The Consciously Appreciative aspect of the Godhead would not know how it may choose at a given time and place to appreciate its then and there context or whether or how to choose among all possible next unfoldings. However, to the extent it keeps itself apart, It may know how a particular Perspective of itself will choose.
What the holistically conscious aspect of the Godhead chooses may be subject to a higher math. That is, what it chooses to express must conform to parameters of a defining math. But it need not subjectively model or know in advance how that math will at any given time and place determine its subjective experience of conscious appreciation. In that sense, the conscious aspect of the Godhead functions as though it enjoys free will in participation with whatever the maths of Substance and Information that co-define it.
Much the same may be said of each limited, mortal Perspective of that Consciousness. An observing person may tend reliably to control and predict the unfolding actions of an unsuspecting other person. However, that reliability will diminish as each person comes in dynamic feedback to factor its expectations regarding its co-acting others. In that sense, each person functions as though he enjoys free will in participation with whatever the maths of Substance and Information that co-define his fellow participants.
**************
PERSPECTIVE AND ILLUSION; FEEDBACK AND PURPOSE:
What breathes fire into the world-math? https://youtu.be/zORUUqJd81M
Speculation: How could we communicate a shared illusion of Physical-World-In-Itself, absent means for mathematically re-normalizing the illusion? Especially since the Universe seems from every perspective to be expanding at much the same rate --- in a way that cannot be completely physically modeled, by reference either to the surface or to the interior, of an expanding balloon.
Those means happen to consist with our sharing of such math-based fluxing-constants as the vacuum speed of EMR, the Gravitational Constant, the Planck Constant, the equivalence of Energy and Mass, and so on.
IOW, the illusion of physics is math-based. Which begs a question: Is a Conscious Perspective essential to the present-ation of the World Illusion?
****************
Everything we measurably experience is imaged --- in the sense of being tricked out as re-presentations. Do you experience anything that is not a cumulating re-presentation of previous presentations?
As the measurable world unfolds, the evidence is that it obeys algorithms. We can measure what is measurably expressed by those algorithms. We can express the algorithms that control our world in formulas. But we cannot measure the algorithms or their progenitors as things in themselves, nor can we entirely explicate why they abide, how they came to abide. or what will cause them or our world to change. We cannot even entirely explicate our own I-ness. Such things simply abide ... according to our general sense of beingness.
The evidence is in the general experience and appreciation of our beingness. The experiential evidence is that Consciousness functions from perspectives. Perspectives change, absorb, pass on. But there is no evidence that Consciousness as Consciousness ever ceases, or that either measurable Substance or cumulating Information could manifest in the complete absence of all Consciousness.
*************
INEXTRICABLE EXPRESSION OF CONSCIOUSNESS:
Well, we do "create" conscious entities. By sexual reproduction. Artificial insemination. Genetic engineering. Eventually, by chemical engineering of genetics. Then mechanical engineering. Reverse engineering.
I put "create" in caps, because we do not really create anything. We work with what is already availed with existence, to engineer fluxing applications.
I don't conceptualize or think of our thoughts as sub-atomic particles. I don't think the brain-in-itself is conscious. I don't think there is such a thing as a particular thing-in-itself, much less a brain-in-itself. I think Brain (manifest matter, substance) avails expression of Consciousness, and Consciousness avails expression of Substance.
I think Consciousness, Substance, and Information (CSI) are inextricably intertwined as fluxing expressions, each requiring for its expression some level of entailment or expression of the other two.
As to what is the substrate of CSI? I suspect/conceptualize that the substrate consists of nothing more than Math, being fluxed with a Mathematician. I do not think there exists any "ultimate" particle-in-itself.
I think Consciousness abides as an inextricably expressed fundament, fluxing with Substance and Information. I do not think sub-atomic particles are expressions or perspectives of Consciousness at the human level. Rather, I think Consciousness is expressed at all levels. I do not think any expression of Substance could become measurably manifest in the complete absence of any relationship with Consciousness. Every pattern that receives nutrients and processes them to sustain, expand, or reproduce itself is expressing an entailment of Consciousness at some level.
Every pattern that is availed to measurable unfoldment has to be reconciled within parameters allowed by a Conservation of Matter and Energy. The Mathematician is constrained to Math --- which is why all exchanges of Information and all Evolutionary unfoldments necessitate death, recycling, phase shifting, material trade-offs, and continuous chemical rebalancing.
If no purely scientific principle pre-determines which choice is to be effected among all allowable parameters for choices within a Conserved System, then what is the character/nature of the Determiner/Reconciler/Mathematician? Neither science nor Logic can say. Whatever IT is, It is what It is. Perhaps the best we can do in respect of IT is to apply innate intuition and empathy, in good faith and good will.
*****************
NOTE REGARDING SCHRODINGER'S CAT:
Suppose it is not just material physics that is “entangled,” but perspectives of consciousness (which happen to be entangled in sharing a same algorithm for how they mark their relations)?
Suppose that which we take to be superimposed in a mix of indeterminacy is not potential states of “physical matter,” but potential choices to be synchronized among “perspectives of consciousness”?
If that which holistically synchronizes has capacity to collapse choices based on feedback summed from among particular perspectives, then not every possibility needs to be chosen or made to exist “in some world.”
IOW, the body of Schrodinger’s Cat would not be required to exist in innumerable states spread among a multiverse of possibilities. This is because a body or system of physics would not have independent existence apart from signifying for a state of synchronization among perspectives of consciousness.
IOW, insofar as the consciousness of Schrodinger’s Cat were entangled with the consciousness of its owner, there need be only one then-and-there combined state, i.e, the owner would either be happy (cat alive and conscious) or sad (cat dead).
************
Consciousness:
Every pattern that receives nutrients and processes them to sustain, expand, or reproduce itself is expressing an entailment of Consciousness at some level.
Schrodinger's Cat:
By definition, a world of parallel expression of measurable manifestation would become manifestly measurable only if, when, and where it were to become measurable to some level of informational recordation (consciousness) to measure them.
Particulars of people and things do not exist as such, entirely apart from relational perspectives. The unfoldments of such relationships and perspectives are not entirely pre-defined. Rather, they are unfolding. "Your" true unfolding relationship is not with other mortal perspectives, but with the empathetic interests of the Reconciler, by which "you" and "they" may be unfolded and defined in potentially innumerable variations. "You,"in your connections, are legion.
IF Schrodinger's Cat exists in a different state in a different parallel world, it would only be because the Reconciler effects Consciousness with respect to such world. OTOH, if the Reconciler functions only with respect to one world of manifestation, it would seem that all perspectives of Consciousness must therewith be "entangled" -- so that no parallel world of a half dead Cat would manifest.
**************
That which avails choices among possibilities within allowable parameters.
That which, by Participatory Will, participates in such availment.
Not being particularly interested would represent in apparent randomness.
Consciousness can be conceptualized as building on different levels. Self awareness, awareness of surroundings, awareness of nutrients or sunlight, subconsciousness, organic stimulus response, determination among potential alternatives or choices, informing of potentialities of Consciousness, maybe even systemic regulation and reconciliation of events within and of parameters.
I do not see how mere substance could cumulate a storage of information (stored consciousness?), absent an expression of consciousness at some level. I do not say substance is consciousness, but I do not see how mere Substance could be expressed in ways that cumulate Information in the complete absence of Consciousness.
Holistic Consciousness: Holistic Consciousness relates the math under which Simple Consciousness, Substance, and Information are activated, coordinated, and Reconciled.
Simple Consciousness: Simple Consciousness is a massless and qualitative capacity, from an otherwise dimension-less Point of relational Spin, to receive and transmit Information.
Consciousness of Consciousness: Consciousness of Consciousness is Complex Consciousness that abides with an organized and adopted system of Matter.
Consciousness of Self: Consciousness of Self is Complex Consciousness that appreciates and apprehends that it abides with an organized and adopted system of Matter.
I am conscious. Consciousness exists. A is A.
My native empathy and intuition suggest/evidence that Consciousness exists and is expressed among perspectives apart from the perspective that seems to attach with my body.
As I conceptualize Consciousness, it is not restricted to bodily self awareness. Rather, it relates to the expression of a qualitative capacity to sense, record, or appreciate representations or Information concerning quantifiable Substance.
Such capacity to sense and record Information seems to be inextricably common throughout the universe. I am unable to imagine in any non-contradictory or unambiguous way how any representation of Substance could collapse to measurable manifestation in the complete absence of any entailment with a measuring Consciousness, at some level or layer of presence or potentiality.
Bodies that harbor Consciousness are composed of Substance, but Substance is not by itself conscious. Rather, Substance offers perspectives with which Consciousness of Information can be experienced and accumulated.
Although Consciousness can be experienced from subjectively different perspectives, bodies, and senses, it always relates to capacity to sense, record, or appreciate representations of quantifiable Substance.
If unfolding events are not entirely objectively pre-determined, then Something or some subjective principle participates in accounting for how they are chosen. I doubt that principle is purely random.
Patterns of order somehow arise out of chaos. To come in after the fact to say such patterns must have been "most fit" is simply to engage not in explanation but in after-the-fact labeling. Why are they most fit? I conceptualize that they were most appreciated by a Reconciling aspect of Consciousness.
I would agree that it is likely impossible for a mortal to prove whether the Reconciling Principler is itself Conscious or merely some kind of meta-algorithm of algorithms. Consciousness, Substance, and Information may abide as fluxing ways that such meta-algorithm finds expression.
Still, I do not think it is possible for either Substance or Information to find expression in the complete absence of Consciousness at some level or layer. I think that condition connects all perspectives. To conceptualize that condition as implicating "God" CAN (not must) help avail the assimilation of "consciously subjective-substantively objective" standards for decent civilization for pursuing moral purposefulness among free-thinking citizens of a representative republic.
No comments:
Post a Comment