First Turtle

.

Re: "multiverses allow any and all solutions, therefore everyone is right"

.
INDUCTIVE EMPIRICISM:
.
I concord. The idea of "CAUSE" (and responsibility) breaks down when pushed beyond the fuzzy limits within which we abide. What "causes" Will? Is "Conscious Will" a tri- or bi-valent AC-DC hermaphrodite, with capacity to flux and present as cause AND effect, depending on chosen purpose of medial context and frame of reference? (Is the Cosmos both its cause and its effect?) Can Will express the penny, while pushing the penny up the door? Can a form or pattern express Will to conserve itself? Must not every pattern that does conserve itself give expression to Will that it be preserved? Why are any patterns at all preserved?
.

Well, we can model a greedy "explanation": There was a Big Bang, secondary to incredible forces, and those forces expanded outwardly, spinning out all manner of patterns. Out of this chaos, natural selection requires that some orbits and patterns prove more fit to prevail than others. Problem is: This model assumes-the-spinning-out-of-assumptions is some kind of higher order "explanation." (It has no way to define "the fittest" except trivially or tautoligically: That which happens to spin out is the fittest.) Second Problem: "Force" is another word for "cause," and we don't know much about CAUSE. Not the first cause, nor any cause thereafter. Rather, what we rely on are empirical observations about replicable CORRELATIONS, and then we model those correlations as "causes." (Oddly enough, as people who believe Conscious Will is only an inferior derivative of natural causes, many scientists sure spend a lot of energy worrying about plagiarism and proper credit for new discoveries and insights. I wonder if that trait is innate to beingness, so that it's a trait that is not inferior to Nature, but leveraged by Nature? Don't speculate about that in class --- it would get you fired.) Third Problem: So long as our purpose, perspective, and context facilitates our focus on measurable expansions, we will lack means or models for apprehending that which may be contracting. Can we know the relative separation in space between particles passing into or through a black hole? We can only convey sense relative to one model at a time. A model for communicating ideas based on a fundamental notion of expansion will not avail much communication based on a fundamental notion of contraction. To appreciate discrete Plank mechanics, one temporarily puts aside continuous Einstein relativity.

.
FEEDBACK:
.
At best, we resort to favored models. I resort to a feedback model, as a conception gifted by consciousness, not as a map of reality. Feedback is how we get yin and yang. Also, digital representationalism --- which seems to avail all models of matter and energy (substance). Feedback entails CONSERVATION (pushme-pullyou), but also entails that no entity engaging in feedback is "the cause." Rather, the aboriginal cause is that which sets up the feedback ... which is beyond the loop of our comprehension or control.
.

If the Whole is more than merely the Sum of its Parts, then what is the character of the feedback between the whole (field) and its parts? The logic of the parts cannot rule on the character of the whole. That inspired Whitehead, but it stressed Wittgenstein. Young Wittgenstein said: Of that which one cannot know, one must pass over in silence. Atheists love Young Wittgenstein. They don't read Older and Wiser Wittgenstein. Just because we cannot apprehend measures of a being does not mean we cannot appreciate qualities of a being.

.

KNOW THYSELF:
.
Can or do we know ourselves? If we do, then I think we know the Holism. If not, then we cannot know anything. If we are mere dust, what can dust know? I think the conscious aspect of us can know the Holism, whose feedback is essential to our beingness. The Holism is not the first cause, but the holistic character of the feedback mechanism. However, we can only know the Holism qualitatively, not measurably. As to the first cause (the unknown-unknown?) that made the Holism (the known-unknown?): I don't think we can know the first cause --- not even qualitatively. To my thinking, those who believe and entertain warped religions about the Holism suffer in the quality with which they know themselves. Their goals and their civilization tend not to be my goals, nor my civilization. Their turtles are not kosher.

.
**********
.
UNTESTABLE HYPOTHESIS OR METAPHOR:
Each black hole remains entangled from a distance with every other black hole.
The immeasurable sum of black holes is the seat of the Holism of Consciousness.
The rest of the cosmos of measurable Substance is a sequence of 2-D holographic projections from black holes, interpreted to Consciousness as 4-D.
.
Information is that aspect of Substance spun out of space-time which falls or is drug into a black hole, from there to be spread out and projected unto the cosmos as Information.
Substance is shared Information being interpreted by like aligned perspectives of Consciousness.
As Information is interpreted to increase along an axis or grid of conscious purpose or direction of projection, the 4-D sphere of space-time seems to that Source of conscious direction to be expanding.
As Information organizes, increases, and seems to accelerate outward, the organization of Substance becomes more entropic, diffuse, and less organized.
.
Once all Substance becomes diffuse, mere space-time, while far from empty, will no longer restrain the sum of black holes from coalescing into a Singularity. There will be no organized masses to groove space-time to keep the black holes apart, except the black holes themselves.
At that point, a new or super-added purpose, project, and holographic projection and Big Bang unfolds.
The System fluxes to conservational feedback among Consciousness, Information, and Substance.
The System conserves and abides, as Consciousness, Information, and Substance inter-convert.
.
CHARACTER V. NATURE:
.
The character of the unfolding conservation is often not subject to precise empirical analysis or control because, when it fronts as Consciousness, such Consciousness does not have capacity to reduce the quality of its experience of consciousness of self to quantitative measure or control.
Consciousness, Information, and Substance are not each the cause or result of the other two. Rather, they are interconverting-correlates, unfolding in respect of an Unknowable Unknown that causes them. Nevertheless, Consciousness experiences interpretations AS IF its apprehensions and appreciations (emotions and judgments) were of causal effect. For that, Consciousness has as much a claim as either Substance or Information. It’s the trip that can make it seem really worthwhile and meaningful. (Or not.) The interpretation of the quality of the trip depends on ...or correlates with: purpose (Intention), point of view (Observer), and frame of reference (Medial Context).
.
CONSERVATION:
.
On highest level, conservation is imposed upon the System. The apparent outward expansion of the cosmos is not conserved by a simple subsequent collapse. Rather, the circular relation within the System is trivalent: Consciousness gathers all within itself and purposes to express itself by projecting outward; such outward projection is interpreted as Substance; such Substance interrelates in forms, patterns, orbits, and spins; such patterns unfold as sequences from a master recording as Information; such Information accumulates and accelerates outwardly, accompanied by an outbound acceleration of diffusing Substance; Substance becomes so diffuse as to erase the grooves in space-time that keep individual black holes apart; all black holes coalesce; and the System resets to a new cycle. Thus, Consciousness, Substance, and Information are CONSERVED within a repeating cycle of trivalent inter-conversions. The expansive directionality and unfoldment of purposefulness are cyclic. The real direction abides not in a measurable grid or destination, but in appreciation of a trivalent pursuit. The Cause is the Unknowable Unknown, i.e., the System, aka, The Shadow. The Shadow knows.
.

HOLOGRAPHS IN SPACE:

.
There's a recent Nova special about Space. It concerns a notion that Information is not lost when Substance is absorbed into a black hole, but is instead spread out along a kind of plane at the perimeter. It seems to question whether Substance may best be conceptualized as a hologrpahic projection from the black hole through the perimeter of Information. It seems to suggest the holographic projections are what we take to be measurable Substance, while Information is something not itself measureable but indirectly implicated and precisely correlated with the projection of Substance. This implicates a third part to a triad, i.e., the interior of the black hole ... which is beyond measurement within its guts. Yet, it is quantitatively measureable in respect of its external capacity to bend or pull mass, and it is qualitatively implicated in respect of how it may interfunction with Information in order to "choose" which holographic patterns of Substance to project. Perhaps, the greater the accumulation of Information at the perimeter of the black hole, the greater the outward acceleration of holographic projections of Substance. Question: What is the implicated QUALITY of the black hole, in respect of its internally non-measureable capacity to determine (or "decide") which projections to produce through its perimeter field of Information in order to produce measureable holographs? Is its internal capacity random, evolutionary, predetermined, guided by conscious Will, or some interconversionary mix of all of the above?

.

DARK HOLOGRAPHS:

.
The more the Dark Substance a black hole pulls from space-time, the more the Holographic Substance the black hole projects through its Information perimeter. Substance that is pulled into a black hole is projected, darkly, not holographically. But the Information field that is byproduct of such swallowing of Dark Substance faciliates projections of holographic (non-dark) Substance. The black hole does not conserve ALL possible Information at its perimeter, but only such aspects of Information as it chooses or determines to in-form. This is why the mass that is swallowed by black holes is far greater than the mass that is projected through the field of Information that surrounds a black hole. The faster the projection of holographic Substance, the sooner it dissipates into a smooth field of space-time. The more space-time dissipates into a smooth field, the more every black hole reaches towards its limit of saturation behind its perimeter of Information. Some inherent aspect of Information leads its perimeters to collect and accumulate. Once space-time is diffuse, little precludes whatever decides, guides, or forces qualities of choice or determination within black holes from collecting their fields of Information within a common field, leading to a synthesis or collapse of black holes into a unity.

.
HITCHENS:
.
It often seems everything circles back. I wonder if God believes in God, or if consciousness believes in itself? My take on a recent Nova episode about non-empty space is that the holographic-substance we measurably experience around us may be modeled (a model is a map, not the territory) as projections from black holes through information filters planed around their perimeters. Perhaps the phenomena of entangled-and-spooky-action-at-a-distance may be a trick of sequenced 3D projections, based on projections from black holes through the same bit of information. This raises questions about choices. Statistics pertains to analysis of probabilities among possibilities. But what accounts for each choice, determination, or random-happenstance that actually becomes manifest? The supposed "answer" is always circular, sometimes referred back to indifferent Nature, sometimes to caring, Conscious Will ... as in Will of consciousness that finds expression in the cosmos ... as God, spirit, or man. Regardless of perspective, where does the seat of determination or consciousness "reside?" Does the seat of every determination reside in a black hole, its information filter, a holographic projection of substance ... or in feedback with respect to some meta Source of the entirety? Militant atheists are wilful about their belief systems, yet don't "believe" in will. At the end, Vonnegut said it's all a crock. Apparently, a crock for which Hitchens finds reason or appreciation to be brave about. That's his "answer." Hitchens is fond of fellow Horseman, Sam Harris. Harris, despite agnostic stance, respects Eastern spiritualism.
.
It's ok for atheists, agnostics, and physicists to engage in metaphysical musings, so long as they're "testable." As if multiverses, string theory, and projections from black holes through information perimeters were testable. Go figure.
.
Why "must" we pass over that of which we cannot quantify in silence? Why ought we not celebrate it in a quality of emotive, empathetic appreciation? Why should civilization reject common ground in a quality of empathy just because it cannot find common ground in science? An atheist who bravely wills or believes that we should seek common ground in empathy (btw, empathy is not necessarily love) is a great believer-of-sorts ... despite protestations.
.