A Score of Years since Crick began the Next Level of Physics Enquiring about Consciousness

A Score of Years since Crick began the Next Level of Physics Enquiring about Consciousness
L. Edgar Otto 17 March, 2012

Physics, or any type of social enquiry that strives to answer the questions of it day is at the frontier of the border between what can be understood and communicated for the present and conservative range of the enquiry as well the introduction of the next level prepared in the general awareness of what may be accessible and breakthrough discoveries, awakening of knowing the reality, achievements, and the prospects of man.

If we keep this in mind, that we undertake something more or less a risk, the negative result also the tough love of scientific enquiring, appeal to existing methods and persons involved within and beyond their legend as perhaps a restraint, one needed on the average, that the results of the enquiry has to also conform with our dreams beyond any question so answered as to be a bottleneck of imagination. The game while played with edit and effort should nevertheless be done with a certain freedom in the play. What makes this difficult is that such a view of games is a condition at the very heart of the question of how we know and how we enquire and what in science, if there is a science of consciousness, is but dreaming or the real.

Consciousness is at least harder to explain than the foundational physics that underlies the "Cheshire Grin" type or models of interlinked chess games on quantum grounds.
If we shift perspectives (of that observed or the observer in the perception boundaries) between these senses of the real and fantasy, the unique general states in transformation as well the actual, directional and chronological reduced path of a game we interlace the styles of play which on this level of modeling can be intelligibly played, physically or in theory.

From an artistic view (that too related to the moods and states of this phenomenon of consciousness) can we combine or mix styles in which we ground the creation of certain methods and products of the artist? This regardless of the toxic effects, the wear and tear in the doing, the merging of colors to dulled grays and cloudy browns, the general health or illness physically of the artist. Could we for example mix the methods of the impressionist painters and the surrealistic painters with there emphasis on pixel by pixel painting (not as such the preference of styles of how things are painted in internet spaces of digital design where the restriction to text is a freer field underneath of the vague nature of trying to represent variations on the type face that underlies the viewers illusion of continuous time and letters) in this mixing (which we have set as standards for the machines to interpret in the development of terms as a unified language) that both styles can be expressed as a unified product of creative artistic expression.

Of course there are other compiling of styles beyond this example and variations along these classes of games in the abstract within the range of some mixed styles. For example Miro is generally regarded as surrealistic in his time and group but his picture in a sea of surrealism (to which the nature of the directional braids and vectors of surreal numbers as defining general number is aptly named) is one of interesting almost linear objects. I mention again the idea that abstract painters were interpreted as a reflection on the quantum microlevel in their time and that Jack in our time is interpreted a little deeper as if we find hints of fractal patterns. This is quite besides if it is a matter of Jack the Dripper or randomness, or if the observed recurrent patterns are coincidentally but an artifact of patterns in numbers as their natural arithmetic laws.

* * * * *