance? Does it fill, occupy, or guide all spin, so that it reconciles and evolves layers of spin within spin, overlapping and crossing with crosses of spin?

.

ITERATIVE SPIN LAG:  Does spin lag set up varying iterations, layers, levels, and cross overlaps of competing species of fields, spins, and sub-spins, which average to take on characteristics of one another, until some (or one) come to overpower all neighbors and blow them to singular or relative insignificance?  A mother universe need not disappear to make way for a singular new universe.  It only need be blown into relative insignificance or dark immeasurability.  Once black holes are twisted to agglomerate within a system, they could consume and spit out new universes, from which the laws of our universe would be measurable only in dark, indirect, aggregate.  The dark substance of our universe may be the remnant effects of our having previously been consumed by a black hole.

.
*********************
.
POTENTIAL:  Of every spin that is manifested, traced, and focused to be perceived (represented, sequenced, and recorded), there is potential for mathematical measure. That measure will correlate with the situational capacity for the spin to be perceived. No correlation will ever avail a mortal’s perception of zero spin, because no zero spin is perceptible. Math that correlates with measurable spin will never avail cancellation of infinities to measure a “thing” precisely at zero. Finding zero to measure is not the same as measuring a zero. Parts of space-time may appear to be quantitatively empty, but they are not devoid of qualitative potency.
.
CORRELATIVE RELATIONS:  Some property of the relation (dance of feedback?) between spin and perception requires that parts appear AS IF they were “things” to be spun, even though there is no-thing that is measurable within each spin — except more spin. No method of measure ever completes a purpose of a mortal to measure the “ultimate fundamental thing.” That which is experience-able suggests this is because the ultimate thing is not quantitative, but qualitative.
.
MARKER:  Yet, without reference to some “marker” (fundament) of what is being spun, a mortal cannot conceive of a measurable spin about a point, axis, string, or additional spin. So, WHAT “completes” that marker? Is what is being spun “just” another spin within more spins, or is it meta-idealization, some kind of living math, or some participatory entity that is spinning and/or being spun, which is some-meta-how in a “class of itself”? Is it itself quantitatively measurable, or is it only qualitatively experience-able?
.
HOW:  How does the Fundament guide or determine such traces, signs, and significations of its participation which are measurable? Well, we don’t know. Yet, we somehow participate in a dance of qualitatively appreciative feedback. What a thinking human being means by “moral” pertains to how we interpret what we should appreciate. Morality implicates thinking, judging, choosing, i.e., taking ownership and responsibility for oneself. It does NOT implicate sub-human adoption of a permanent policy of leaving such determinations to one’s pretended betters, messengers, or conniving mobsters (“community organizers” and “free-trading-crony-corporatists).
.
HIAWATHA INSIDE-OUTSIDE:  Thinking about what lies deepest "inside" a particle seems like thinking what lies "outside" our universe. Some aspect or function abides that requires that every potential for manifestation must be associated with a potential for perception or recordation. Unless perception or recordation could be associated, no particular thing manifests into signification. A zero manifestation cannot in itself be perceived, recorded, or manifested, because it does not exist as such. A manifestation that cannot be associated with a perception or recordation does not quantitatively exist.
.
REGRESSIVE RECESSION:  Manifestations are availed for various perceptions and recordations of "inside" and "outside." However, no such manifestations are availed for perception or recordation for ultimate particles, within which there would be no potential for a smaller particle, nor for universes outside our own. Rather, mathematical measure seems always to avail a smaller particle or a further expansion of our universe. Some aspect of the system with which we participate imposes limits to what can be perceived and recorded, such that no ultimate particle, nor any extraneous universe, is perceptible. Rather, the act of venturing to look for ever smaller particles or ever further distances seems simultaneously to be associated with the bringing of such particles and distances into experience. As mortals, we are capacitated to follow and perceive only that which has been prepared for us to perceive.
.
THE MODERN HIAWATHA, by George A. Strong:
He killed the noble Mudjokivis.
Of the skin he made him mittens,
Made them with the fur side inside,
Made them with the skin side outside.
He, to get the warm side inside,
Put the inside skin side outside.
He, to get the cold side outside,
Put the warm side fur side inside.
That's why he put the fur side inside,
Why he put the skin side outside,
Why he turned them inside outside.
.
CONTEXT OF CONSCIOUS PURPOSEFULNESS: Conceptualize a gravitational globe that spins about a north-south axis. Above the equator, toilets will be seen to flush counterclockwisel below the equator, clockwise. This is because the frame of reference would be the globe, itself. However, what if the spinning globe, instead of traversing eastbound around the Sun, were to traverse a northbound path. In respect of the northbound path, all perspectives on the globe would view it as spinning clockwise in relation the the northbound vector. Now consider states of being asleep and dreaming versus being awake. While asleep, with no one else to share your experience, and taking your own body (globe) as your frame of reference, your dream may seem real. Once you are awake, so that you must include other persons in your frame of reference, you recognize "that reality," FOR THAT PURPOSE, as being superior.
.
**********************
.
CIRCULAR DOVETAILING OF COLLECTIVE DREAMING WITH COLLECTIVE EXPERIENTIALITY:
.
TAKING THE INSIDE MEASURE OF THE HIGGS: I suspect “physical things” can be concocted to be perceived “inside” a receding point, but only with participation (resonant identification?) in apprehending a frame of reference in relation to which to “observe” such things. Upon each such concoction, the point itself becomes no longer a point, but a spin-orbit-roll around its own centrally organizing point (or principle of mathematical algorithm), and so on. In ultimate respect, to search for the smallest (or most fundamental) physical point is as vain as to search for the end of the rainbow, the bottommost turtle, or the smallest mathematical decimal. Even so, in participatory respect, to seek to flesh out such searches seems to yield astonishing vistas along the way, including possibilities for music that may be subject to alternating, qualitative interpretations of music, noise, and indifference.
.
INNER TUBE: Imagine a system of spins that, from a vantage, looks like an inner tube. Imagine it consists of nothing more measurable than spins crossing spins, within spins crossing spins, thereby presenting a 4-D appearance to an observer that he is participating in a sequential series of continuous and discrete relations within a mathematically geometrical web. If measurement pertains only to spins within and crossing spins, either individually or in aggregate, then no participating observer “within the tube” would ever be able to see or take the measure of any smallest or most encompassing among such spins.
.
IDENTIFYING WITH ADOPTED SPINS: This leads one to suspect that no spin exists, purely objectively, in itself, unadopted by a sponsoring observer or recorder. Moreover, no sponsoring observer or recorder exists, unidentified with a focus and context of spins. Still, each observer seems to have capacity to proceed along an infinite way (or relative direction), AS IF there were a smallest and a most encompassing spin. How may this be conceptualized as possible? How is it that no smallest or most encompassing spin is ever quite reached, but always recedes? How is it, that as each new and smaller level of significance and each more encompassing field or order of magnitude is discovered, it seems as if its “residents” had always existed?
.
DOVETAILING BETWEEN LEVELS OF SIGNIFICANT EXPERIENTIALITY: Has some cone of shared experience been perpetually prepared before us, and is it being infinitely prepared before us, to allow us continuously to discover new takes on worlds and levels of significance and mathematical magnitude? Why is it that “math is incomplete?” Does our shared experience phase-shift, in imperceptible correlation with our perspectives, back and forth, in feedback with a continuously encircling (or looping) “Collective Unconscious” (God?), in dreams within dreams and in shared realities within shared realities?
.
SPINS EXPANDING IN CONCERT WITH PERCEPTION: What lies beyond (or “interpenetrating” with) the most encompassing “inner tube” of associated spins imaginable? Does the “inner tube itself” spin, orbit, and roll? If so, what, beyond itself, would it spin in relation to, if, by definition, every spin that can be perceived is part of our shared universe?
.
GUIDING COLLECTIVE UNCONSCIOUS: The “answer” seems to be that our “entire” world “spins” and signifies in relation to a non-measurable, qualitative, “dark,” “collective unconscious,” which, by its mindful dreams, images, and imaginings, guides and prepares the way for our experiences of various levels of measurably shared “reality.”
.
***********************
.
GEOMETRICAL CLASS-SET LOGIC: Class-set logic is never complete, quantitatively.
.
NO EXTERNAL STANDARD AGAINST WHICH TO MEASURE THE HOLISM:  The spin of the WHOLE TUBE is subject to continuously guiding, Qualitative alteration. There is no external, objective, standard against which to measure it, as a constant, apart from what is needed to preserve identity in consciousness.
.
COLLECTIVE UNCONSCIOUS:  There abides an infinite Quality for imagining, beyond measure in terms of only real numbers, with capacity to imaging the objectively nonsensical, such as time travel, what if, etc.  There abides, in identification with a shared cone of experience, a shared and thus objectively measurable representation of reality, so that such physical reality can be measured and experienced simultaneously from more than one perspective in a sequence.  Imaginary Numbers seem more to pertain to the dreamed and objectively nonsensical.  Real Numbers seem more to pertain to such reality as is subject to shared objectivity.  Real numbers seem more to pertain to quantitative, 4D geometry. Imaginary numbers seem more to pertain to qualitative, collective unconscious.
.
DIMENSIONS FOR REPRESENTING SIGNIFICATIONS: 3D - 4D representations facilitate idealizations of infinite layers and levels of spins within orbits within rolls, conserved in respect of dovetailing levels of real and imaginary significations. 2D representations seem more restricted to levels of spins within orbits, less facilitating of imagination of 3D compressed AS IF it were 2D, etc. 2D representations seem not to avail curve-back, fold-back, loop-back, dovetail-conservation of collective dream with shared reality.
.
FRAMEWORK LAGGING, DRAGING, AND PHASING:  Real math seems to help prepare ways for phasing from old frameworks to old frameworks newly discovered, prepared by a preceding collective unconscious, so phase-in and phase-through remain beyond measurable perception as pertaining to anything that has not been long established.  Because frameworks are subject to constant and continuous change, the math that helps define them is never quantitatively complete.  Spin lag may facilitate entangled iterations, for iteratively representing much the same signification, event, or thing.
.
SELF-FULFILLMENT AND EMPATHY:  To imagine, to conceptualize, is to associate with impartation of spin, which can tend towards becoming self-fulfilling.  What is self-fulfilling is often constricted to less-empathetic layers of idealizations of “selfness,” depending on one's identification of self and self interest.
.

TAKING THE INSIDE MEASURE OF THE GOD PARTICLE

Is that which manifests out of chaos determined by purely quantitative equations for mixes of nature, or by a mathematically-conserved reconciliation among qualitative perspectives of character?  To me, the notion of chaos implicates an aspect of predictability, yet also of appreciative anticipation.
.
I suspect “physical things of nature” can be concocted to be perceived “inside” a receding point, but only with participation (resonance) in apprehending a frame of reference in relation to which to “observe” such things.

.

Upon each such concoction, the point itself becomes no longer a point, but a spin-orbit-roll around its own centrally organizing point (or principle of mathematical algorithm), and so on.

.

In ultimate respect, to search for the smallest (or most fundamental) physical point is as vain as to search for the end of the rainbow, the bottommost turtle, or the smallest mathematical decimal.

.

Even so, in participatory respect, to boldly go, to seek to flesh out such searches, seems to yield astonishing vistas along the way, including possibilities for music, alternatively valued as good, bad, or indifferent, bounded only by imagination of mind for adopting conserving parameters of algorithm.

.

Thereby, each point-cone-field of shared experience may transition through imperceptible wormholes among varying universes, conserved in respect of their own expressions of shared and transition-phasing algorithms.

.

Ultimately, the organizing principle that is measurably shared throughout our universe seems to be geometrically mathematical. The only “point-particular substance” seems to be qualitatively experiential, yet immeasurable, Mind.
.
Math based geometry of space-time seems to be secondary to a need to allow consciousness to adopt varying perspectives.

.

The basis for moral interaction among particularly expressed perspectives of Mind seems to abide with a qualitatively shared, intuitive injunction: Be empathetic (i.e., communicate that which facilitates and feeds back meaningful freedom and dignity between and among your fellows).

.

This meta-freedom is not a concern of a "ghost in the body," but of a ghost inside the ultimate particle --- for, there is no "thing" there.

,

It's true that the avatar with which your point of view is associated did not itself decide to be born. However, some accumulating reconciler of qualitaitve experience and quantitative significations did so decide. The avatar from which your point of view takes its foci is as artificial or arbitrary as any part or point upon which it happens to focus. That Mind that guides and reconciles the measurable significations that constitute your environment also guides and reconciles the expression of will that participates through the avatar of your body. The process of imbuing avatars to express such apprehension is a process for civilizing an empathetic and self-fulfilling society of participating perspectives of free will.

.

PERPETUAL PLAYER PIANO (LIVING MUSIC AND GEOMETRY)

GEOMETRICALLY ACTUATING MATH FOR 3-D SPIN-ORBIT-ROLLS IN CONTINUOUS SPACE-TIME:
.
All of, and within, our space-time may be conceptualized as consisting of iterative out-foldings of a single POINT of resonance between potential of mind-imagination versus math leveraging, for which a single algorithm may govern our shared point-cone of perceptive experience.  Such resonance is thus capacitated to represent a self-actualizing FIELD of mathematical relations, in which relations among geometrical spins, orbits, and rolls, tracing along geometrical strings of axis, consist of nothing more than capacities of such RESONANCE.  Inside each iteration of spin-orbit-roll, there is nothing, that is, no thing that can reasonably be thought or demonstrated to be purely physical or substantively-measurable-in-itself.  Ultimately, the cosmos is not well modeled after any one physically apparent "thing," because there ultimately is no thing that is in itself physical with which to model or map the cosmos.
.
JUNG AND WHITEHEAD AND PERPETUAL PLAYER PIANO:  Prosaically, the cosmos can be  analogized as being like an unfolding memory of a prehistory of a collective unconscious. QuaNtitative cosmos is like discrete keys on an infinite series of pianos. QuaLitative cosmos is like a piano that continuously images itself, writes music, plays itself, writes more music in response, continuously tunes strings for keys that go out of tune, and proceeds therafter in an endless loop that feeds The Continuous back to The Discrete. The accumulated tightening of each string keeps a record of how its key has been played, while the sum of such records preserves the accumulated context.  Each key and each associated string is of the same identical function: as an iteration of an Actualizing Memory of an image --- an imagined reminder of a memory of separate illusions and possibilities. Appreciation of each note depends not on the reality or relative locus of each key and string, but on the relative flux of the multi-focusing capacity of the cosmos. The keys are quantitatively accumulated and apprehended Before they are played, whereAfter, appreciation of their notes is accumulated for continued qualitative factoring. Thus, the cosmos is not in its particular keys; rather, the particular keys are in the actively-projecting collective unconscious of the cosmos.  The significative aspect of the geometry is quaNtitative; the important aspect of the music is quaLitative.

.
AUTHORING COSMOS:  Each conscious decision, each conscious thought, is appreciated by “self” an instant or so after something of the Cosmos decided to measurably signify and express such decision and thought. This applies even to self awareness of the thought of the thought of the thought, and so on. Something of the Cosmos qualitatively fluxes to appreciate and factor the regress, both as to its quantitative price and as to its qualitative value. Something of the Cosmos conserves and reconciles all such appreciations to present accumulation and representation. That which is measurably signified only as general background is accumulated only mathematically (stored in geometric imagery). That which is consciously appreciated and factored is accumulated qualitatively, among iterative of perspectives, via an ineffable relationship of feedback between the Source of the Cosmos and its means of availing mathematically obedient “physical” significations.

.

CORRELATING MATHEMATICAL VECTORS:  Assuming (or being given) a meta source or quality of substance that can be imaged to be spun, rotated, and pushed, through 3-D space, along a width, depth, and length, in severable 4-D sequences, angular speeds, and angles of address, experienced or measured as continuous, then: Spin-orbit-pushes can meaningfully, geometrically, and mathematically be conceptualized as obeying mathematical vectors, considering some spins to proceed along width, counterclockwise (or clockwise) to a direction of orbit along depth, rolling forward (or backward) to a direction along length. Positive-negative-neutral and forward-backward-stationary permutations are conceptually possible among such 3-D measures of vectors proceeding in 4-D space-time sequences. Moreover, along axis of width, depth, and length, vectors can express variations in relational frequency of spin, orbit, and rolling, as well as variations in relational diameter, foci, multiple foci, amplitude, wavelength, intensity, angular speed, angle of relation, wobble, vibration, alternation, reinforcement, interference, drag, superposition, exclusion, destruction, annihilation, iterative relative proximity-number-pairing-entanglement-dispersal-vector; etc. Thus, it appears that all constraints that follow the same mathematical rules within a shared cone of resonant experience may be represented and expressed in geometry of space-time. All of substantive signification that is quantifiable or measurable may be representable in geometrical forms.

.

PARTICULARS:  A "particle" would be an interpretation (or suppression), as focused for measurement, of either a specific trace of a 1-D location or a 2-D direction, or a statistical analysis of a likely combination of both location and direction. (To perceive a particle, a recorder must take a resonating space-time point of view of the particle's loci, because the particle does not in itself exist, except in respect of how it is made to represent to affect a resonant observer.  The notion of a cone of shared light or experience needs also to take into account shared resonance.)  A "wave" length or wave frequency may be a 2-D interpretation (or suppression) of a 3-D spin-orbit-roll. Digital measuring would be an on-off, switch-like, discrete-measure or counting of a relational revolution of a spin, orbit, or roll. At limits of measure, such measures may be interpreted as “leaping” (in that no spin remains stationary in respect of a mappable 4-D grid of orbits or rolls).
.
SENSING PARTICULARS:  To respond to a particle, the particle must first be expressed by some Source or field that has taken a position for signifying it (or even pre-deciding it, or predeciding a function for randomly later deciding it), in order to take further interest in measuring (suppressing, collapsing, or interpreting) it, in order to feed back further interest in evaluating it, and so on. Thus, a point-particle is a signification that is derivative of a "field" that is availing a point of experiential representation.

.

WEB --- MATHEMATICALLY CONSTRAINED, YET UNLIMITED IN POTENTIAL FOR EXPRESSING PERMUTATIONS:  All such positional and relational significations of spin-orbit-roll, in all possible permutations, are conserved, constrained, and expressed consistent with mathematical formalizations. Moreover, math defines constraints by which each local expression of spin-orbit-roll is conservationally affected by every other expression of spin-orbit-roll that arises in association with its cone of influence. For spins at limits of measure, a unifying formalization would define constraints for possible expression within a web of spin-orbit-roll. Even though such spins would be subject to mathematical constraint, the potential variety of spins that could obey such constraint may be infinite.

.

CONTINUOSITIES BEYOND THE DIGITAL:  Beyond digitally countable spins, there abide orbits and rolls that occur within broader parameters of measure, which are not limited to digital counting, but which can be experienced and measured relatively. These "fields" of orbits and rolls are subject to continuous relativistic re-normalization, to fit the contextual field-frame of reference for the point of view of the experiencing and measuring observer or recorder. Such re-normalization entails a more continuous, less discretely restricted, concept for the physics of measurable significations.

.

FIELD OVERLAPS:  A field interprets trace expressions of particles and applies such interpretations to measure itself. A field or wave cannot measure itself without reference to sub-particulars that comprise it. Ultimately, precise measurement requires reference to tracing of particles to a level of discreteness beyond which further precision is not possible. Those who wish to “unify” the math for measuring spins (particles) with the math for measuring orbits and rolls (fields) are confronted with a dilemma for how to unify what is measurable only discretely with what is measurable continuously (i.e., what seems to be absolutely quantifiable with what seems to be relatively quantifiable). They must imagine a coherent and consistent way to conceptualize spins and particles as being relative, or orbits and rolls and fields as being discrete. Either the atom must be de-grid-ed, or space-time must be re-grid-ed. So far, such a feat has not seemed mathematically available to mortals. (No one has mapped an end to the universe, and no one has extended an atom to the end of the universe.)

.

PARADOX OF THE CLASS OF ITSELF:  Given spin-orbit-rolls, suppose there were a unifying mathematical constraint or construct for their expression (even if knowable only to God). How would such a formulazation account for relative experiences of time and local experiences of gravitational constancy? How would it account for how mass is consistently experienced, transferred, and re-normalized to local experience? May space-time carry some kind of aether-field-property, so that certain mathematical varieties of local spin-orbit-roll are assigned to express certain measurable quantities of substantive mass? Is a mathematical formula available to mere mortals that would prescribe the local mass value that must be associated with each prescribed relation of spin-orbit- roll? (What if our Universe itself spins, orbits, and rolls, relative to other universes within the Cosmos?)

.
************************
.

THINGS MEASURED: The only measurable "thing" inside a spin, orbit, or roll consists of other spins, orbits, and/or rolls, meet to the rational experience of their shared cone of experiential observation. The establishment and sustenance of a form of observer (mankind) may coordinate to limit or stretch parameters for what can unfold to such observers' measuring.  It's not a spin in itself that exists, but a capacity for taking a resonant position whereby the spin may be relationally measured AS IF it were a thing.  Apart from relational resonance with a cone-of-shared-experience observer-recorder, there is No "Thing-In-Itself " that exists inside" any part or particle.

.

SHARED AXES: The sharing of one axis of orbit, as opposed to other axes, is what defines and identifies severability among parts. The smallest possible axis of orbit may be as unlimited as the math that leverages imagination. There may not be a smallest particle, even though there may be a mathematical algorithm that, within a shared cone of experience, must be obeyed in all measurements of orbits.

.

CONSERVING DISCRETE CIRCULATIONS: Spin, orbit, and roll can be conceptualized and experienced as relatively "stationary," when measured about a single shared point-line-axis, like for an atom. A set of orbits defining an atom can also be about a point-line-curve (plane-field) axis, even as the atom itself is rolling beyond a point, expanding forward or contracting back, along a line , a curve, or a series of curves or wobbles. (In a way, if space-time itself is curved, then in that respect no purely 1-D or 2-D roll-along would seem possible, even though, in respect of the limiting speed of light (EMR), there may seem to be a linearly straight roll along.)

.

CONSERVING DIRECTIONAL CIRCULATIONS: Roll, as it proceeds beyond a point axis, along a line or a 3-D wobble in a field of space-time, will not thereby define a particle discretely measurable in respect of a single-point-line axis. Rather, it will trace along a 4-D path of space-time that must be measured and re-normalized in relation to other particles and observer points of reference. Such roll push-pulls and attract-follows proceed along re-normalizing space-time geometry. While circulations about point-line axes bring measurably discrete particles into play, it is the proceeding beyond such point-line axes that brings continuous re-normalization into play.

.

MANAGING RANDOM BILLIARD BALLS: Vast numbers of particles defined in respect of shared point-axes may cluster together, as in the shape of a billiard ball. The billiard ball itself, as a shared mass, may be made, in statistically averaging terms, to be said to spin, orbit, and/or roll, and it may be directed to bounce off other similarly directed billiard balls, each tracing out varying patterns. Results of their smashs up are amenable of statistical prediction. Random opposing spins may produce a variety of unfolding reflections, which, when received by a preserving-perspective of forms, may be interpreted to show forms and shapes. The defining perception of a shape may be considered as part of a series of waves.

.

MASS: A measure of a single spin about a single point-line-axis is a measure of a massless part. As a spin is measured to proceed along a 2-D wave plane or 3-D curve field, a measurable property of "mass" may correlate with attributes of spin that are in some manner of measurable opposition(repulsing, attracting, annihilating, interfering, redefining, reinforcing, intensifying, superpositioning) in respect of a balancing and conserving algorithm.

.

MIND: To the extent pure mind may measure the cosmos, it may be because the cosmos is measurably comprised only of imaginings put to geometric constructs of "mind." However, mind itself may not have capacity to explicate mind itself.

.

Shadows of Writing on the Wall

Writing appears on the wall:

A.I. machines will take away many more jobs.

As jobs vanish, sense of material entitlement based merely on existing will increase.

Genetic load and susceptibility to cataclysms will increase.

Dependence on centralizing mechanisms will increase.

National boundaries will be less recognized.

Loyalty to nations will diminish.

Whether by government or business, people will be more hierarchically organized and dependent and will become less expressive of individual (human) freedom.

Work and activities will be much more monitored by high technology.

Individual freedom will be more constrained.

Science for inducing control over mindsets via pleasure-distractions will flourish.

Politically induced right-think will be more enforced between competing demagogues.

Competition among demagogues will increase.

Old measures will less surely provide solutions.

Fallout will lead to increased factoring of environmental limits.

Literalisms of religions will be more discredited.

Purposefulness will be mocked.

Human freedom and dignity will be devalued.

The spirit of Will will be largely replaced by addictions, despair, and micro management.

Meaningfulness will tend to draw expresson only from those who empathetically intuit that something of the Cosmos is author of their persons and identities.

Spiritualists will tend more so than materialists to want to survive.

If these are the shadows of things that must be, then perhaps the meek will inherit the ant-pile, after all.

Particle-Wave Packets

PARTICLE:  Is a "particle" best conceptualized as simply one of a series of expressions of a 3-D wave, which sustains in such wave a mathematically-descriptive relationship for how it simultaneously SPINS AND ORBITS, sequentially among other such particles within 4-D space-time? Does each mathematically-constrained relationship in spinning and orbiting associate, to lead to combinations with other such particle-waves?   Is there Continuosity within spinning-orbiting particles, yet Digital discreteness between them?  Can all of measurable quantification be reduced to digital logic?  Are such particle-waves "real," or are they merely significative, for conserving mathematical balance in communications among perspectives of consciousness?
.
INTERFUNCTIONING:  May such interfunctioning combinations --- depending on proportionate cross-vectors (relative rotational directions-frequencies-amplitudes-intensities-massiveness-inertia of spinning and orbiting) --- "lead to": re-normalizing; superpositioning; excluding; reacting; capacitating, charging, polarizing, entangling, reinforcing; destroying; repulsing; attracting; accelerating; widening; contracting; dividing; annihilating?   What "causes" such "lead to"?   Is there a system of 3-D waves within 3-D waves, overlapping with 3-D waves, to define a fluxing web for the sequential unfolding and expressing of 4-D space-time?
.
CAUSATION:  Does 4-D space-time "cause" 3-D expressions of particle-waves, or do 3-D expressions of particle-waves cause 4-D space-time? Or are both 4-D space-time and 3-D expressions of particle-waves the unfolding effects of SOME QUALITATIVELY SUPERIOR SOURCE? Are 3-D and 4-D physics ultimately derivative of something qualitatively beyond measurable physics? Are 3-D and 4-D physics non-reconcilable, much as the logic of a class within itself is non-reconcilable, much as a whole is not completely definable by referring only to the sum of its parts?  It does not appear that a notion of quantitatively measurable particle-waves can take a quality of mysticism out of physics.
.

QUALITATIVELY COMPLEX APPREHENSIONS:

- Every experience is coordinated with a measurement (whether observed or recorded).

- At some level, every measurement is taken digitially, in respect of particles.

- Every particle that is expressed at a given place and time in 3-D (relative location and sequence) is a measurable expression of a 4-D field (that is either somehow limited by other fields or carries potential to occupy all accumulated space-time).

- No particle is measured to have been expressed until after its sponsoring field has undertaken to express it.

- No field is measurable, except with particles.

- Every field has qualitative capacity to respond to feedback in its sensing and appreciation of each particle it expresses.

- One field does not sense the particle of another, except in respect that both fields, with respect to such particle, are subsumed or overlapping with a third field.

- Complex fields produce complex particles, complex measurements, and qualitatively complex apprehensions.

- Qualitative apprehensions are not constrained to perimeters marked by particles of an organism's skin.

.
WAVE-PARTICLES:  My imagination is unable to conceptualize a "physical" wave packet --- except possibly as a complex combination of simultaneous spins and orbits. Add clockwise versus counterclockwise and one may get various possible interactions, perhaps somehow "physically" associated with attraction, repulsion, etc etc. Still, I don't quite get why that should offer a solution, unless one assumes complex rotations of "the aether" should account for particular expressions of repulsion versus attraction. However, mathematically-constrained relations among complex iterations of combinations of spins and orbits would seem simultaneously to implicate a 4-D space-time aether.
.
DIGITAL DELAYS BETWEEN QUALITATIVE SPONSORING OF EXPRESSION VERSUS QUANTITATIVE SIGNIFICATION OF EXPRESSION VERSUS QUALITATIVELY APPRECIATIVE FEEDBACK OF SUCH EXPRESSION:  Thinking about delays between decisions and an organism's conscious awareness that it has already made a decision: Similarly, I wonder whether it may be said that no particular observer perceives or measures a field except through its particles, and every particle is availed measurable significance only AFTER it has already, a quantum instant previous, been determined to be expressed by a field? IOW, may particles reasonably be rationalized as significative traces of trends, rather than as being causal in themselves? IOW, would not a quantitative (measurable) expression of a "god-particle" implicate a qualitative (immeasurable) Expresser (god-field bottom-turtle)?
.
PHYSICAL REALITY:  How can Consciousness sense or respond to feedback, unless combinations unfolding and being signified before it are are "physically real"? What does "physically real" mean? Does whatever-it-is that founds math therewith simultaneously capacitate a "real" expression of spins and orbits? Does some qualitative Property of Existence compel (what would otherwise be) Nothingness to manifest and signify measurable, "physical" existence, i.e., mathematical coherence and sequential (spin-orbiting, space-time) consistency?  Measurable significations ("particles") are availed "reality" only insofar as a Source of Consciousness capacitates such particles for representing fluxes it wills to obey mathematical coherence and consistency. Except insofar as Consciousness so wills, it would have nothing by which to experience, imagine, think, or decide. Our particular bodies and brains inhabit differently signified loci for appreciating perspectives and iterations of the Holism, only in respect of its here and now accumulations and experiences.
.

Free Will

FREE WILL:

.

RE-CONCEPTUALIZATION: The idea of “free will” would seem more useful and coherent were it to be re-conceptualized as a non-quantitatively measurable, yet qualitatively experiential, existent, which is not separately particular or coterminous with each apparently separate physical organism.

.

AVATARS: Rather, free will is experienced and appreciated by a Oneism, which finds iterative expression in a perpetual dance among variegated avatars, with which it imbues its fluxing perspectives. Its avatars do not exist in themselves, much less have free will in themselves, nor do they in themselves give expression to free will. Rather, the avatars only give expression to debates the Oneism has with itself, concerning which significations and sequences it should appreciate as being worthy of being nurtured through unfoldings of manifestations.

.

UNFOLDING ADJUDGMENTS OF MERIT: Thus, appreciation, worth, and merit are reconciled to unfolding concerns and guidance of the Oneism. The fluxing favor of expressiveness that seems to coordinate only with each avatar of perspective is, in that respect, as illusory as are the avatars. “In themselves,” the avatars are only fluxing expressions of the Oneism. In themselves, the avatars have no merit. Their only merit abides in how the Oneism’s experience of them is appreciated, synchronized, and reconciled. Thus, there is no eternally, objectively-measurable good or evil, but only such qualitative good or evil as the Oneism may find to be worthy of availing expression, in various sequences and significations. Thus, it is not we avatars who adjudge that which in a given sequence or duration of signification is either good or evil, but the Oneism, as it reconciles its expressiveness through us. Objectively measurable good and evil do not exist. However, qualitatively changing and experiential good and evil do exist ... in respect of unfolding purposes and reconciliations of the Oneism, of which we avatars and measurable substances are agents for availing signification.

.

RECONCILING AMONG AVATARS: Thus, it is appropriate that our organic avatars and measurable substances should avail means through which participatory expression is availed in a dance, during which what is desired is separated in unfolding sequences from what is not. Moral judgment is not to praise or condemn the merit of a particular appearance of avatar-in-itself, but to reconcile that which coheres with the unfolding appreciation and guidance of the Oneism.

.

COIN OF THE QUALITATIVE HOLISM AND THE QUANTITATIVE SUM OF PARTS: Conscious conceptualizing, thinking, appreciating, and deciding do not appear by themselves, nor as precise compatibalists or coterminants with any minor substance or beingness. The Oneism is not thinking the storm, nor is it lost in the storm. Rather, the quantitative substance of the storm is "the other side of the coin" of the qualitative consciousness of the storm. Unfolding substantive signification is the feedback-sum side of a coin, the other side of which is experienced and expressed as qualitatively-unifying, conscious-will.

.

OVERLAPPING SEQUENCES OF CHOICES: The substantive-significative-measurable side of the coin of beingness can be conceptualized as being determined by (1) presets (past choices), (2) randomizing algorithms and patterns most fit to unfold out of chaos (non-choices which will continue to affect patterns for the future), and/or (3) concurrent conscious choicemaking (present choices) by the Oneism (however sequentially delayed its choices may be in finding manifestation through measuring avatars).

.

WILL IS EXPRESSED AS UPSHOT: Thus, the unfolding of subjective consciousness gives expression to a quality of Will, which is not entirely reducible to quantitative determination or control, but necessitates respect for qualitative boundaries. That is, Will is experienced along “qualitatively open bounds,” even though artifacts of its significations are measurable only in respect of quantitatively closed bounds. Thus, a quality of spirit, purpose, value, merit, and will abides with a quantity of digitally-measurable, quantum-leapiing substance. Merit abides in being empathetically intuitive and respectful of unfolding purposes of the Oneism. There is no reason to suppose that that experience of consciousness is purely epiphenomenal, as opposed to itself being a cause-contributing, merit-appreciative factor, both from the perspective of the whole and from the perspective of the part. When a local state of being is brought to a quality of conscious appreciation, there is no reason to suppose that such experience would not become part of the causal environment or system, to be assimilated and factored for feedback appreciation to the experience of later sequencing aspects of consciousness.

.

FLUX ENTAILS LIBERTY: To avail expression of any consciousness, the Oneism must flux. To flux, the Oneism cannot always equally empower every human perspective. Human beings tend to abide as temples of receptivity to such empathetic intuitiveness. To choke off the receptive expression of such empathetic intuition is to choke off only a local perspective of the freedom and dignity of the Oneism. However, it is also to reduce a human being to a status of subhuman. Were every perspective reduced to an equality, things would not simply be uninteresting; things would not be experienced at all.
.
DIGITAL DELAY BETWEEN QUALITATIVE RECONCILIATION AND QUANTITATIVE EXPRESSION:
May it reasonably be said that no particular observer perceives or measures a field except through its particles, and every particle is availed measurable significance only AFTER it has already, a quantum instant previous, been determined to be expressed by a field?

A unitary field determines how each particle is to be expressed, before the particle is expressed (manifested).

In that sense, no manifested particle is causal.

Rather, all are merely significative, though their measurable significations show trends and contexts.

Sequential feedback to the field for its appreciation of trends, contexts, sub-fields, and measured expressions is subjugated to the field’s unfolding qualitative reconciliations.

Thus, communication fluxes back and forth in apprehensions between the qualifying field and its digitized iterations, between consciousness and its perspectives, between holistic (superior) God and particular (inferior) avatars of God.

Mortal notions of "substantive causation" simply do not apply to the conserving, synchronizing, reconciling Holism.

While separate avatars (quantitative bodies) do not themselves have free will, there is no good reason to believe they are not nurtured as way stations for overlapping transfers of perspectives (qualitative minds) of free will.

.

GOD'S MATH:

Does any substance or principle limit the possible number of different kinds of "bosons" that can function as way stations for the transfer of measurable expressions of a zoo of potential particles and forms of mass?

If one kind of particle functions as way station for signifying the transfer of specific bits of measurable mass, may another kind of particle function as way station for signifying transfers of "dark mass" (whose associative effects are measurable only indirectly, in aggregates)?

Might that particle be associated with organizing and transferring expressions of consciousness?

.

BAYES:

At best, temporal-notions-of-causation pertain to tinkering, to detect and manage trends unfolding out of chaos into sensible manifestations.

That is, trends for perspectives of consciousness will tend, trivially, to follow trends for expressions of happenstance.

Depending on level and layer of field of analysis, some trends simply happen presently to be much more reliable than others.

For that, Baye’s Theorem may be more of an observation about trivial happenstance than a principle for running God.

Indeed, does not a quantitative expression of a God-particle implicate a qualitatively expressing God-field?

.

DEATH:  Particles and bodies are necessarily temporal, for they, taken in sum, comprise only digital, trace significations of all accumulated information and measurement up to the last present sequence. As each present signification is replaced in sequence by a following digital signification, particular representations of the past must be constantly and organically reconciled and reorganized. So they will be different. A phase-change in organization of an observationally-focused organism will result in phase-out or transformation of that particularly formed organism. Phase change will not, however, result in phase out of the Source of conscious field that temporally fluxed about that organism.

.
HOLISM SELF IMPOSED LIMITS: The Holism experiences freedom to decide what to appreciate and reinforce within a framework it accepts for imposing conservational limits. Only by imbuing avatars for accepting such framework does it capacitate and signify coherent purposefulness. In respect of wormholes for releasing the Holism to other pursuits, neither the Higgs nor any standard model can ever be a complete answer. God cannot confine or explain God.

.

STANDARD FRAMEWORK FOR SIGNIFICATIONS: Whatever the nature of the parts that comprise the universe, there seem to be reliably measurable in interfunctionings in respect of the mathematical framework of a standard model. That standard model seems to be coordinate with reliable measurement.

.

ORGANIC AVATAR IDENTITY: Particular consciousness is imbued with its identity by being capacitated with levels and layers of organically polarized significations.  Consciousness is not coterminous with perimeters of skin.

.

DANCE OF FEEDBACK: The Holism decides from the perspective of each organism what the organism should do. The Holism does not predetermine or foresee how what the organism chooses to do will actually be successful or reconciled or valued once the decision is completed.
Once completed, the Holism evaluates both from holistic perspective and, later, from perspective of consciousness of the organism. And overlappingly reconciles ... Thus makiing the experience of the present one of feedback as well as of overlapping continuity.

.

APPEARANCE OF CONTINUITY IN TIME: Why is the present experienced as continuous and connected? Why is memory of the past connected and represented to the present? How can discrete states be experienced with appreciation of a consciousness that is contemporaneous with the present?

.

GOODNESS CHANGES: Things are not good in themselves, except as they are thought good, and thoughts necessarily flux and change within a system of conservation.
A Holism fluxes to pursue unfolding experiences of goodness, and our human bodies and brains are only avatars for signifying the communication of its changing purposes. We have free will only in respect of how the Holism speaks and operates through signifiers.
Insofar as we express identification with God’s trending purposes, this may be expressed as temporally “good.”

.

EXPENDABILITY CHANGES: Regardless, all avatars are ultimately expendable, for re-assimilation with the Holism.

.

FRAMEWORK WORMHOLES: Apparently, we are given to derive the standard model for this universe. Perhaps there is a meta-trend, pursuit, or ideal: the establishment and preservation of a decent civilization of freedom and dignity. Perhaps God, through us, will guide ways to establish wormholes to change or phase to alternative models and universes.

.