Simulated Intuitions (Hyperglossa)
L. Edgar Otto April 18, 2012
The actuality of a cosmic code, its extended uniqueness as if two point determine a line, or perhaps some length of it, or if it cascades in questions of divisions and hierarchy, seems to fill our intuitions as if we imagine a principle of a filled vacuum. Not only the sentiment that between the pen and the paper falls the shadow but in the ink and shadow itself falls the reality of the codes. (a salute here to Gibhran)
I word this with reference to our management systems of our experience in the cyberspace world of which the metaphor may apply more intimately to physics or philosophy questions than we are aware as we move through these changes and states of technology, perhaps to a totally new state for any of its applications. For example the influencing and monitoring of human behavior with its hidden assumptions emphasized. With technology that works to a point in such matters the objective distance from the varieties of psychiatric analysis may move from the idea of things hidden and interpreted between to subjective beings.
I had what I thought an unusual dream and it has taken a few days to see the significance, to perhaps make an interpretation only, it standing out even in my repertoire of references to recent dreams that seemed to me physics related and foundational beyond arbitrary symbols and themes. Yet, it is not as dramatic as a first dream encounter so it has a sense of rationality as a mature model. It suggests to me it could have dramatic effect in the real world.
This question then of more than the skin effect but what happens in the neutral place, the aether not necessarily virtual or real where different states of matter or ideas meet, as questions of simulation or analogy is also the issue of connectivity between things. So we have the crude and traditional division of instinct, intelligence, and intuition of which the still relevant question here of how we encounter and are expressions of the codes as if it actual or just simulated intelligence. But such a management system would be colored by our core systems of interpretation of which as thinking creatures to some physics models or intelligible mathematical models for truth they can correspond. Our current ones seem to me limited to our ideas on the general vector properties involving the vertical.
To achieve a wider application to give back to the web of which it should be of little surprise as it is a system that is close to the logic concerning real and virtual information and in its development can in theory find patterns for physical storage and systems that we imagine can go beyond the limits of the small or encompass more monitoring space and speed or something totally new but we are not sure what that will replace our level of technology, somewhere around mid century some who want to forecast such things predict.
The idea so far in the hierarchy between websites has advanced in the hypertext language as connecting between webpages such that these external pages have a central effect globally on the design and content of all pages in which it is referred to. This a few levels down and no further as the vertical direction of things, the gravity like, do not shrink. What is involved here then is not just how things are connected and the consequences and interpretation of these growing organizational systems or possible errors of abstraction into daydreams for example. It is the simple fact that the idea of what a page it can be hardly like our physical example of books or scrolls. Then again it is not just a picture for the technology of a direct addition to the linear code for pictures and even pen on paper is a simulation that is outside the present scope of our technology. One would think with such expert people the problem would not seem so slow in the rapid compression of computer man hours.
In philosophy, and in logic we raise these question of what are pictures in pictures for paradoxes of representation and ans so on. The box model of the cascading styles, as in my dream, is not simple idea of a page like picture on a computer that is a simple plane. It is at least as complicated as our idea of branes of which the principles of access, so close to tables in tables or ideas of distinct layers of transparency or superimposition as if a quantum issue. We can then embed such branes in the browser page (and is not a page of only a logical measure compared to real inches for example- is it not the continuum as aleph 1 that could include most any extent or dimensions in a set theoretic view?)
In a unified physics (that itself among the foundational paradoxes) it is reasonable to see our unique persons, mind and bodies, as unified as to our instincts, intellects, and intuitions as if one central place of reference. When two animals, such as canines, meet they have stances of appearances and focused interest as if an analog in an evolving hierarchy of which we personalize into them as the temporary awakening of the next level of intelligence. But systems are also independent in their non-necessary connections that similar things are by the fact of being in a distinct location (singularity) are not connected or are one thing to the perceptible whole. The cloned twig of a tree may eventually become clear that it fundamentally is a different tree. That these management systems are possible even if hidden guarantees that collectives and groups may be different in their physical states as well as mental ones.
But for any system, as in our organic ones, as a brane description for example the Daystar in the attempted unification or mixed myths of Baha'i faith and faithful He breaks down as if a Hologram of broken mirrors, the shingles on the church roof as my metaphor of a general neutral aether, a broken mirror that can reflect forever the source or the source fades as thing break- so too our unified unique persons can be said to be as actual or simulation, as to if they can respond to a theory forced to intelligibility or returns to intelligibility in the long run, is such a collection of broken planes or branes.
We are at once everything as human being and not worth much at all or something in between alone or part of a cultural system and its purposes, actions, we are all this at once and so is the society which can be the source of our decoherencce as well as our unity of vision. This seems true whether a view of universe as simulation or not, real or virtual. This would explain what happens in war or other social breakdowns, economy, natural disasters and so on, or the resilience at the bottom of the spirit in man for although we may error to some unsupportable direction by force or circumstance we can discern what is but propaganda or lies.
While in this hyperglossa, the ways some doubtful or not understood of how at the foundations a human mind can communicate to another, how some core value or emotion can be seen as false or real if the truth persists in time. These secular human models with the restraint of religious like myths, interpretations simulated in the aether of the virtual or real what is the unique character of our being. In this sense we can have a new view of our fellow man even if it is a strict timeline of development and pattern of lifespan as wide as the actual life, to infer of their view of the world and of their own lives. We can see each others patterns in the widest sense of the unified wisdom struggling in our day.
The frontiers may have more surprises beyond our most imaginative current dreams. The old debate that in principle can return as an issue again if machines or some connection in virtual space between them have intelligence (and the vague fear they take over our place in life- but here we can have a creeping take over of some invisible and neutral design of which it does not need to be intelligent or with purpose of meaningful action as all such haunting potentially real lessons to be learned with a better system of learning) or machines can have emotions- but the deeper nature of intelligence and emotions themselves under foundational designs.
So, at the risk of seeming concerned with the trivial and trite I now list some simple ideas of which we do keep in mind or should as we explore our dreams and world:
*1 The distinguishing between a God and World, implied mirrored or actual.
*2 The continuous and the discrete.
*3 The Absolute and the Relative
*4 Intelligent or Robotic effort or action
*5 That evolving (an inheritance given a chance in a chance environment) or seems to be occurring at an instant.
*6 Ordered or Unordered loops that can default into sub-cycles with the loss of information or streamlining of superfluous structures in space or partitions or time.
*7 The idea of Mass or Gravity and their relationship.
*8 The vacuum as replete or empty.
*9 Something Hot or Cold, or even lukewarm.
*10 That which is strait or curved or so related discretely in patterns.
*11 The real or virtual cyber wars for the control of designed logic.
*12 That which is passive or active, and that which is Kinetic or Potential.
*13 In general that which is anchored or free.
*14 Things which can be doubled or halved, repeatedly.
*15 What is by nature a duality or mixed or at ground a unity.
*16 This which is physically or mentally transparent as to the nature of layers coherent or decoherent as creative or destructive, superimposing or independent, congruent or incommensurable, a code simulated or of a concrete programming.
These of course not a complete list but only a departure point for some symbols as words or languages, processes or states of being as the origin of words may indicate at times as well the hopes for someone so named for some strength or beauty. But we have a different problem than just the issues of fundamental physics or programming for as a sentient being we work with the tools we make or are given but what contrast is it that shows us how to use or make the tools? Meanwhile, it is a problem as always as to what to keep or what must be recycled or thrown away as we cherish the bits of things that in our great wonders of this world stands but a part of the dreams in the past itself or in some future state beyond even the scope of these first blush considerations (go ye to develop from the ground these most human hints in which our unified language can become a fine instrument and not lose its humanity in the middle ground.)
For this as philosophy goes beyond the question of why is the world here rather than not here and we cannot take for granted this has no higher truth and question of which to ask for clearly this may ask of one thing two questions. Nor are these abstract things not worth the asking or that we waste our time with such questions perhaps with no real answer told so for comfort by those who do not know. If there is no God then in this doubly dark aether we may find that we are not mere simulations of some ultimate noble idea. On the other hand we as real for all practical purposes God exists and in a non necessary universe this hypothesis at the other end of all unities and reductions seems needed.
* * * * * * * * *
No comments:
Post a Comment