Consciousness, Transcendence & Integration

[SteveA]

Another posting for the sake of interest and discussion. LW

The quantum vacuum is the realm of energy behind matter. In this realm there is neither space nor time and everything in it is interconnected. Conservative scientists generally do not accept the concept of this realm of energy behind matter. But there are several scientific institutions that do ground breaking research of different aspects of the quantum vacuum.

The Oxford University in Great Britain has dedicated a department to research the possibility of a computer operating on the principles of the quantum vacuum. As there is no time in this realm a computer operating on basis of qbits, these are the equivalent of ordinary bits used in "normal" computers, would do all the computations in zero time. This means that the moment the data is put into the computer the result shows up on the screen. The smallest qbit computer will outperform the most advanced giant present day computers.

At the California Institute of Physics and Astrophysics - CIPA - the possibilities offered by the quantum vacuum are researched in various directions. For instance, allegedly the Institute received a grant to research the possibility of a space drive utilizing the quantum vacuum. Such a drive would bring a space ship to its destination in zero time. Distances would not matter any more. The most distant star systems and galaxies would be reachable instantly as travel time in the quantum vacuum is zero.

At the University in Innsbruck, Austria, researchers succeeded teleporting matter using the quantum vacuum. The test matter did not travel in a traceable trajectory to its destination. Instead it disappeared in one location and appeared in another one. This matter had overcome the distance between departure and arrival destination in the quantum vacuum. This means the transport was instant.

http://www.world-mysteries.com/ra_qv_peg.htm

Consider that if physical motion is similar to mentally learning a subject, there is a similar limit to velocity in terms of knowing where to go or learning how to be in a specific state.

For example, if we had a physical manner to move at an unlimited velocity we'd similarly need a manner to control where such a motion went and what the properties were of the places this motion passed through.

In order to move faster in a controlled manner that has any value, the values and the manners of controlling, interacting and determining that motion need to exist - the specific velocity is related to the quantities or significance of whatever changes outside, contrary or against this this desired motion or change of state (which is determined by our perceptions of that motion and beliefs regarding how it influences that state).

The reason why I commented on this is that I believe it is desires or emotions that "set the course" so to speak and that where we happen to be right now is the product of a long chain of these over time nested within each other - likely the first such motion was simply a desire for something else and the second something like a desire for a freedom/choice/control in that and the third potentially a manner to alter values ... but we can possibly see it similar to that thread on Maslow's Hierarchy except at a very fundamental of how we experience existence now as a product of many desires to become such and such over time.

The relevant "velocities" in this case could be seen a bit more clearly as the general ratio of motions/changes that satisfy these versus those that don't. If there is a reason that faster than light speed velocities is valuable (in itself it has no determinable/controllable value if the destination or states/positions passed through cannot be determined to have such value), then we'll pursue it (and there's actually no physical law that denies it's possible but instead that if we use light to navigate by and conventional manners of observing and learning of space, then rather much by definition we'd be travelling through such conventional forms of space). In order to move in a different manner with any utility, those components that allow for such faster than light motions to occur would need to be used - for example, one component needed would be a manner to move without navigating using information conveyed via. light would be needed (so in a sense, the motion would not be through a conventional light speed space). Another component that would appear helpful would appear to be intuition or faith as requiring events repeat multiple times before a landmark is declared would lead to a space with lots of repetitions So in some ways - just going, without stopping to know everything along the path can make for a bit faster velocity to the trip - of course such motions would not be "provable" in the typical sense of empirically measured motion through a space.

Anyway, it's just interesting to see that there's actually some solid logic and information theory behind things that could normally appear as myth/pseudo science etc. and there can be real reasons why some forms of phenomenon cannot be proven to exist and can appear to only be experienceable or subjective.

It's also interesting to see correlations between different classes of thought processes and some of the characteristics of the "spaces" these perceive are.

I guess the main point is that I believe we already "travel" at the speed of knowledge/experience etc. and this is not a specific velocity in space. The manner in which we figuratively "navigate" determines that velocity ... different ways of navigating .... different velocities What's the most important metric for velocity?

[leskey]

Consider that if physical motion is similar to mentally learning a subject, there is a similar limit to velocity in terms of knowing where to go or learning how to be in a specific state.

For example, if we had a physical manner to move at an unlimited velocity we'd similarly need a manner to control where such a motion went and what the properties were of the places this motion passed through.

In order to move faster in a controlled manner that has any value, the values and the manners of controlling, interacting and determining that motion need to exist - the specific velocity is related to the quantities or significance of whatever changes outside, contrary or against this this desired motion or change of state (which is determined by our perceptions of that motion and beliefs regarding how it influences that state).

The reason why I commented on this is that I believe it is desires or emotions that "set the course" so to speak and that where we happen to be right now is the product of a long chain of these over time nested within each other - likely the first such motion was simply a desire for something else and the second something like a desire for a freedom/choice/control in that and the third potentially a manner to alter values ... but we can possibly see it similar to that thread on Maslow's Hierarchy except at a very fundamental of how we experience existence now as a product of many desires to become such and such over time.

The bolded section represents how memory operates. This may also describe how alterations to DNA occur.

The bolded section is the way in which memory operates and which could be represented by changes to DNA...?

The relevant "velocities" in this case could be seen a bit more clearly as the general ratio of motions/changes that satisfy these versus those that don't. If there is a reason that faster than light speed velocities is valuable (in itself it has no determinable/controllable value if the destination or states/positions passed through cannot be determined to have such value), then we'll pursue it (and there's actually no physical law that denies it's possible but instead that if we use light to navigate by and conventional manners of observing and learning of space, then rather much by definition we'd be travelling through such conventional forms of space). In order to move in a different manner with any utility, those components that allow for such faster than light motions to occur would need to be used - for example, one component needed would be a manner to move without navigating using information conveyed via. light would be needed (so in a sense, the motion would not be through a conventional light speed space). Another component that would appear helpful would appear to be intuition or faith as requiring events repeat multiple times before a landmark is declared would lead to a space with lots of repetitions So in some ways - just going, without stopping to know everything along the path can make for a bit faster velocity to the trip - of course such motions would not be "provable" in the typical sense of empirically measured motion through a space.

Anyway, it's just interesting to see that there's actually some solid logic and information theory behind things that could normally appear as myth/pseudo science etc. and there can be real reasons why some forms of phenomenon cannot be proven to exist and can appear to only be experienceable or subjective.

It's also interesting to see correlations between different classes of thought processes and some of the characteristics of the "spaces" these perceive are.

I guess the main point is that I believe we already "travel" at the speed of knowledge/experience etc. and this is not a specific velocity in space. The manner in which we figuratively "navigate" determines that velocity ... different ways of navigating .... different velocities What's the most important metric for velocity?

Well put, as usual, Steve. The number of 'vector' choices determine velocity.

And, following on from lw's YouTube link:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q5wv_ZuFB0I

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZ_EViiLwys&NR=1

[SteveA]

The bolded section represents how memory operates. This may also describe how alterations to DNA occur.

You read my mind. Probably easy to do by now?

Well put, as usual, Steve. The number of 'vector' choices determine velocity.

Yes, though I guess we could also say that it represents a density of information per change (unit of time/difference) and this interestingly enough appears to possess a spectrum as well that's dependent upon the prime factors of that quantity.

Something to consider here is what context that quantity is in. If we look at it from the perspective of passive observation, then it's more of an "input" bandwidth. If we look at is as a context for actions, then it's similar to a density of energy. Passive learning is in a context of observation could be seen as a large input with little or no output. Uncontrolled output (not particularly productive I assume ) with little guidance might be "creative" in a random sense, but it appears at least one ideal could be close to a 1 to 1 correlation between state and action, where information is transformed in some optimal manner between input/environment/senses and an output/action/influence and I'd assume that transformation would correlate with some values (though I tend to believe erring on the side of input and minimizing actions/influences/output tends to be better in the long run ... lots of fun stuff to consider , though I definitely don't think we need too much uncontrolled output! Seems like we've been there, done that enough)

[leskey]

A little side-track (into uncontrolled output? ), following on from 'flux'...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crystallography

Crystallography in materials engineering
Crystallography is a tool that is often employed by materials scientists. In single crystals, the effects of the crystalline arrangement of atoms is often easy to see macroscopically, because the natural shapes of crystals reflect the atomic structure. In addition, physical properties are often controlled by crystalline defects. The understanding of crystal structures is an important prerequisite for understanding crystallographic defects. Mostly, materials do not occur in a single crystalline, but poly-crystalline form, such that the powder diffraction method plays a most important role in structural determination.

A number of other physical properties are linked to crystallography. For example, the minerals in clay form small, flat, platelike structures. Clay can be easily deformed because the platelike particles can slip along each other in the plane of the plates, yet remain strongly connected in the direction perpendicular to the plates. Such mechanisms can be studied by crystallographic texture measurements.

In another example, iron transforms from a body-centered cubic (bcc) structure to a face-centered cubic (fcc) structure called austenite when it is heated. The fcc structure is a close-packed structure, and the bcc structure is not, which explains why the volume of the iron decreases when this transformation occurs.

Crystallography is useful in phase identification. When performing any process on a material, it may be desired to find out what compounds and what phases are present in the material. Each phase has a characteristic arrangement of atoms. Techniques like X-ray diffraction can be used to identify which patterns are present in the material, and thus which compounds are present (note: the determination of the "phases" within a material should not be confused with the more general problem of "phase determination," which refers to the phase of waves as they diffract from planes within a crystal, and which is a necessary step in the interpretation of complicated diffraction patterns).

Crystallography covers the enumeration of the symmetry patterns which can be formed by atoms in a crystal and for this reason has a relation to group theory and geometry. See symmetry group.

CLAY:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clay

Clay is a naturally occurring material composed primarily of fine-grained minerals. Clay deposits are mostly composed of clay minerals, a subtype of phyllosilicate minerals, which impart plasticity and harden when fired or dried; they also may contain variable amounts of water trapped in the mineral structure by polar attraction. Organic materials which do not impart plasticity may also be a part of clay deposits.[1]

Clay minerals are typically formed over long periods of time by the gradual chemical weathering of rocks, usually silicate-bearing, by low concentrations of carbonic acid and other diluted solvents. These solvents, usually acidic, migrate through the weathering rock after leaching through upper weathered layers. In addition to the weathering process, some clay minerals are formed by hydrothermal activity. Clay deposits may be formed in place as residual deposits in soil, but thick deposits usually are formed as the result of a secondary sedimentary deposition process after they have been eroded and transported from their original location of formation. Clay deposits are typically associated with very low energy depositional environments such as large lakes and marine deposits.

Primary clays, also known as kaolins, are located at the site of formation. Secondary clay deposits have been moved by erosion and water from their primary location[2].

PHYLLOSILICATE MINERALS:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silicat...hyllosilicates

Phyllosilicates (from Greek φύλλον phyllon, leaf), or sheet silicates, form parallel sheets of silicate tetrahedra with Si2O5 or a 2:5 ratio.

Serpentine group
Antigorite - Mg3Si2O5(OH)4
Chrysotile - Mg3Si2O5(OH)4
Lizardite - Mg3Si2O5(OH)4

SERPENTINE GROUP:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serpentine_group

The serpentine group describes a group of common rock-forming hydrous magnesium iron phyllosilicate ((Mg, Fe)3Si2O5(OH)4) minerals; they may contain minor amounts of other elements including chromium, manganese, cobalt and nickel. In mineralogy and gemology, serpentine may refer to any of 20 varieties belonging to the serpentine group. Owing to admixture, these varieties are not always easy to individualize, and distinctions are not usually made. There are three important mineral polymorphs of serpentine: antigorite, chrysotile andlizardite.

POLYMORPHISM:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_polymorphism

In computer science, polymorphism is a programming language feature that allows values of different data types to be handled using a uniform interface. The concept of parametric polymorphism applies to both data types and functions. A function that can evaluate to or be applied to values of different types is known as a polymorphic function. A data type that can appear to be of a generalized type (e.g., a list with elements of arbitrary type) is designated polymorphic data type like the generalized type from which such specializations are made.

Parametric polymorphism
Parametric polymorphism is a way to make a language more expressive, while still maintaining full static type-safety. Using parametric polymorphism, a function or a data type can be written generically so that it can handle values identically without depending on their type.[2] Such functions and data types are called generic functions and generic data types respectively.


TETRAHEDRA:
In geometry, a tetrahedron (plural: tetrahedra) is a polyhedron composed of four triangular faces, three of which meet at each vertex. Aregular tetrahedron is one in which the four triangles are regular, or "equilateral", and is one of the Platonic solids. The tetrahedron is the only convex polyhedron that has four faces.[1]

The tetrahedron is the three-dimensional case of the more general concept of a simplex.

The tetrahedron is one kind of pyramid, which is a polyhedron with a flat polygon base and triangular faces connecting the base to a common point. In the case of a tetrahedron the base is a triangle (any of the four faces can be considered the base), so a tetrahedron is also known as a triangular pyramid.

Like all convex polyhedra, a tetrahedron can be folded from a single sheet of paper. It has two nets.[1]

For any tetrahedron there exists a sphere (the circumsphere) such that the tetrahedron's vertices lie on the sphere.

TRIANGLE:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triangle

A triangle is one of the basic shapes of geometry: a polygon with three corners or vertices and three sides or edges which are line segments. A triangle with vertices A, B, and C is denoted ABC.

In Euclidean geometry any three non-collinear points determine a unique triangle and a unique plane (i.e. a two-dimensional Euclidean space).

TRIANGULAR STRUCTURES PROVIDE THE GREATEST RESISTANCE:

A LITTLE GEM OF SITE:
http://www.rwgrayprojects.com/synerg...s06/p1300.html

To be referred to as a rememberable entity, an object must be membered with structural integrity, whether maple leaf or crystal complex. To have structural integrity, it must consist entirely of triangles, which are the only complex of energy events that are self-interference-regenerating systems resulting in polygonal pattern stabilization.

Tetrahedron: Beginning with the tetrahedron as the minimum system, it clearly will require proportionately greater force to create a "dent." In order to dimple, the tetrahedron will have to turn itself completely inside out with no localized effect in evidence. Thus the dimpling forces a complete change in the entire structure. The tetrahedron has the greatest resistance of any structure to externally applied concentrated load. It is the only system that can turn itself inside out. Other systems can have very large dimples, but they are still local. Even a hemispherical dimple is still a dimple and still local.

THE PYRAMIDS REPRESENT A LANGUAGE OF KNOWLEDGE WE HAD, UNTIL RECENTLY, COMPLETELY LOST...

[SteveA]

Well you certainly pick great subjects, Lesley Yes, I think a few more things 'clicked' too and I should post them while they're fresh, but I've got run so I'll just make it a quick one:

Imagine a perfectly uniform medium of transmission - if it doesn't alter information at all and is equivalent to a perfect conductor, then we could see it appear as an empty void - not particularly entertaining, though potentially useful to recognize.

If we add any irregularities to this then information can be redirected and we can have properties like reflection or refraction. At a discrete level we could consider some piece of information to either be visible or not (even a probability could be considered to be a discrete piece of information that is distributed over time and not truly something unknown/random/statistical).

Anyway, if we considered the idea of flux or energy to represent the equivalent of a communication bandwidth within a medium (the quantity of distinguishable states something can be in at a moment determine its information content, along with its equivalent spectrum - if two units in communication don't possess a manner to represent a direct 1 to 1 correlation between their states then some information in (interestingly enough) either or both directions can be incommunicable or require approximations to convey over time at different rates. For example if something exists uniformly over time in one of 2 states and something else exists uniformly over time in one of 5 states (such as objects rotating with constant velocity over time), then there is no manner to have these mapped as precise representations of the other in both directions if their transitions are synchronized 1 to 1 with fundamental units of time, though over extended periods of time we can generate spaces (with implicit memory) that can approximate each other, except distances/times when compared between these can appear "warped"/stretched/scaled for example if we took a group of 7 of the binary units, that gives us 1 of 2^7=128 possible states and similarly grouped 3 of the 5 state objects together, we have 3^5=125 states and we could have two such spectral lines closely approximate each other (with a log(12/log(125)~=0.5% mismatch in rates of time or information capacity at their rescaled rates. Imagine this similar to a lissajous image or atomic orbital shell with periodic ratios in time of 3:7 and a slight skewing of this over time so that this approximately stationary form also rotates, much like orbital ratios in a solar system)

Dang, I drifted off a bit. Ok, let me give a quick summary of a few ideas that clicked with you comments on flux, energy density/flow as well as reconfigurable structural forms.

Imagine, similar to the clay or crystalline structures you mentioned, a space of discrete and identical quanta conveying information through this array (or "matrix" for those who prefer the term). Without any irregularity, the perceptual context is identical at any and all points with such a space so it could appear as a perceptual singularity though it can also be an entirely uniform and unbounded crystalline structure.

Now if we have non-uniformities, only the asymmetric components are visible. A single point within this space has every dimensional axis of communication within it as an identical line of symmetry and hence any interaction within a 1-D framework of time would appear similar to interactions along a single dimensional delay line, though these distances in 1 dimension could actually exist as spherical shells of interaction and this could potentially break the symmetry of a single dimension of communication - notice that all points in a 1 dimensional string would also be identical and appear informationally/perceptually collapsed into a singularity, though if a single point within a volume communicated with the surrounding space, its "emissions" would be similar to expanding spherical shells and the increasing volume of these within a discrete substance of uniform density would allow a stream of information in 1 dimension to become embedded within an asymmetry as the growing volume of possible positions within that spherical shell.

Ignore the specific references in this image (though they're closely related):



And you could imagine that the expanding (and the shown 1-D spiral constructing it, is likely not inappropriate) cone on the left can be mapped to the expansion of a spherical surface (in any number of dimensions) over time.

Well imagine that as these volumes of potential interaction increase, they pass through states at which they encapsulate layers of volumes that contain 1 unit (the origin of this), 2 units (a pair immediately surrounding it), 3 units etc. Over time, we have a few views of this - one is of the increasing spherical volume as a whole (containing all past space). The other would be of a "present" shell in which multiple pathways can intersect and another would be the various possible pathways from an origin that could intersect at a present moment as well as individual 1-D pathways through this.

... oh dang, I hardly began to tie things in better with your comments, (I've been thinking there are ways we could possibly take a pair of most any substance in different forms and convey information between them as states of one becoming motions/growths in the other and visa versus and the communication between these would appear to be much like an electromagnetic spectrum - we can map the n-way symmetries at any point within a network of possible state transitions in each as being driven by the state of the other and potentially construct a singular space of motion in which these are all visible as a unified state).

I think it's great how you manage to pick subjects that seem to add enough of some novel, yet related concept to get things clicking. In some ways the ideas are already there, but it's hard to connect them together without getting a bit of a nudge toward some different way of looking at things ... sort of like trying to solve a set of equations with a few too many unknowns or a crossword puzzle and solving one can lead to a lot of other relationships being seen as well.

Gotta run but the ideas are basically regarding how to map pretty much any concept/process/substance into a common space of computation and how these can all interact and communicate in the same "universe"

I'll try to get these ideas put together a bit better still though, but it's hard to fit things into nice small posts. (BTW, notice that these expanding shells can be considered volumes of possibility over time expanding from an origin, their surface area could be factored into primes and then various shells with different rates of expansion could appear related to rates of expansion that track over time as ratios or sequences that contain the same primes, and this could also be seen similar to writing numbers using all bases of representation instead of just binary or decimal, but an expanding base 1,2,3,4,5, ... and then the "spectrums"/prime factors of these can appear interlinked chaotically across this, and this can be seen similar to how we see periodic, fractal and chaotic events spread across time and space and can "learn" to predict future characteristics (even if not precisely as the equivalent "density" of such a future shell would be larger than a present state, but some information can be represented across these).

Thanks for the great ideas and finding subjects along similar lines as I've been tracking and pointing out a few new sights as well, Lesley.

[labelwench]

Hello Steve.

For us northern folks, I challenge you to do an executive summary of post #1265.

You've got your mind in overdrive by the looks of it.

The true test of the understanding of anything, is the ability to explain it in simple terms, by increments, or so I was taught by a school teacher. She was one of my riding students, and through our sharing, she gave me as much as I gave her in the way of better sharing what was second nature to me, yet quite foreign to those who wished to learn and needed to find the starting point.

Your mind may handle this stuff like a flash drive, or be capable of soaking up multiple information streams like a USB hub, but think of us simpler folk who are still processing data with a mind akin to a 286 processor, lol.....

No rush, and if it would slow you down too much, feel free to disregard this small request.

[SteveA]

Hello Steve.

For us northern folks, I challenge you to do an executive summary of post #1265.

You've got your mind in overdrive by the looks of it.

The true test of the understanding of anything, is the ability to explain it in simple terms, by increments, or so I was taught by a school teacher. She was one of my riding students, and through our sharing, she gave me as much as I gave her in the way of better sharing what was second nature to me, yet quite foreign to those who wished to learn and needed to find the starting point.

Your mind may handle this stuff like a flash drive, or be capable of soaking up multiple information streams like a USB hub, but think of us simpler folk who are still processing data with a mind akin to a 286 processor, lol.....

No rush, and if it would slow you down too much, feel free to disregard this small request.

Hiya, Lorrina

I'd definitely enjoy getting things into simple terms and in some ways it is very simple, though the complexity is in seeing how the properties evolve and interact on larger scales and yes, I was posting a bit quickly and chaotically in the last post because of trying to add this to the ideal of an infinite dimensional uniform space - basically an unbounded void, though actually as an array/matrix of discrete quanta/units.

But yes, I agree that a short and sweet version of it is a great start and could be a good refresher of some concepts.

Imagine first an infinite number line 1,2,3,4,5,6,...

Now imagine that this line can be wrapped around in various ways to fill any form of space we could conceive of. Some examples are these:



or fractally like this:



or similarly in 3 dimensions:



And we can show pseudo representations of objects with 4 dimensional forms by altering the shape of this line in 3 dimensions, for example this sequence can arise from 4 or more dimensions of such "folding" of a single "quantum number line":



Now if we look at such a "space" in its most fundamental form it's just a number line 1,2,3,4,5,...,n and some fundamental process continually increases its length, n and we can see the present moment we experience as being some value of n or arising from some quantity of time.

But if we go back and look at all these different forms, they can be similar to mathematical formulas describing a structure of growth. For example, in the square spiral, the numbers heading upward and to the right from the center will construct the sequence 0, 8, 24, 48, 80, ... and it's "pattern of growth" is +8,+16,+24,+32,+40, ... (so it could be seen similar to an accelerating motion away from an origin in terms of its sequence of positions - it's continually moving faster and faster away in terms of fundamental units of time, though from another perspective it can be seen as becoming less and less densely represented over a fundamental time and the "distance" between "observations" increases and we could see this similar to a lengthening wavelength or slowing and spirally outward orbital period).

Anyway, there are just many forms of such growth possible and each requires the existence of a specific form of space to make its motion appear to be in a straight line.

If we look at some point in time, it's equal to a specific quantity or number and can have all spaces and objects that can construct that number/quantity be considered present in that moment (there are additional comments I should add to point out some technical considerations but I'll skip that and try to keep it relatively simple - yes, I recognize these ideas aren't truly "simple" though)

So anyway, as an example, let's say that we were some figurative "time" that was 64 quantum/Planck/fundamental units in length. This form could exist as a 3 dimensional cube with length 4 on each side (4*4*4=64) as well as a 2 dimensional surface that was 8x8 units wide (8*8=64), though it could also exist as many other forms or broken into pairs of objects etc. and in a sense we could say that at that moment there's an intersection between a 2 dimensional universe and a 3 dimensional universe.

Our perceptions appear to remove all the symmetrical components and only show the unique/asymmetrical components and this is where a lot of the complexity arises, but it can allow us to see the most significant components in an experience and effectively filter out the continual "background noise", though the mind doesn't specifically operate in 1, 2 or 3 dimensional cubes and we have manner types of patterns of growth and equivalent properties of "dimensions" of such spaces that intersect at different times.

I'll stop there and avoid more complex than that, though with regard to some of the ideas of a an infinite and unbounded void along with these types of motions in time that have various velocities and accelerations and decelerations, we can see it similar to sending out shock waves with different velocities in a fluid type structure. These can then interact with themselves, if the velocities are different (for example, if one manner of growth is initially fast but slows, and it's later followed by a constant velocity form, then these can interact together when they intersect in time and we can experience the reflections from these).

I guess a good analogy of the basic concept is ripples in a pond, though the variously "shaped" waves move with different velocities and accelerations.

(And yes, I'm still aching to type up a ton of other ideas on how these can be related to linear and non-linear forms of computation as well as idealized and directional insulators and conductors in a flow etc. ... What would be a good example though would be computations using sounds in air or a liquid and trying to untangle a bit of the chaos)

Actually here's a very good analogy

[labelwench]

Thank you Steve. Your illustrations are helpful.

The storage capacity of the memory on this unit has temporarily been exceeded, lol......

I commend you for your efforts.

[SteveA]

Thank you Steve. Your illustrations are helpful.

The storage capacity of the memory on this unit has temporarily been exceeded, lol......

I commend you for your efforts.

Thank you ... and yes, I'm certain the ideas can take a while to piece together. It appears a very open-ended structure as to what properties can exist.

Here's another physical analogy of how these pathways can intersect in space to form structures:





Recognize that these are just some examples. The "complexities" of any specific motion depend upon whichever "form"/class/dimensionality a particle possesses and complexity can be a relative term, the simplest common denominator appears to be the number of dimensions or properties such a pathway fills, which determines how it can appear to accelerate or decelerate over time and interact with objects of other dimensions. For example here some are some plots of common (polynomial) powers and these could correlate with how fast n-dimensional spaces expand over time relative to each other and how they can intersect and interact at various distances over time:



Or here's how another pattern of growth can construct the space itself for these (it's from this link http://canweevolvenow.wordpress.com/the-eternal-cycle/):



Here's an example of how discrete cells with simple rules in a 3 dimensional space can act similar to such fluids:



Though recognize that the "empty space" itself is constructed by a time/number line itself and that this "fluid" is created as a layer of intersections over layered.

Also, though it can appear as though these volumes move independently, consider that even in the computer simulation it's fundamentally a single process(or) performing single operations one and a time to construct a complete frame (in which case we could consider that similar to a complete loop constructed before the next trajectory begins - specifically why some are selected versus others or even how time and change are possible goes beyond any of those images or logic to describe though we have some rules that can naturally arise when these forms are altered by feedback - in order words, if some manner to "randomly" generate images is possible, then they need not progress within any set of restraints at any time, but if a bidirectional interaction occurs in which such forms are altered relative to their previous state, then this interaction effectively inherits "rules" or manners of change that are a product of the form itself and that's something that likely deserves yet another volume of material to study ... yes, things do not appear to be getting simpler but instead appear to be more open ended and creative, which works ok with me. I'm curious at to what the distinguishing difference is between physical and mental spaces. It could be the general dimension context that determines this - for example, hearing, smell and taste are largely 1 dimensional streams of information though hearing has a subjective distance and stereo component and vision is 2-D but with depth. Touch is 2-D but no depth component etc. It could be that these could correlate with specific "shells" of interaction in this space. It might also be interesting to see if there's a correlation with the order in which senses develop - (for example, hearing is likely early on and maybe touch, but possibly not sight ... etc.)

Oh well, just rambling as I'm certain you're familiar with

[labelwench]

My husband, who is a student of stop motion animation, came across this interesting little piece which focuses on the philosophy of consciousness, and forwarded the link to me, which I post here as it seems to fit well with some of the content currently under discussion.

In The Fall Of Gravity

http://www.animateclay.com/index.php...all+of+Gravity

Watch in full screen to catch all the details.