The Growth of Theoretical Concepts (Contents and Coherence in State of Our Vision)

The Growth of Theoretical Concepts

(Contents and Coherence in State of Our Vision)

L. Edgar Otto  28 February, 2013

*03:14:02 AM

I have worked long enough and have accumulated enough creative data to ask if the state of my own, or any vision is a healthy way to spend one's light especially what of the concepts inquire and test in perhaps a general environment of physical and subjective uncertainty.

But let us not, in the rumor of doubts, dismiss the insights and coherence that like evolving science ideas seems to move or grow toward wider unified explanations or visions as well not hold too tightly to the mind's self deception in dreams.  Content is to be honesty judged in science, not on the physical level how we associate with it by just feelings.

So in the pattern of my grow as creative still it is difficult to recall or search the data as it changes on this level.  As with all symbols born of automatic and quasi-random processes we do repeat them from time to time.  That is I find a drawing of which, like script writing in its subtitles, we almost have to see things in their era to read or decipher them- to understand what we said, to see what we intuited or saw with some predictive implications if we are wise enough of the meanings or the why we moved the concepts that way.

Yet it is not that in any era we do not have a coherent and seemingly total theory- but the analysis of the content may find connections, deep and in a wider span of designed and set down intuitions that are greater than the principles implicated then.  In  more than an abstract sense the flow of such information or projects in the general confluence of individuals and the body of accumulated collective knowledge our alphanumeric age seems a physical entity which describes if not on some level is actually time travel.

Such connections, not quite reached save in retrospect to which the growing mind and theory may invoke comments like such and such a theoretician came close but for some reason did not take the nearby next and profound step. Or that in the test of time conjectures were spoken too soon.

I add then an example of two pictures from my backdoor gin coloration of cubes I stumbled on trying to set the default for viewing of which another program took over for such things hidden deeper in the filing system, one moreover my established methods is in conflict with usual specialized models of operating systems with the ease of intuitive use in mind.  Something is to be said for a formal procedure and a more careful arrangement unto the resolution of even photos.  But the general grow of theory and how to live best in the environment with others in the world, with technology, also is evolving, growing with these same doubtful patterns.

To use these 20 cubes, abstractly painted, lately is more on the order of a quantum or second physics than my earlier state of ideas which were decidedly more classical and relativistic in its environment of advocasy save it more finite to be cautious as assumed so for the endorsement.  That is to say we should not forget the previous era that returns as do movements in deep or shallow fads of philosophy.

Clearly, the use of these cubes with an arbitrary interrelation notation based on the 30 cubes originally stated, and I rediscovered the division into ten and ten of them, was the direction of the structure in relation to what when these are applied to physical situations amounts to a stance toward four space- as well if we count th cubes as dimensions we come again to the (well is geometry an elaborate but empty enterprise in the end and trivial or its it an ideal realm?) intelligibility of numbers, especially the 13 14 15 and 26 of things... but for generations that exceed these low dimensional concerns, 10 more classical or Euclidean, the total of 64 adds one to which we justify the leap into the next level of quasic generations and systems of dimensions- either way thru a third physics what may be n-physics generally with dimension-like considerations and hierarchical analogs.

For this reason I post two previous drawings in one for what I said now seems to me even less a conjecture or theory closer to facts of which we are all converging it seems- I have not looked to see if and where I posted them here earlier.  In general is it better to touch a screen or to view it at a distance as far as the learning goes and changes possible in the subjective-physical developments of our minds?  Is there a reason to worry say for those whom have been raised in this current explosion of data and media such as in the influence of violence or the act of video gaming?

Just a thought or two, after the confluence series they are not coming as fast in the growing, yet what does is even more subtly terse and profound.  I feel sure in the end for all of us who inquire the more we know the better all our lives will be- including the freedom to simply live finding other things.  But from time to time it is a good idea to streamline and edit the body of ones work without losing its information and meaning if it is to transmit by its reading a source for the awakening creative time in others.

* * * * *