Nested tetrahedron

--- In jcs-online@yahoogroups.com, "RLG" wrote:
>
> Just a note on coordinate systems, probably unrelated to
> consciousness, but should be made clear for readers of this forum.
>
> Ralph wrote:
>
> > Alternatively, consider that we ARE taught XYZ-cubic coordination
> > and
> > visualization as a "first-language". That's our bias .    But then
> > we
> > encounter the new-found awareness that ALL of our transactions are
> > engaged, naturally, in this tetrahedrally coordinated dance.   And,
> > the tetrahedral dance does fit INSIDE the cubic framework, even, in
> > fact, naturally expressing multiple-states in the process.
>

>[RLG]: Rectilinear coordinate systems are just one popular and common system.
> Standard mathematics has an infinite number of such systems; spherical
> coordinates, polar coordinates, and so forth.  It should be really
> easy to have a linear transformation from the usual rectilinear
> coordinates to a coordinate system with axes in alignment with the
> tetrahedron shape.  That is all part of standard mathematics.
> However, such a change is no big deal and sheds no light on
> consciousness.
>
> R

[ref] Yes, equivalent frameworks are an important point. Given, for instance, the actual way consciousness works, how is it that they even arise or are recognized?   Or, put a slightly different  way, given the many inter-transformative equivalent representations, there ought to one or a few coordinations or configurations that do, in fact, instantiate more often within nature.   If previously unseen, discovery of such a more frequent natural configuration could certainly be enlightening on some features of natural consciousness.


Additionally, one of the perspectives I hold is that 100% of all abstract math symbols and expressions are artifacts of human consciousness. So, there is obviously SOME kind of important connections between the primary symbols and expressions -- the relationships -- within the fabric of human consciousness and with the secondary symbols and expressions people  cast to form terms and expressions of their abstract maths.  

I stress abstract math as an artifact of human consciousness, in part because I've observed that dogs, horses, cats, and cows that I have lived with and depended upon at various times, survive and function quite well and have superior senses and abilities, yet all without any dependence on or need for fiddling with any abstract maths.

Moreover, as described in my prior post,  having had the opportunity to study a small amount of organic and biochemistry, I have come to appreciate that a huge fraction of diverse molecular coordinations throughout the biosphere persist and function in the so-called sp3-bond hybridization.  That arrangement generally places four collections of "matter and charge", most often  at the four vertices of a tetrahedron.  (See: http://magtet.com/images/phpshow.php for  some molecular schematics mostly taken from Morrison and Boyd's "Organic Chemistry".)

This means that all of the molecules of water in the world's oceans, rivers and streams, and clouds,  as well as the water that makes up more than 60-70 percent of each person's being, are all in this one tetrahedral configuration. The same generally holds for all organic carbon (and nitrogen-ammonia) -- as our fats, sugars and proteins -- making up living systems.  As well the silicates making up the mantle and crust of Earth and terrestrial type planets, exist in the same tetrahedral configuration.

So, a large fraction of the volume and mass of the Earth, plus our own physical selves exist within tetrahedral coordination and patterns. As well, in our own  respiration reaction, some number of carbonaceous tetrahedral units are dissipated  as 10^20 (tetrahedral) water molecules are being formed each second.  

Thus nature sings a loud and joyous sp3 (tetrahedral) refrain.

As you point out, standard abstract mathematics as developed so far, basically building up from the XYZ Cartesian model of the 1640's,  does indeed have several seemingly equivalent and/or inter-related  coordinate frameworks. And our dominant scientific paradigm, the one that doesn't yet have much coverage for consciousness  does maintain the perspectives you express. Indeed, getting to a different scientific paradigm which does improve integration would, of course, involve making one or more discoveries and changes or shifts  related to some of these coordinating features and issues.

Another point, more related to efficiency in direct visualization rather than apparently equality of computed numerical measures arises when thinking about the significance of order.  Physicists may say it as "initial conditions are important", or "outcomes often are determined by initial conditions".  I am proposing that learning tetrahedral coordination FIRST leads to a different and improved, naturally more organic way of thinking, rather than, as has been most students' experience since the 1600's, embedding the XYZ-cubic coordination system first.


Again, the short demonstration of this, rather than start with a point and a line and the number line,   is to flip through the five ways to align four rod magnets along the radii of a tetrahedron and then note the look and feel symmetry of this one general handheld multiple-state model with the similar five possible charge or electronegativity patterns of the sp3-hybridized molecular arrangements.   One pattern begets five  states differing in increments of one-half spin. These five states model the patterns making up the molecular states of essentially all life and  much of our world.

Then, to shed some light on the un-sub-conscious, one can use the n2s2 magnetic tetrahedron unit and showing that there are six (or twelve) ways to orient it within or relative to an enfolding field (equivalent to beginning with the tetrahedron, then ADDING the XYZ-cubic framework).   Then the visualization shifts from the ~six states of the n2s2 magnetic tetrahedron, to the analogous ~six possible orientations of each water molecule forming during steps in our respiration reaction.   In under 20 lines of text,  that gets learners to an appreciation for and perhaps some physical intuition of the 6^n internal structural coding that is always running concurrent with all of our moods and experiences.  Since initial conditions influence outcomes, repeating vibrations in the environment obviously would form or select out repeating patterns in the chains of water molecules being formed during respiration. Thus, beginning with tetrahedron, learners would quickly experience and acquire an appreciation of at least one way living and breathing also results in having a somewhat functional internal associative  representation of our surroundings.  

Since the structurally coded packets of water molecules formed during respiration would subsequently influence protein-formation and folding, the same internal analog language can also be observed as having direct active connections with motility and, through protein-folding, ALL human expression and communication. So, the impression is of a deeply integrated associative/relational process.


Yes, certainly many would  probably say one counter-claim may be in favor of the total wad of abstract math that you referred to earlier and heading to quantum mechanics.   That is,  certainly the option is to start in with the Cartesian split, the point, line and number line and embed the XYZ-cubic framework FIRST, and then build outward  through the various layers and logics to also arrive at some appreciation and some distribution of physical intuition to students of reality as resting upon multiple-states.

As you said and I agree, going that route generates a lot of equivalent frameworks (which would also be characteristic of  a multiple-state system) but doesn't or hasn't yet seemed to lead to ANY clearly functional description or accommodation for "consciousness". (other than the one I am presently .-)

So, again, different initial states lead to different sets of outcomes and involve different levels of effort.    It will be interesting to discover how such  alternatives pan out.


Imagine facing the global classroom...


Best regards and Merry Christmas,
Ralph


Joy, to the world
Heaven and nature sing.

Analog Math

I get quizzical looks, sometimes, when I mention "analog math", as if perhaps I may have a few screws loose. I suppose the situation degrades further when I speak or point to a magnetic tetrahedron and/or the five ways to align four magnets along the center-to-vertex lines of a tetrahedron.  Of course this spawns the n4, n3s, n2s2, ns3, and s4 primary isomers and we're off and running with the "look and feel" of many biologically significant molecular arrangements and a HUGE fraction of the biosphere.  And, of course since one can feel the artifact and the pull and push of of the quantum gravitational fields, the thing gives the right  "analog" signals right out of the box.  But a fair question still is,  "Why tetrahedron?",  or "Why magnets?"

Origin of ~ : the underlying principle of approximate equivalency

Origin of the underlying general principle of approximate equivalency, symbolized as ~  : an alias for the underlying general principle of structured~duality...

Many readers seem to track on the structure or structuring part of the underlying principle of structured~duality, but often, people don't seem to feel comfortable embracing "duality" as a core foundational item (despite ALL the wave-particle, one-half spin attraction-repulsion evidence).

In an effort to seek and explore options (and alter bandwidth)  I've been considering abbreviating the term structured~duality  just to ~, which would give "the principle of ~".  Would that be pronounced "principle of tilde", or simply "principle of squiggle, that is, shift-the key left of 1 on your keyboard".

A search for the ascii value of tilde on Google,  beside showing 126, brought up the term "equivalency", and a search on "principle of equivalency"  did raise some hits and with the similar principle of equivalence.  A search on the full phrase yielded:

Your search - "principle of approximate equivalency" - did not match any documents.

So, it's an option, something  for people who see all the underlying inter-transforming multiple-states but who don't necessarily track on thinking of the underlying principle of structured~duality. Yes, it's true, collections of hydrated ions are approximately equivalent with all their transition states and paths and with their pre- and post equilibrium reaction products. It's all multiple-states jumping between multiple-states. Various dances of structural codings.

I believe if one peers into the term "approximate equivalency", it turns out to be a helpful, informative term and a decent alias for ~ and structured~duality.

Think about it.

Getting a *feel* for modern science.

In prior accounts of the trial theory of consciousness I advocate, the
storyline goes that when we inquire about the source of electrical flux and
potentials measured in neuroscience's synaptic and neural studies, we quickly
discover the energy comes from the aerobic respiration reaction. Considering
that reaction, we discover the on-going generation of 10^20 water molecules per
second being created throughout all the widely distributed sites in the body.
Sequences of these particularly shaped molecules have the propensity to
structurally code in an active 6^n analog/associative pattern.

In prior accounts, often I'd choose n=12 to get 6^n to come out to a high number
around 2.2 billion options or different associations that could each pack into a
stack of 12 molecules. These hydrogen bonding packets, once resonantly coded in
relation with on-going experience  can then (1) unfurl or
dissipate imparting influences in protein-folding so as to deliver expression
or motility, and/or (2) become incorporated in bound water layers in newly
forming protein matrices and thus be stored for use/retrieval/resonance in
future events or cycles, sort of like excess food gets stored as glycogen in
fats.

Hopefully, if one weren't too terribly autistic or psychotic in their
expressions, when replicated the expressions might prove beneficial to
(absolutely conserve energy expenditures by) and thereby curry positive
attention from both the individual and within the larger, enfolding social
group.

In a 6^12 system there are 2.2 billion associations, and in a 6^18 coding,
10^14 associations. One can speculate this single common analog math divides
between the different sensory channels or, repeats codes, so as to give odd
influential results, for instance, should auditory codings flow within visual
centers (synthenesia). Imagination, creativity, forethought, and one would
surmise, wisdom would all function and easily develop within such a active
internal language.

Yet, today, if we sift down into the lower numbers and shorter stacks and
sequences (also shown with length-based initial, example-only, perhaps wildly
speculative associated categories/functions),

6^12 = 2.2 billion - "complex, abstract thoughts or impressions"
...
6^6 = 46656 - "autonomous signals"
6^5 = 7776 - "touch"
6^4 = 1096 - "smell"
6^3 = 216 - "Turret's Syndrome" [or your guess goes here]
6^2 = 36 - "feelings"
6^1 = 6 - "deep sleep/anesthesia"
6^0 = 1 - "red alert/flatline/anoxia"

and we consider the so-call six states of each unit as the six directional
vectors:

a. bottom to top
b. top to bottom
c. left-back to right-front
d. right-front to left-back
e. right-back to left-front
f. left-front to right-back


within each tetrahedral-shaped water molecule.

With this backdrop, then, for instance, assuming there are just, let's imagine,
only 36 "feelings", and since emotions are said to prompt or be entangled at the
root of each and every thought, the first two positions in all chains, or any
two-unit sequence, can, speculatively, provide the ~emotional coding.
Therefore, among the initial units in a sequence beginning with states a,c,e,
say these code to some form of "flight" emotion, whereas units beginning with
b,d,f code out to some version of "fight" emotion. Yet, then there is room to
get added functional or dysfunctional alternatives or other versions, say, as
breaking out various codes for "freeze" emotions or reversals to get predators
and victims.


It's something to think about.

Body consciousness?

Sounds like structural coding to me.  If you remember your physics particle accelerator technology, one of the components used to be a cloud chamber where the debris after particle collisions would trace signature trails through water molecules.  In the storyline I am hawking, experience/immediate memory is forged in structurally coded stacks of newly formed water molecules and these persist for a wile as impressions and feelings (and link to expressions), and then the patterns that get incorporated into protein matrices persist as longer term memories.   Then, of course, that all opens up the doors for, say,  the so-called junk DNA to also transcribe into corresponding ordered water stacks and sequences prompting other expressions  -- ALL in the same internal structural coding, analog language.

Structured~duality as tenet: ending the temporal era.

Excellent and challenging questions by Otmar and Thom Mandel in jcs-online about
whether structured~duality is noun and/or verb and/or whatever else
prompt me to digress slightly from the consciousness is phlogiston;
structured~duality is fundamental philosophical debate, to place
another keystone in the paradigm bridge.

When a person understands a little bit about structured~duality and
the internal structural coding analog math, then when we review the
modern western science history, what we observe is the initial
Cartesian, basically XYZ cubic structuring of "space" and our model of
space, and then adding the Newtonian extension of "absolute
time". Then we travel  along for a while until Einstein adds a subtle "oops"
correction dialing back on the "absolute time" notion to couple the
absolute space and time so as to introduce non-absolute, ~relative
time.

If a person watches the bouncing ball, it doesn't take a rocket
scientist to recognize that the next or a subsequent likely step in the
paradigm trend is, of course, demoting time as a primary tenet of the
scientific paradigm. Time goes from: absolute; to relative; to
--shall we say?-- non-primary. (Shades of Julian Barbour's The end of Time.)

Now, certainly the BIG Challenge in this step is coming up with the
expression, basically shifting from the set of tenets Einstein
introduced around the year my old house in Brookston was built (1905), to
the set of tenets that retain sufficient backward compatibility and
yet also delivers the halting transition.

This is where structured~duality as a tenet enters in. Once you tie
off the bungee and take a flying leap into the abyss, after coming to
rest ~60 levels of organization ~below the relativistic space-time
model, you can detach and gain your bearings. With reality being
nested structured~duality, experience exists, but time (relativistic
or otherwise) does not.

So, we look at the principle of structured~duality, consider the
associated structural coding and the analog math, and we see what
emerges, or, I suppose I ought to say, we look at what can emerge when
one adopts structured~duality as a tenet.

I assume that readers can already intuitively view the
structured~duality INSIDE "relativistic space-time". That is,
Einstein's storyline is obviously an instance. But when we try on
the proposed shift in tenets, sure we can still use the abstract math
model in the old "space-time" paradigm, but conceptually, with us all
running the 6^n ordered water analog math and von Neumann's "process1"
as we bobble along in the varying mass-density. So, conceptually, we
come down on the side of "multiple-states" (as cast into terms of
nested structured~duality).

In the process, in the paradigm transition, in hearing the soft "CLAP"
time as a tenet shifts to non-primary status and, rather unexpectedly,  the temporal era
ends.

That is, we continue to move forward....

Best regards,
Ralph

Love, joy, peace,
patience, kindness, goodness,
Faithfulness, gentleness, self-control

From: The Unwritten Handbook of Paradigm Mechanics

It's a snap to dial back to 1640 and step over to Comenius's path, then insert the underlying general principle so as to see all of reality as nested structured duality. Child's play, really. And we're remediating or adding only one step and back in our group's development just a mere 350 years. But, that path doesn't need to or require tanking science and religion. It mainly implements a smooth shift and roll down into the more unified scientific view of the local region, on-the-fly, and then we all blast forward together. Obviously,  the more coherent appreciation of our shared biological connections will naturally develop as such a more unified perspective becomes adopted.


[With thanks  to Christopher, Roland, Serge, Ram, Leon, Chris, and all the many, many others in  [jcs-online] Digest Number 2109] and related posts.]

Thought for one day.

I still advocate that the group focus in just on the scientific paradigm transition. Dial back to 1640; Comenius pops the question on the underlying general principle; fast-forward to the present era: synergetics, magnetic tetrahedra, nested structured duality, respiration-driven structurally coded consciousness, quantum gravity and ecology makes sense, bend a knee - plant a tree,  care for God,  one another and Heaven and Earth.   Bob's your uncle.

On-goiing conversation in JCS-Online April 1, 2011

  See: http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/jcs-online/

 

Re: Energy, the one and the many

Posted by: "Ralph" ralph@frostscientific.com   ralphedwardfrost

Fri Apr 1, 2011 12:20 am (PDT)

--- In jcs-online@yahoogroups.com, "Chris Nunn" wrote:
>
>
>Subject: [jcs-online] Re: Energy, the one and the many
 
>
> Hi Ralph, Tom and all,
>
> Thanks for the comment below, Ralph:-
> [rf] < I expect evidence has already or soon will emerge showing that the types of field punctuations you theorize about here are naturally and readily provided by the small field explosions occurring in the respiration reaction, in massively parallel form. The formation of each water molecule, or a sequence of n-water molecules, for example, presents a certain type of rational field signature within a certain period, structurally tuned or tempered, of course, by multiple layers of ~enzymatic catalysis/inhibition. Respiration sites adjacent in "space-time" (aka, 'the dancing field') would, in effect, sustain, cascade, or resonate/amplify the disruptions into signals.>
>
>
> The idea I like is that events with an 'objective' energy sufficiently precise to go with a Heisenberg temporal uncertanty of the same order as EEG frequencies could perhaps allow a translation of meaningful brain activity into modulations of a 'consciousness field'. I'd agree that

Grab your own end of the more unified knowledge worm-hole.

One of the odd idiosyncratic advantages of this  "structuredduality::"  modeling effort is it began and begins with a physical exemplar -- a physical model.  This doesn't mean that the exemplar is perfect or needs to be revered or worshiped. Far from it.  But, cast as it is  in terms of the multiple states inherent in the magnetic tetrahedron, this artifact is more of a non-classical rather than merely a classical device.  And, thus, playing around with the exemplar provides physical intuition of the shape, actions, states and behaviors of one non-classical artifact and thus provides some familiarity with ALL non-classical artifacts.  One holds and feels a "hand-sized" magnetic tetrahedron and creates the five primary isomers or states by giving the four magnets one-half spin each, and instantly, one acquire some impressions relating to the actions, states and behaviors of water, ammonia, methane derivatives and the like, including the 6^n structural coding occurring in the 10^20 per second respiration reaction that we're all running at the base of our consciousness.

So, while we may not be highly skilled in abstract math, playing around with, or even visualizing the new analog math, leaves us with useful impressions of some of the multiple-states features of our being. Together we acquire a common, rudimentary knowledge of one instance of quantum gravity and our home-schooling continues.

While visualization may be sufficient, for those people who would like to learn from experience,  Magtet.Com has recently begun offering the "Classic Magnetic Tetrahedron" design. If you are so moved, check it out. Grab your own end of the more unified knowledge worm-hole.

Respiration as von Neumann's 'process 1'

In his article  "Philosophy of Mind and the Problem of Free Will in the Light of Quantum Mechanics", Henry P. Stapp of Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, University of California recently made references to John von Neumann's development of quantum mechanics and our intertwined observational relationships as involving a undefined "process 1" action.

This “free” choice plays a fundamental role in von Neumann’s rigorous formulation of quantum mechanics, and he gives the physical aspect of this probing action the name “process 1” (von Neumann, p. 351, 418, 421). This process 1 action is not necessarily determined, even statistically, by the physically described aspects of the theory. http://arxiv.org/abs/0805.0116 (p 15)

 It is downright intriguing to accept  that the 10^20 unit per second , 6^n multiple state structural coding analog math occurring in respiration reaction sites fits nicely as von Neumann's 'process 1'.

-Ralph Frost - Februrary 11, 2011

A thought worthy of speech

Try this link.  (Listen to an excerpt from a recent jsc-online post.)

--Ralph