Pages

Tuesday, June 1, 2021

Platonism Revisited

 Considering the often repeated statements that quantum mechanics "isn't understandable" or "doesn't make any sense", etc.,  I sometimes think it worthwhile to inquire about  "make sense in relation to what?"


Roughly, I guess the answer to that question is the non-classical features don't make sense in relation to our classical understanding and conditioning.  And generally, at that point the inquiry stops because as most mathematicians might quickly say if they were to say anything is there is  A LOT riding on the foundations of classical understandings remaining just as they are, thank you.   The inquiry is as unwanted as republicans want aopen re-hash of Trump's and their January 6 2021 insurrection attack of the Capitol.

Well, maybe not that badly. 

In any event,  from the vantage point of reality being nested structured~duality, if we dial back to Plato,  first we observe that he is invoking a skimpy model of nesting in his  physical and metaphysical classifications.   To my knowledge he doesn't have a rule or guide or justification for such thinking other than, perhaps invoking   God and/or soul  relative to physical items-- just as the common assumption or belief.  He also doesn't identify why there are just the two categories: physical and metaphysical. 

The second observation is that his important consideration was on the idealized forms and on the ideas of the idealized forms.    Note that by invoking the word ideas, he is inserting a small but rather complete (and ill-defined) model of "consciousness" without mentioning that he is doing so. 

Therefore, in his instance, he is running a nested structures model based inquiry.  Not, nested structured~duality, but nested structures. 

Then, however,  or in among the developments, one can also observe a mathematical nested level and an idea level of structural coding emerge.   So the underlying general principle is present and at work, but at sort of an unconscious level.

In any event, it's a good approximation, perhaps, even though incomplete and largely ignoring or unaware of the concurrent  Eastern yin-yang-like structured~dualities.   The idealized pure and abstract math ideations emerged along with the associated causal-logical relations.       Establishing and conditioning all advocates thinking as to "what makes sense".  

Thus the "classical physics" understanding.  

Entre-vous la salle de class --- enter the classroom of the non-classical items and interactions, particularly given and guided by more newly created abstract math relations, which all ideations are formed of, and all of a sudden,  educators say the new stuff doesn't make sense.     They don't say,  or suspect the old stuff not making the right sense. The problem allegedly  is the new stuff.  

Allowing that reality is nested structured~duality,  it would also make sense that exploration and development would occur in somewhat of a recurrent fashion sliding from one successive approximation to a more general successive approximation -- from one trial theory to an improved trial theory, like we have experienced for the last 400 or longer years.

Thus, we find ourselves  mulling these anomalies and we, or I, at least, can note that Plato's idealized forms -- the Platonic solids -- are a zero field strength subset of structured~dualities. For instance, for rod magnets align along radii of tetrahedron in five ways creating five (variable mass density multiple) states. Idealize this down to approach zero field strengths and the states persist.    Idealize further and you can have the special case if you want, or if you deploy perfectionism differently, the idealization only occurs in your ideation.

Yet, and here there is room for all sorts of divergences  the ordered water and carbon-nitrogen-based items making up our ontology are persistently all over in the above zero field strengths ands are "always"  structured~dualities, not just the idealized forms.  

A ponderous question then rolls in  (again)  about the internal analog math (nested structural coding in our vibrating atoms and molecules)  being 100% primary and the idealized special case abstract  mathematics being 100% secondary, in fact, arising from the internal analog math. 

This fact might be a hard pill for mathematicians to swallow.    Yet, I don't see any way around it, other than, ignoring,  bullying or appealing to authority. 

Do you?

Best regards,
Ralph

Saturday, December 7, 2019

What is reality?

(12/3/2019 "Reply to your forum post" -- Scientific Basis of Consciousness  group)
Ram,

That's a good question.  I guess I consider it (reality) as universe+theories+errors+incompletions+other_items/concerns/influences.  I'd say it includes more than just 'universe' and "originally" I think I started out  considering "both the physical and the 'mental' aspects of reality".  Later I think I realized that in seeing "reality as nested structured~duality, which includes physical and mental aspects", that I was pre-conditioned in the dominant western scientific paradigm to think in terms of the supposedly two categories: physical and mental... (or alternatives), but in the emerging more unified model, at the underlying principle level there is just the nested structured~duality  "supporting both".   Thus, reality is nested structured~duality. From there, or prior to, we acquire the "magnetic tetrahedral/polyhedral analog math" and that prompts for nested fields within nested fields and nested structural coding.

The pattern seems similar, to me, relating to the <'Chit-Padartha: Conscious-Matter'> in that if/when one  "looks inside" that, (according to me) it's the same thing -- more nested structured~duality.

...As a quick and dirty very general approximation.

Does that help or answer your question?  You do understand that anyone who re-defines reality is typically considered psychotic, don't you? 

How do you define 'reality',  Ram?

Best regards,
--Ralph

Saturday, November 23, 2019

Re: Rise of Ayurveda

Scientific Basis of Consciousness   11/23/2019


Ram, others,  

When you describe (2) and reference "brain-based" and "neuroscience" terms, is the approximate "explanation" for why the self is said to die due to the Neuron Theory in that once the neurons rot away there cannot possibly be any  neural and synaptic activity and thus obvious end of self?

I raise this question/query sort of in light of the storyline I advocate where, in my model I have nested structural coding going on in stacks of ordered water forming internal representations of surroundings (and thus  self) forming in the energy-related aerobic respiration reaction.  This structural coding goes on within neurons and other cells and parallel with or perhaps cooperatively interactive  with the neural networking and other  structural coding. 

Upon the death, the structural coding of the stacks of ordered water, as in the (1) option could just continue on, let's say, going through various re-orderings in the similarly structured and coordinated surroundings and regenerative cycles.      If we are basically talking about continuations of particular natural structures or coordinations, then this sort of  model could  give some account for  both (1) and (2).

I suppose, to get technical, various psychic phenomena (astral travel, remote viewing, OOBE could work along a similar "structural" or resonance pathway.  The so-called "self" would be "in or related with ordered water structural coding"  and not so much with the neural activity, although locally, both are related.

Thoughts?

Best regards,
--Ralph

Thursday, July 18, 2019

Subjectivity re-visited

Stanley, Whit, Ram, others,

First, I note Ram's condensation-sublimation is NSD-like -- roughly agreeing with "reality is nested structured~duality",  as does considering matter converting to energy. Thus, Ram's statement might better or also be or reflect:  matter is a condensed form of energy where the "two" states are changes in nested structured~duality.

Second, where you say, "Like there is nothing shocking  about brains producing language and ideas. The challenging part is how do brain produce qualia (subjectivity). ",  I don't think brains alone produce language and ideas, and so thinking that reality works that way sort of screws your chances of understanding subjectivity.

That is, in my storyline, the approximation is vibrations in surroundings influence structural coding in  ordered water and/or other sp^3-hybridized structures (or, if you are a neuron theory advocate, alignments in synapses...),  but within that, in getting to language that first involves influencing sequences of protein-folding CONCURRENT WITH moving gas streams through varying channels  as to get 'sounds'.  Those sounds add to the vibrations of the surroundings and additional internal structural coding (all relating to whether such activities aid or detract from energy and material collection and conservation "within respiration reaction".  Anyway,  during the language learning phase the brain and the surrounding gaseous environment and several other levels of organization are all involved in scribbling up to so-called  'language'.

Sunday, December 16, 2018

Before words?

 (Scientific Basic Of Consciousness Google-Groups - Dec 16, 2018)

John, others, 

In follow-up to the question of how migrating to NSD/magnetic tetrahedra catalyzes acquisition of physical intuition... Kant's Transcendental Idealism seems relevant.

Kant's Transcendental Idealism allegedly says space and time are subjective items ~forming our intuition.  Maybe others can clarify or correct if I misinterpret or add too much of my bias. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transcendental_idealism

...the idea here is, NSD turns out to be a more accurate basis of our intuition and our physical intuition.   Our intuition is not formed of "space and time" but of "nested structured~duality". The magnetic tetrahedral analog math is a close enough approximation of the real thing so as to be able to deliver the improved yield.

Whether ~this ~refutes T.I., or just drills down through and replaces "space and time" with "nested structured~duality"  is not clear to me today and may be irrelevant. Both approximations are necessary and/or helpful.The bigger issue of switching to a more deeply, fundamentally nested  model, I think, overrides most other considerations.  That is, NSD and/or its spectrum of repeatable subjectivity (SORS) soundly disrupts the familiar or popular subjective-objective method of assessing or  of conceptualizing and categorizing, so various items, even on Kant's gameboard, get shifted around.

That is, he is saying (or I am interpreting wildly from skimming the Wikipedia article), that we have one apparently objective model founded on objects moving about within space and time -- which itself is like a flat nesting image: objects within space (and/or time).

But then he fashions together a ladder and climbs up to view "Transcendental Idealism" to notice that that flat objective model is mysteriously nested within  or emerging from our intuition which appears to be formed of subjective "space" and "time".   But (I assume or project) no where does he notice the fundamental, but simplified  nested ~structure that he is also  relying upon. (OR, he's relying on the spiritual nesting and does not consider it necessary or perhaps possible to make it scientifically explicit.)

Anyway, he's sketching out a problematic nesting and inaccurate structure problem compounded  with a related missing spectrum of repeatable subjectivity problem. It's excellent for an initial approximation or one in the succession of approximations, but at some point it reaches its limits and folds away.

Best regards,
ralph


On Sat, Dec 15, 2018 at 5:15 PM Ralph Frost wrote:
Dear John,

In attempt to summarize or clarify further from this morning's post,  if or once a reader can provisionally consider "reality being nested structured~duality",  what is structured turns out to be different instances of structured~duality (as one word) -- one instance for the so-called thing itself and some other instances for  all the various communicable descriptions of the thing itself.

People have the tendency or ability discover, create, stack and/or balance  these instances of nested structured~duality, which, of course, just creates other instances of nested structured~duality.

Sunday, October 21, 2018

Structural coding exists; time does not.

Hi, Chris, 
The   model I am advocating currently is that thoughts are structurally coded in ordered water.  You and I are about 60% water and in respiring about 160 kg of oxygen per year so our respiration sites (within neurons, and other cells) are generating 10^20 water molecules per second.  Water's structured~duality (two plus and two minus vertices in a tetrahedral-like shape) could support 6^n or 12^n structural coding forming internal representations of the vibrations of our surroundings.  Such units would also be hydrogen bonding packets that are influential in protein-folding, etc., (expression).  Yes, it may well be speculative, but the model is  visualizable, non-classical and somewhat rational enough, and storing such immediate ('now') stacks of ordered water in bound water layers of newly forming protein matrices provides a way to get more persistent (aka, longer-term) structural coding or memory.  It seems to be a somewhat interesting model and  trial theory.

More below..


On Tue, Oct 16, 2018 at 11:45 AM 'Chris Nunn' via Scientific Basis of Consciousness <scientific-basis-of-consciousness@googlegroups.com> wrote:
Hi Ralph,
But what are ‘thoughts’ made of? Dynamic ‘codings’ of some sort for sure. And I agree that ordered water is likely to play a part in these, perhaps in the context of ‘hydro-ionic’ waves.

[rf] Perhaps. I think there are quite a few options for various kinds of structural coding. Plus, there are the various levels of un-sub-conscious as well as ~feelings/emotions, sensing, imagination, etc..   I have  happened onto the 6^n or 12^n structural coding as an internal analog 'language' which is an upgrade of the familiar 2^n binary coding. Getting associative coding into such hydrogen-bonding packets going  is just a step  or two away from sequences of protein-foldings sounding a lot like speech and/or the expressions  of useful, organizing sounds and words.

Something, however, is needed to provide continuity for the codings. As I mentioned to John, any purely classical account runs into trouble because its ‘moments’ are infinitesimal and its metric notional. But real things need to exist in a temporal dimension as well as the three spatial dimensions. As a consequence any purely classical account of continuity probably has to follow Julian Barbour in proclaiming the “death of time” and a universe lacking any real time, but only a path through an unimaginably vast array of relative state spaces. It’s another extravagant picture, not unlike a timeless version of the currently popular multiverse.

[rf] My impression for a few years has been:  "experience exists; time does not" -- or that ~time and the entire  many flavors of temporal notions are an artifact of our structural coding. It's difficult to describe and clarify because the notions of time  (and space) are paradigmatic in the dominant model. In  NSD, reality is nested structured~duality  -- nested fields within nested fields --  where, let's say we are structurally coding "thoughts" or "memories" as nested fields within nested fields.  Those so-called 'moments' are dependent upon  _completing_ increments of  structural coding which we might visualize as  building a coded stack of 12 or 18 water molecules, or perhaps packing  a number of those stacks within a newly forming  bound water layer.  You and I would likely still say, "yeah, but those processes take time", and yes, so it appears.  But add some catalyzing enzymes and the times the process takes lessens.  So the 'moments' still centrally depend on "completing the structural coding of a recognizable, recallable ~thought". 

Such bio-molecular structural coding is minimally non-classical and not infinitesimal. Yet, notice that what matters is that energy-collection-related structural coding does get packed, say, into bound water layers such that as the relevant (perhaps even caustive)  vibratory pattern repeats, the ~echo reactivates the stored structural coding to spawn a useful or effective adaptive response or expression.   You and I may consider these repeating events occurring "in time", and certainly the Earth turns daily as it obits the Sun, but the fact still is: experience (structural coding) exists; time does not".

Wednesday, October 17, 2018

Re: Reality!

Hi, Chris, 

The   model I am advocating currently is that thoughts are structurally coded in ordered water.  You and I are about 60% water and in respiring about 160 kg of oxygen per year so our respiration sites (within neurons, and other cells) are generating 10^20 water molecules per second.  Water's structured~duality (two plus and two minus vertices in a tetrahedral-like shape) could support 6^n or 12^n structural coding forming internal representations of the vibrations of our surroundings.  Such units would also be hydrogen bonding packets that are influential in protein-folding, etc., (expression).  Yes, it may well be speculative, but the model is  visualizable, non-classical and somewhat rational enough, and storing such immediate ('now') stacks of ordered water in bound water layers of newly forming protein matrices provides a way to get more persistent (aka, longer-term) structural coding or memory.  It seems to be a somewhat interesting model and  trial theory.

More below..


On Tue, Oct 16, 2018 at 11:45 AM 'Chris Nunn' via Scientific Basis of Consciousness wrote:
Hi Ralph,
But what are ‘thoughts’ made of? Dynamic ‘codings’ of some sort for sure. And I agree that ordered water is likely to play a part in these, perhaps in the context of ‘hydro-ionic’ waves.

[rf] Perhaps. I think there are quite a few options for various kinds of structural coding. Plus, there are the various levels of un-sub-conscious as well as ~feelings/emotions, sensing, imagination, etc..   I have  happened onto the 6^n or 12^n structural coding as an internal analog 'language' which is an upgrade of the familiar 2^n binary coding. Getting associative coding into such hydrogen-bonding packets going  is just a step  or two away from sequences of protein-foldings sounding a lot like speech and/or the expressions  of useful, organizing sounds and words.

Something, however, is needed to provide continuity for the codings. As I mentioned to John, any purely classical account runs into trouble because its ‘moments’ are infinitesimal and its metric notional. But real things need to exist in a temporal dimension as well as the three spatial dimensions. As a consequence any purely classical account of continuity probably has to follow Julian Barbour in proclaiming the “death of time” and a universe lacking any real time, but only a path through an unimaginably vast array of relative state spaces. It’s another extravagant picture, not unlike a timeless version of the currently popular multiverse.

[rf] My impression for a few years has been:  "experience exists; time does not" -- or that ~time and the entire  many flavors of temporal notions are an artifact of our structural coding. It's difficult to describe and clarify because the notions of time  (and space) are paradigmatic in the dominant model. In  NSD, reality is nested structured~duality  -- nested fields within nested fields --  where, let's say we are structurally coding "thoughts" or "memories" as nested fields within nested fields.  Those so-called 'moments' are dependent upon  _completing_ increments of  structural coding which we might visualize as  building a coded stack of 12 or 18 water molecules, or perhaps packing  a number of those stacks within a newly forming  bound water layer.  You and I would likely still say, "yeah, but those processes take time", and yes, so it appears.  But add some catalyzing enzymes and the times the process takes lessens.  So the 'moments' still centrally depend on "completing the structural coding of a recognizable, recallable ~thought". 

Such bio-molecular structural coding is minimally non-classical and not infinitesimal. Yet, notice that what matters is that energy-collection-related structural coding does get packed, say, into bound water layers such that as the relevant (perhaps even caustive)  vibratory pattern repeats, the ~echo reactivates the stored structural coding to spawn a useful or effective adaptive response or expression.   You and I may consider these repeating events occurring "in time", and certainly the Earth turns daily as it obits the Sun, but the fact still is: experience (structural coding) exists; time does not".

Something temporally holistic is needed to escape extravagance of this sort, which does imply incremental increase and something memory-like, but it’s not going to be a spatially definable ‘something’.
Best
Chris

[rf] Consider just the on-going mostly resonant structural coding  of nested fields within nested fields as a feature of reality being nested structured~duality.