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