.
Regarding melted pots of crayon colors:
Regarding melted pots of crayon colors:
.
Genesis 1:3: Let there be light: and there was light. Hebrew: יְהִי אוֹר (yehiy 'or). Latin: fiat lux. Greek: γενηθήτω φῶς (or genēthētō phōs).
.
Fiat lux: May light better be conceptualized as something that arises and persists in respect of nothing more than an appreciation of consciousness? But mere conscious will cannot push a penny up a door. So how could mere consciousness harness substance? Can mere appreciation alter substance? Or is substance, such as light photons, some kind of thing-in-itself, independent of consciousness, in respect of which consciousness merely "emerges," as an entirely dependent derivative? But is it coherent and consistent (non-contradictory) to reason or believe -- in sense or faith -- that any substance, however split or fundamental, can really abide as an independent thing-in-itself, i.e., a (independent?) unit or block that can be applied (non-independently?) to relate to or build more encompassing and fluxing things and holisms? Isn't that a walking contradiction that "makes sense" only in respect that some perspective of consciousness conceptualizes it, AS IF it makes sense? Can any thing, principle, or definition "make sense" ... apart from a context that entails sense of consciousness?
.
Conceptualize Consciousness as abiding in a void, then imaging or beginning with a single point, pulling (imaging?) the point into a line, folding the line to define and occupy a 3-D corner, then pulling a width out along the length of the line that defines each side of the corner, in order to define and occupy a fleshed out corner (half a box). Such a 3-D half-box could be correlated for signifying, graphing, and mapping all sorts of spatial 3-D images, concepts, and representations: Points, lines, planes, boxes, spheres, undulations, twists, parameters, constraints. If sequentially-functioning, term-transpositioning math is added, a dimension of Time would be implicated. Then representations could include spins, orbits, entanglements, jumps, conversions, wavelengths, frequencies, amplitudes, intensities, random bouncings, chaotic and fractal patterns of unfoldings, collapses to vibrating sustainabilities, evolutionary sorting out of the "most fit," avatars for "talking back," etc.
.
Does conceptual capacity of consciousness for imaging representations and models of relations implicate a 5th dimension, i.e., a Consciousness Dimension, which is qualitative, not itself subject to quantitative measure? Is Consciousness the qualitative "thing" that, given a context, both stirs colors together and separates them? Is the different light frequency that separates each color mere byproduct of a field of conscious imaging, or is consciousness mere byproduct of a substantive physics that avails different frequencies for separate colors of light? I doubt one can "know," but one can conceive for various purposes from various points of view within various contexts. What is the purpose for conceptualizing a Consciousness Dimension? Answer: To explicate a "real" basis for empathy among perspectives, i.e., a qualitative contextual field for moral interfunctioning.
.
.
An article that may support a supposition of darkness and degrees of darkness being dependent upon the life form perceiving it (there being no such thing as a darkness particle and the tree falling in the woods producing semantic arguments if not sound). The research concerns perception dimensions. See http://www.ploscompbiol.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pcbi.0030179.
. Brightness and Darkness as Perceptual Dimensions
Abstract Top
A common-sense assumption concerning visual perception states that brightness and darkness cannot coexist at a given spatial location. One corollary of this assumption is that achromatic colors, or perceived grey shades, are contained in a one-dimensional (1-D) space varying from bright to dark. The results of many previous psychophysical studies suggest, by contrast, that achromatic colors are represented as points in a color space composed of two or more perceptual dimensions. The nature of these perceptual dimensions, however, presently remains unclear. Here we provide direct evidence that brightness and darkness form the dimensions of a two-dimensional (2-D) achromatic color space. This color space may play a role in the representation of object surfaces viewed against natural backgrounds, which simultaneously induce both brightness and darkness signals. Our 2-D model generalizes to the chromatic dimensions of color perception, indicating that redness and greenness (blueness and yellowness) also form perceptual dimensions. Collectively, these findings suggest that human color space is composed of six dimensions, rather than the conventional three.
.
4 comments:
The only sympathy in the Left is sympathy for the Devil as a free spirit artiste. The difference is this: Football is a macho sport for teaching loyalty to a team effort. Had Sandusky been an artiste or a ballet instructor, who, instead of denying, had simply said he was trying to spread love in a cold world, then the Left would have rallied. The only "principle" is identification with a perp who is an artiste. The Left identifies with the misfit artiste when up against the macho Right. The Left is not collectivist in terms of loyalty for making collective sacrifice. Rather, the Left is collectivist only in terms of taking the collective sacrifices of others. Had the boys in the shower been men, the Left would have complained that the uproar was just Rightwing homophobia. It's a waste of time to look for loyalty or principles in the Left. Leftists have no more principles than a hedge operator: the principle to favor that which lights up evil as artiste against all decent principles. Don't assume Leftists are only misguided. Many are acutely conditioned to default to evil. It's Not About What Was Done; It's About Who Was Involved. If a club of Hollywood directors were found to frequent orgies with rich Saudis and their child boyfriends, who in the Left would not be outraged were anyone to dare to make a big deal about it? America is close to becoming top heavy in its electorate with pure reprobates, for whom very little is considered abnormal when it's done by atristes and minorities.
It turns out, after all, that representative governance is not able to absorb unlimited quantities of wretched refuse from teeming shores. How many voters are uninformed, idiotic, or corrupt? Given such a base, who wins? Answer: Hedge nasters of cheap bribes and ridicule. Why? Because the media cheer squad is now mainly owned by such hedge masters. The problem is not that Republican candidates make gaffes. The problem is that their gaffes are ridiculed while the gaffes of the most ignorant and corrupt party are ignored ... at least, when they're not celebrated. The prodigious weight we stunble under is the dead weight of a breeding majority of well-connected derelicts, deviants, and distributionists. America's new wretched base and its cheap labor masters and traders intend to level the middle class and make wretchedness the rule of the world. We're the luscious apple of the new oligarchy's eyes. It may well turn out that it's simply too late now for any nation to get control over its borders, currency, and trade. The era of nations will be replaced by an era of hedge funders and corporate gangsters. They will promote diversity and disintegation to try to ensure that no middle class will ever again assimilate an efficacious sense of human freedom, dignity, nation, or culture. History will be re-written to protray America's Founders as sons of satan.
I want neither to be ruled by monopolists of governmental force nor by monopolists of corporate force. People need to own the property they invest their efforts in and to be incentived to work. But most things reach points of diminishing returns when pushed too far. When wealth is favored to buy government and to cannibalize it to unfriendly regimes, that goes too far. Checks and balances are needed, but none are in place to protect human freedom and dignity against those who wish to rule the masses by governmental force, nor against those who wish to privately or corporately own all means of production and governance. More and more, America, its politicians, and its resources are owned by persons and regimes that are the antithesis of human decency. Yet, no one wants to restrict the pell mell sell out to them.
Shutter the Departments of Energy, Education, and Commerce. They're just fronts for selling out America. End most corporate welfare. Provide socialized health care and draft new doctors whose educations are financed by government to serve in it for x years before being allowed to go into private practice. End corporate taxes against domestic corporations, but tax corporate outflows that send money and resources out of country. End the income tax, but keep death taxes. Begin a national progressive tax on individual consumption, totaled yearly. Result: a free America, incentived workers, checks against disloyal corporatists and oligarchs. Otherwise, how in heaven's name does it help human decency to trade government masters in exchange for new, non-American masters who will simply own government (which is what we are rapidly falling to)? The pols who champion unfettered corporate wealth just want to replace crony socialist masters with crony corporatist masters. The pols who champion unfettered community organizing just want to replace crony corporatist masters with crony socialist masters. Theyr'e the same, single-dimensional alliance: Enlist dupes to allow elites to divide, cannibalize, and rule the middle class. When it comes to preserving human liberty, is there a dime's worth of difference between single-dimensional dupes for national socialists versus dupes for international corporatists?
Everything central gov touches beyond national defense, enforcement of borders, interstate crime control, and maintenance of interstate roadway infrastructure turns to ashes. Put a fork in it. It's done. If it could be trusted, a safety net for health and social security would be nice. However, given the recruited stupidity of our electorate, the disloyalty of crony and sociopathic capitalists, and the easy corruption of politicians, central government simply cannot be trusted.
Post a Comment