Transgenerative Consciousness

Transgenerative Consciousness L. Edgar Otto May 22, 2011

The following is perhaps not as deep as some of my ideas on the physics, but I present it informally as it perhaps contains the germ of future worthwhile ideas. I am not sure there is much original in it de novo. It is more a consideration of the consequences of the new physics so intimately connected to topology and number theory but the underlying logic, the generative thesis in general, would explain why on one hand, and for higher symmetries and dimensions, that are seems to be in our human consciousness a sense of some true idea in which some cannot understand why others cannot see the obvious truth of such theories. Lubos said as much today in his post on Greene in which he questions a whole panorama of speculations as without evidence. Pitkanen posts what seems to me a very obvious theory as true but maybe because we touch base on the vision with a few minor exceptions and for all I know some major global differences. Consciousness still seems to me wider than references including Penrose of a quantum theory alone.

It is difficult then to actualize the awareness of ones consciousness, to try to see it as a direct object of study. I awake this morning and the world is still here and it will not help that I am in a different time frame to yesterday or that one cannot in reality live in day tight compartments. These sorts of questions seem to me to be open to at least a partial description by physics- while I am awake that is - but if there is anything to the consciousness of our dreaming then I have reached the limit of my ability to so understand them myself- that or in some sense the terrain is now exhausted and craves rest or other inputs from the external reality. Only the vaguest patterns and calculations in a world of patterned partitioned dots meaninglessly replicated and debated in a conference with others held little meaning upon awakening or if we did throughly understand all was simple and perhaps a waste where it happens in the greater world to our use of life.

Is it a surprise that, as in the social networks, that freedom to access anything will reach a cycle where the pendulum is monitored and pushed in the virtual bubble- that even in the recommendation of music we are isolated in our styles from those who might awaken us to other styles- our poetry saturated in an incestious relationship where we all, sharing our common bonds for survival, now are blind to the herd together. Such unstable things strive to impose its organization on others and so cover the world with its point of view. But the general consciousness cannot so be contained although we seem to make money by the community we access and what is so restricted in the flow of information is more power than its forms of politics or power or even numbers.

Two tornados were a few counties away today, twice I had to close the windows, the neighbors seemed to be intimate all day as the clouds dimmed the sky- or those who took a day off did what they usually do, read the Sunday paper, watch the media for hours on end. There is a lot to be said for a place just to be alone with windows to keep out the rain or candles that what one does- and who does not wonder what others do- can be safely seen. Why is it that in larger cities people tend to keep their immediate neighbors at a distance? There is a new strong light on the porch fire escape- it discourges the weekend drinkers with cushion chairs from being outside or watching the fights and dancers, climbing the roof, thinking that to a point such a loss of control is a better state of consciousness. But this was getting more dangerous toward the mornings when they would half slip trying to climb up on the roof. It seems to me not a friendly act to watch in stealth from the dark.

Oh, the world did not end- or it did and the true belivers inverted the truth of their believing passing to some explanation where if the prophesy failed they are on a higher plane where it seems even more true. It ended at 6 they say so before I came home I went to the convience store and came up to the worker saying Hi again, you know about the end of the world- yes, she said, we always talk about school stuff and poetry and so forth- her boyfriend makes mathematical puzzles- Well, we only have a half hour to cuddle! She turned red and smiled- that one was pretty good she said. But how many hours have I spent working on the cash register myself and wondering at the closed off place to be and routine that really was going nowhere and if not for ringing up the whole shopping basket in scambled order I think my intellegence would have gone way down punching the numbers. Anyway, these human activities are not the distraction they used to be - but I cannot say that the reason we write for example, the art for arts sake, is that we are building something immortal to which in hard times it is essential so many of us make the plays.

*1 Awareness of the novelty of something saturates, declines, and strives to look beyond itself unto transcendence or tranquility- that or a greater equilibrium in the relationship of both.

*2 In that I in physicality exist, I am an entity, a Being. In that I do not exist in relation to Being-in-context, I am.
(yes, I know, the old Cartesian claptrap, perhaps Sartreanly reversed.)

*3 My existence is everywhere an uncertainty of *2 in all relations. (sometimes I wish Xithul in philosophychatforum would be there on this level to sort out the logic of it and its traditional limits of grounding for these are philosophic issues to address such that we can then design a scientific system as a model at least true to its own logic design implimentations)

*4 The relation *3 does not necessarily relate intelligibly and coherently save it too has a certain "unmetaphysical" physicality.

*5 Any totality reaching rock bottom, decays, or decline is also indistinguishible from unphysical possibilities.

*6 By virtue of this unity, stable on transcendental surfaces of the virial principle (the inverse square law and stable orbits) of reduced three space we can imagine a general, possibly orderings, symmetrical or not necessarily so, of a thermodynamic transgenerative dynamics (TXD)

*7 TXD finds a concrete or scientific reduction to TGD which in the realm of the unmetaphysical is itself a comprehensive theory.

*8 The notions and logic in views of physicallity cannot be defeated as with the several traditional proofs of God by any less comprehensive theory. Same for our vague descriptions of consciousness so far.

*9 But it does secure the possibility, the scope and existence of a comprehensive theory declines into physicality as if there is an indistinguishible paradox of the consciousness of consciousness explained by an anthropic principle of the here now is. That whe should distinguish existential and universal powers of Being as a fact of being, universally, existentially, and generatively. (the use of the word generative essentially comes from particle generation ideas and unity as the generator in Pascal's triangle, aslo my earlier suffix -gene where applies. The poet in me ignores the parallel sound that trangenerative sounds a little like transgenderative although some species propagate by such methods:-)

*10 Poetic Consciousness; Ascetic Consciousness; Consciousness as Mechanical Indifference, that Functionally Unaware; That fourth and grounding category of
the Glorification, Reversals, and Destructive chaos by Evil- a sort of anti-poetry.

*11 A pro-poetry is not necessarily anti-science, and conversely.

*12 What is stated in simplicity [see end of post for a related example in counting the subcells of a simplex] may appear or be empty of either meaning, content in general, or information in no necessary realtion but at unity and scale by default they mix these philosophies in a nonnecessary alternating or dialicatical way - that is a pure anarchy of order may also be part of the preceptive background.

*13 Life (a passing thought here) is started cosmically by x-rays after an earlier stage of gamma bursts- this sequence times three or more and with quasi-analogs, biocode degeneracies, with the background of cosmic coding's. Life can grow and replicate by the storage of visible light.

*14 Inward or outwardly, three fold generative accrued relations as above - and as a mirror in quasi-reality, to physical reality, these same relations at ground yet more generally a possibility and sense of creative (generative) identity, consciousness arises in structure and difference of the mediator count. But some mediators are only shadows, as we can be, so consciousness may be seen transgeneratively. (Thus as some now see, gravitons and mass inducing particles).

*15 Can our consciousness imagine, subjective scenarios or as a technology, a model of the universe beyond traditional and speculative fiction, or religion, now?

*16 Evidence of a transcendent model is the sense of self or change in behavior which may appear to be a decling model, or both such cases present (a failed universe from a failed multiverse over some generative state or compass).

*17 Death, consciousness then as not necessarily local, nor dimensioned even if a radically different and more complicated universe, even for the totality of a species, is not necessarily an instruction or meme that by default can make more than a difference in the near past and future whr natures (un)physicality is conserved.

* * *

I do not have it in my notes, a slight doodling on a scrap of paper thrown away as it was interesting because I had not considered it before, but seemed uninteresting and an all to obvious matter of counting or describing counts and structures. But from a global view- what if such a view of numbers and space was the most that most people can realize when they undertake to envision such things?

I may look at it again. Note, my presentation today seems to read to me a little more worthy to post than it did last night when I casually wrote it down.

Ok consider the count of points on a tetrahedron as if the stacking number, here in three space, is contained between the 4 points n0. Now we have points lines and faces and volume to consider there.

(BTW in TGD Diary today I read an idea in which I imagine Pitkanen is coming closer to the idea of an iota particle in relation to such things like strings and such and endpoints relate to a number line- and also I am wondering if his Galois ideas relate in his theory in a discrete manner- I do not see what I share with another link here- not so much the invariance but the structural quasi-fixed idea of primes that require our theories to take note of composites in the modular sea- that is a special place for the twin primes as a sequence for structural effects.-)

Now, as the count progresses after 4, and in the sequence 1, 4, 10, 20, 35 ... we note in the n3 or volume it is the first time that has a value, 1 point. But in the total count it seems at first glance the formula is merely adding 21 to the last number after 4. But this constructive spaces seems very simple to me in what for most people it is hard to envision three space in the first place.


* * *