Tuesday, January 22, 2013
Zen and Zeno
Zen and Zeno
L. Edgar Otto 22 January, 2013
SOME HINTS OR THOUGHTS I LIST HERE CASUALLY:
Lyceum (School of Aristotle)
Position and Direction (But Plato makes the first subatomic theory based on the polyhedra)
Stadium (of the race course, of the rows)
Philosophy of the S-brane, Stadiuons...
The Kaon is the Koan
Anti-realism of perceptions (Zen)
Monism but the Spirit (Pneuma, air, vapors, aether, Newton, Descartes)...Ideology of the Spirit
Abduction as analog to the stadium of rows
Voluntarism vs Spontaneity, Heeding shadows from Perception
Excluded middle, intuitionist double negation not a positive
Zeno's puzzles seen, if seen, as positive in deep thought
The stadium of the rows compared to trains in relativity and simultaneity... the issue of intervals or minimum duration or distance, minimum space time.
Nonsense on Stilts (nonsense or not-sensed on steroids)
Stadium as the idea of half infinity in the quasic regress view
Idea of an inverse slide rule, or the usual one that regards the outside as not moving or but one side of mirrors moving, Casmir force
The particle idea close to that of Aristotle as if containers- regions in regions (but where in the perception do we explain the construction of a polyhedron's last face?) Where in the Platonic like string theory at its grounding does the particle view meet the space or vacuum view?
The electrons and the photons race around the Hippodrome
Perhaps, the measure of the days as the earth spins in clock time is this issue in its difficulty by smart people to give the explanation.
In the complex number space this half as real, despite the resolution of unity in the many to the one (another of Zeno's arguments) does not the real part partake of this phenomenon of half mirrors or the illusion of them thereof as half infinity- is there an anti-real part?
In the Ibrane perception argument of the condensing (flangelation) or compactification let us generalize the rows in dimensions and their scientific and philosophic motion stereonometry.
In quasic theory many of the core assertions of Zeno, like position or positions in positions and so on; like what is different yet the same, is resolved into a more general system.
* * *
At a critical time considering special relativity getting a haircut I noticed the apparent velocity of a bike rider in the reflections thru the mirrors just before high school, Our Triumvirate or Tetrahedron, our club of kids did reckless experiments with rockets and had long discussions on the nature of higher dimensions, making models. Thus these per-scientific and per-philosophic concerns of which I imagine Stereonometry among other lost books like of Zeno to contain at the dawning of the alphanumeric age- but it is not clear to me we can say of a knowledge that one either has it or one does not- there is too much ideology in the ideas of state, or for that matter in the dogma or dialectics of the ideological science.
I did some color programming by applying sequences of color to paint (but this in the context more than just logic and how it may fit into mathematical physics and philosophy) yet the results were not deep enough to make clear enlightening illustrations- because of the flow of the applications existentially that is the core of what we do when directionality loses information. But it does tell me I have to look into the wider theory of combinotorics in the programming (drawing) of such ordering to show the problem solved this way of the higher spaces and perceptions, symmetries of the colored cubes.
Does not the electron so conceived race around the hippodrome as if on its half magnetic spin values?
In the generalization to higher dimensions (thus somewhere between continuous and discrete as Zeno understood, my quasifinite- hey I am just beginning to look into how my independent thinking relates to this core philosophy and physics- as all of us as inquirers may do regardless of the influence of eras of movements, the back doors and gin of old theoreticians to follow or displace, those that stand, or the true believers who work ideas far beyond the sensibilities of the founders such as with Plato's Republic. Perhaps the Skeptics of Rome. In the search for truth, distinguished or not from fact, we come to realize just how deserving of being a legend some of the old scientists and philosophers were to which others have tried to dethrone in blind iconoclasm as if to glorify what in everyman is but a shadow or a name. This does not help the progress of science or civilization, not the fact of false prophets and cults for them, if we assume it is our ability and responsibility to discern clearly. I do resent that in the schools and in the market square we are lied to about how we should teach or suppress such directions of inquiry.
Again, the idea of why we heed what is real or not from outside of our own sentient systems in isolation or from within it- body and mind and what is real or not or somewhere a spirit in between, beneath the psyche or soul this nous and its dynamics of how we know as if a logic. But from the angelic voices from what order of maturity do we have to have in the givens of spacetime architecture to discern from these ghosts that the message is otherworldly or just mystically general- that in this process the voices we heed with the destiny and responsibility are the same in good and evil, there's or our own- what makes such spirit nonsense on steroids as if departed quantities or that which is not indifferent in its shells and directions of choice the grounding as subjective or some objectivity, both from the same interpretation of the reality of the world?
On what do we ground our judgements in matters like ethics and morals, ultimately, that we can so decided for our society and individuals, weigh the sanity? What sort of higher theory is needed as we design our logic systems as life designs itself and its inquiry's?
This seems an urgent question in our time- but if we listen carefully and think for ourselves it is clear that the words used by our politicians and others are as beautiful as empty in application, response or meanings... we can see the ideology from whence they came thus assume this is their necessity of how to impose on all a way of seeing the world, at least the coloring it with empty words as a question of individual poetry and style.
When we think about the developments in the West, and the counterpart of great philosophers of the East, it is clear that we cannot maintain by ideology even the profound revolutionary experiments of our new constellation in America at this time- that it will not endure in conflict no more than can it be imposed on the world. An ideology without its philosophers cannot long stand or one that does not invest freely and openly in scientific research, in scientists, will not be a whole system that can stay ahead of the technology it heeds from the ill or good, awake or blind in its experiments and applications.
How odd that the great Newton too considered this idea of Spirit as a very airy substance as the aether- that is not talked about much, in his physics anymore than in the philosophy of Hume and Locke. But forgive me- for to a great degree I see the hopeful conclusions of creative souls like Churchman influence by their time and the promises we assume therein- the phases of the moon and consciousness for the new agers now pragmatically a dead end or any of the age of monotheistic sciences underneath a nameless God who brings the world to be by a name- I too am likely to have such influences and why address just the future souls, but I am willing to learn if in the doing so we all find the truth of things.
As to the illustration above, an older example of a banner from an earlier age of theology or crusader groups, and its descendent as one of the banners in an imagined later age of ideology and bayonets. Are they security and liberty or our quarantine personal arms and burial flags? But they were made for the arts sake only.
As to the video above, these general views in the cosmos or in subatomics of what is the relation of space to mass, gravity to mass and so on (somewhere apparently in the merging of backgrounds as with the ideas- much like the early difference between Plato and Aristotle of their string like or more continuous frame geometry varieties) I suggest, as promising at it once was say my chiral theorem for the evolution and structure of galaxies, that mass is not to be considered there by the left over particles beyond a certain difference in spin symmetries- that it is more foundational, and philosophically so as we come closer to the origin and unity of such viewing the universe or finding such particles these go back to the beginning of our civilized history where we make records in stone or light, most lost- yet may imagine being in time anywhere and marveling at the world in thought- or someone there marveling at such parallels but the same world as if a spirit... or perhaps possessed if by fear and the breaking down of joy, of sorrow, and the axiom of irreducible of desire...we need to reconsider Zeno again for to get around this genius we would have to get around ourselves, but not just partially in ways we heed not our grounding beyond perception and in it the intelligible and intelligent creative design.
* * * * *