An innate concept of "everything"

[leskey]

.../CONT.


SET:

Etymology: Middle English setten, from Old English settan; akin to Old High German sezzen to set, Old English sittan to sit
Date: before 12th century

4 a : to place with care or deliberate purpose and with relative stability
5 : to direct with fixed attention
8 : to cause to assume a specified posture or position
9 a : to fix as a distinguishing imprint, sign, or appearance
11 a : to establish as the highest level or best performance b : to furnish as a pattern or model c : to allot as a task
15 : to fix in a desired position
17 a : to adorn with something affixed or infixed : stud, dot <clear sky set with stars> b : to fix (as a precious stone) in a border of metal : place in a setting
18 a : to hold something in regard or esteem at the rate of b : to place in a relative rank or category
19 : to place in relation for comparison or balance
20 a : to direct to action b : to incite to attack or antagonism
21 a : to place by transporting
23 a : to fix firmly : make immobile : give rigid form or condition to b : to make unyielding or obstinate
24 : to cause to become firm or solid
25 : to cause (as fruit or seed) to develop

intransitive verb
1 chiefly dialect : sit
2 : to be becoming : be suitable : fit
6 a : to pass below the horizon : go down
8 : to have a specified direction in motion : flow, tend
11 a : to become solid or thickened by chemical or physical alteration

Etc...

SIT:
Etymology: Middle English sitten, from Old English sittan; akin to Old High German sizzen to sit, Latin sedēre, Greek hezesthai to sit, hedra seat
Date: before 12th century

6 archaic : to have one's dwelling place : dwell
8 : lie, rest
10 : to remain inactive or quiescent
13 : to please or agree with one

SEAT:

Etymology: Middle English sete, from Old Norse sæti; akin to Old English gesete seat, sittan to sit
Date: 13th century
1 a : a special chair of one in eminence; also : the status represented by it
2 a : a seating accommodation b : a right of sitting
3 a : a place where something specified is prevalent : center b : a place from which authority is exercised c : a bodily part in which some function or condition is centered
5 a : a part at or forming the base of something b : a part (as a socket) or surface on or in which another part or surface rests

Is the confusion in contex and language translation, the source of Biblical references to heavenly dwelling places and thrones, or is the correlation deliberate metaphor designed to transcend both?

SOURCE:

The word "throne" appears in the Bible 176 times ("thrones", in the plural, appears 9 times).[1] God is described as seated upon a throne in the manner of kings, as a sign of his sovereignty over creation

[austintorn@aol.com]

Lorber and other scientists theorized there may be such a high level of redundancy in normal brain function that the minute bits of brain that these people have may be able to assume the essential activities of a normal-sized brain.

(Leskey, perhaps you should actually read what you submit…


…as well as sticking to addressing the ideas presented rather than addressing the people personally—possibly as a means of neglect or avoidance of any post-content response).

If, however, this is the kind of language level and tone you wish to speak at, I can translate down to it and return the same if that is your communication comfort zone.


So, then, I am still left wondering what your definition of "consciousness" is, as well as what are the other b-words that are not in your dictionary.

[Graybeard]

It all sounds Sanskrit to me .........

cool bananas ... greg

PS: please provide evidence that the plural of throne only appears nine times in the bible ..... rotflmao

[leskey]

Hence, we can assume a timeless space of perceptual capability exists that has no motion (and no conflict) and it would seem logical that if time cannot be contained to being finite in duration and that if no events repeat in time, then perceptions would need to be capable of constructing a space of infinite potential and themselves be infinitely diverse.

From that "logical perspective", there is no conflict - everything exists perpetually related and unique, though unchanging and timeless.

If we then ignored something in this order and attempted to witness this again, there would be a degree of freedom as to what component of perception was not viewed and this could lead to a dynamic view in time, though in a changing and "conflicted" space as there would be a larger space that existed, but was not being viewed as something was rejected from this view. (Which has some interesting correlations to "Universal" (and "non-linear") computation - one of the primary features is an ability to selectively remove information and this would also be a logically irreversible operation as logic can't create (or destroy, if the logic is precise) anything).

We can even simplify all this into the simple relationship of a 1 to 1 correlation between all elements of two equal sets - every element in one set has a unique "next" state in the other. No branches (which require energy or additional outside information to make the selection), or 2:1 compressions (which destroy information and have terminations - continual compression of information leads to "nothing").

A good physical analogy could be that conscious attention is similar to a localized force or acceleration upon objects in that space, though outside this there is inertial motion (... on second thought, there's likely a better analogy but I'm certain the general idea is clear enough with that).

This post may, at least in part, answer your question, Austin.



Steve, this re-re-iterating some of your post here, but I need to clarify: the memory selection process is not necessarily temporally sequential, rather it is more frequently, a contiguous connectivity. Despite all the cosmic random influences, the 'Will' of individual consciousness can select from it's memory of knowledge and experience, with the motive to either (with apologies for overdoing the illeration) -

• create/construct/coalesce with the consistent, cohesive, co-ordinated control of coherency while focussing minimal energy or,
• chaotically collapse or destroy through complex, incongruous confusion while amassing, expending and dissipating vast quantities of energy.

It's easy to draw an analogy between cosmic actiivities and the 'spiralling out of control' consequences of our own dysfunctional behaviours...

Consciousness is the freedom of introspective perception to randomly retrieve memory for the purpose of determination. It is an extrapolation by a time/motion/experience-based singularity which results in a finite or zipped, 1-D (?) memory identity either requiring minimal energy to persist in time or, a memory identity that exponentially generates and expends energy and time until maxium entropy is realized and the memory component is wiped. Neutrons are condensed matter. They are redundant, incoherent information that has been thermally condensed (in the fires of hell) and either bound in atomic nuclei or, freed temporarily before (like the dead parrot) rapidly 'ceasing to be' ...departing the realm of time. And, of course, neutrons are not subject to the fluidity of electric charge...

It's possible that there are hierarchical dimensions of time/memory. For example: timelessness...there is is an eternal, inert essence; space...the freedom for motion which permits the amassing of random memory (as you know, condensing, means size is not necessarily relevant); consciousness...the individual, deliberate, selective memory retrival of all recorded motion/interaction; a third 'heaven' ...a conscious dimension with accesss to all knowledge/memory...which, in the interests of absolute efficiency, requires only the memory of all that is coherent...

Coherency : the 'glint' in the calm eye of the hurricane...some interesting stuff...

Superfluid-Superconductor Relationship Is Detailed
Laser Experiments Reveal Strange Properties Of Superfluids
New Tool for Controlling Ultracold Gases: Electric Fields...etc.

[leskey]

It all sounds Sanskrit to me .........

cool bananas ... greg

PS: please provide evidence that the plural of throne only appears nine times in the bible ..... rotflmao

...and I was pleased to see you back...

[SteveA]

This post may, at least in part, answer your question, Austin.



Steve, this re-re-iterating some of your post here, but I need to clarify: the memory selection process is not necessarily temporally sequential, rather it is more frequently, a contiguous connectivity. Despite all the cosmic random influences, the 'Will' of individual consciousness can select from it's memory of knowledge and experience, with the motive to either (with apologies for overdoing the illeration) -

• create/construct/coalesce with the consistent, cohesive, co-ordinated control of coherency while focussing minimal energy or,
• chaotically collapse or destroy through complex, incongruous confusion while amassing, expending and dissipating vast quantities of energy.

• Yes, that sounds like a real aspect of experience and a good analogy could be that when we have a function that is divergent and not constrained, there are many pathways that it could evolve along that are not determined/selected/controlled.
  
  In effect, the decisions require an energy/information source to determine which direction to head - time keeps moving along, one way or another.
  
  Now there are some things that can appear to be paradoxical views, but they're actually nested within each other and tend to possess complimentary perspectives.
  
  The specific source of everything could be unknown. It's not particularly relevant. When we use logic to construct some explanation, structure, or analyze physical properties, all of these objects are timeless and stationary forms. The construction of them is nothing that any of that logic explains - we simply act, though it does appear we have at least two possible sources of action - things can be either left to whim and fancy - useful for growth and new experience and not undesirable in some aspects, or we can act relative to our own preferences and, in effect, construct something logical/stationary.
  
  Now this action of logical construction is constantly occurring time and it appears paradoxical that it could arise from more than a single influence. If one is able to have ever performed any action, then the influences/changes arising from this never alter the fact that such actions remain possible as all the influences of such an action remain causally related in time and the form of those causal relationships was determined by the context of that action (which can only, in any controlled manner be self-determined).
  
  The initial state would appear to have had no initial context and in this sense, it had no constraints - it was an action without motivation or reason or dependent upon anything else that would later (in terms of later interrelationships and constraints etc.) arise in time. So in a sense, it was an action capable of existing within all contexts of time and it would have had no logical constraints and in this sense would have been creative - a creation of form, from a formless context, though uncontrolled/undetermined/uncaused.
  
  That initial action is always a possible context and, in terms of life, potentially the only action available at birth and we couldn't describe it in any specific form except maybe as "whatever" and "whichever" and unknown etc.
  
  Logically, it wouldn't seem specifically good or bad in any respect - it's simply a manner in which time and change is always possible, though in the whole I personally think growth is fine, but you don't want growth to overrun everything without any involvement (in fact, I'm rather certain this is actually impossible - one way or another, everything in time is connected together and even the smallest motion in a grain of sand in some other distant nested parallel (not disconnected and unrelated) universe remains something that influences everything else and none of those relationships can change without oneself being a part of the picture at some point in time/space).
  
  So in a sense, there really isn't even an ability to just let stuff "randomly" happen. What this really is, is constructing relationships with many degrees of freedom left to be determined (like placing things in a line, but not building them into a solid triangulated form between all elements - if all elements are precisely connected, then there is perfect symmetry and no option for any controlled influence - that's back to the "initial action", similarly placing everything end to end grows a complexity greatly surpassing that of the same space to determine and this also requires "outside" involvement in compressing things - in this case we have a string with high potential energy, but no specific structure - it's still "uncontrolled").
  
  On the other hand, we have intermediate forms in which various asymmetrical (in effect, relatively prime) features are constructed similar to branches that allows for a wide space of determinable growth to be triangulated - similar to, and maybe not uncoincidently, a tree in real life. I skipped making a comment earlier regarding that Sagittarius dwarf galaxy, but the highly asymmetric form of its curvature represents a large quantity of information, though it's physically smaller, but information is contained in its form. The more symmetric Milky Way has a form that is of a lower entropy in some respects though this might be an observational bias due to local properties of space - anyway, it's just a random thought. It's hard to figure out the transformation between what we see and what's "really" out there.
  
  Anyway, I just think there's a way that, if we did it right, we could have much of the best of everything - both pathways of growth and exploration over time as well as a lot of information regarding the properties of these and individual control over which directions to try out.
  
  The "problem" is that everyone's still learning (yes, me too) and it does appear likely that such control would collapse into conflict (at least with much of the current socio-political state and culture that appears to be being drummed into people - rather sad and what's most frustrating is that it appears best to do little, in some ways it appears to be a lesson in progress (and maybe that's the way it always is, in some aspects - though a bit of faster learning could be enjoyable ). The bright spot appears to be that, given time and no "blowouts" we're likely at a point at which such capabilities will accelerate and things will likely be pushed toward more "make or break" conditions and it does seem like people are fundamentally well meaning and "good", but that ignorance and social manipulation, short sightedness etc. cause the conflicts - but I do assume, that given a clear choice, people would know (or at least "feel") which way is best to head (and it's not a specific way in any sense but simply do we reach toward all the beauties that people have within them or do we crush and crumble these diverse hopes and dreams.).

[SteveA]

A good analogy is "Boltzmann Learning" or "Simulated Annealing". Here's an example, showing how a network goes through various phase transition as it's cooled and moves from structures similar to plasma (on the right), and gas, to fluidic and then a solid/crystallized form (on the left).



I don't believe either the solid crystal (rigidly order/closed/stagnant etc.), nor the plasma (chaotic and highly disordered) states are idea, but instead the more dynamic states along the boundaries of a fluid and solid are the best form in which to allow structures, but a growth and coherent evolution over time.

Though there are potential values to even forms similar to plasma or rigidly ordered (in a sense, the ultimate ideal may be close to rigidly ordered, but that should be simply because everything exists in terms of an ideal "solution" and in that sense it's a "voluntary" cohesion as opposed to an enforced rigidity, but I think such a rigid form would not in terms of any specific physical state, but in terms of a manner in which diverse evolutionary pathways coordinate - though I really don't think we'd ever find such an absolutely perfect solution and I don't think an attempt should be made to try to force that either. The best solution is one where things interact in their natural manner and self organize).

In many ways the ideal solution is anarchy, but I guess the undeniable fact is that it can't truly be anarchic in all respects as there needs exist such a space of interactions for these relationships to exist and in terms of time that means that if anything had to change, then time is always present in that arrangement and everything connected by a common space. So in that respect, the space in which these all exist would have to be a unitary property shared by all, though in higher dimensions of relationships, these are not externally determined aspects and so those are "degrees of freedom" left to be determined.

So, in some ways it's a tyranny determined to be anarchic in all other respects (a shared/common space of complete freedom of interactions - I guess in a sense, that singular property shared would then be the ability to freely interact itself, otherwise without some property in common, there would be no relationship between things an in terms of anything coherent, I can only assume it would be the equivalent of completely separate existences), and if we look at how many ideals are, that does appear to be an ideal for many - generally a government is expected to be a source of common defense against intrusion/control, though it appears the track record is that this is then interpreted to mean that such a government then "runs the show" instead - the growth of such a structure should actually be determined by (vaguely) nature, IMO. We already have diverse and specific forms and many ways to interact in optimal manners (in a sense that reflects the state of universal evolution).

It could be a steep curve for people to learn to both live freely as well as tolerate/allow others to exist in the same condition, but I assume over time we can learn how to do this (in most all interactions between people this is already present, much of the "problems" actually arise from common social misperceptions, miscommunication and misunderstandings ... even individual selfish greed, I believe works out fine if someone is actually intelligent enough to recognize how to best satisfy themself. It would only be desires for intentionally limiting, controlling, impeding or subjugating others in an involuntary manner that would appear fundamentally incompatible with such a state - I think this is often done ignorantly, but that's simply a manner of growth and intelligence - not uncurable, but if there existed some truly perpetually sadistic desire for control in something, then that's a state incompatible with being satisfied, that I can figure out, within such a system, unless something simply wanted to be miserable and unsatisfied ... ? Who knows. I don't believe there's fundamentally any way to contain something else in time because everything has its own reference and need have never been connected to such a space and time).

Control over motion is only restricting and limiting of potential, it's constraining and leaves desires unsatisfied, and that potential gets replaced with uncontrolled components instead (the potentials for growth already exist in the relative entropy between individuals and the environment, time will either move toward realizations of those or uncontrolled "natural evolution" - that seems the only significant choice involved. The rest of it are just the details (hopefully lots of beautiful ones )).

So personally, I don't have any guilt in working toward seeing such an ideal present. If there's a spot I didn't check, it would be great to know. If there's a spot I didn't check, it would be great to know, but otherwise circumstances are as they are and one can only do their best.

All I know is that I've been over this a hundred times and if there's a "next/first step" to take it's a motion in that direction - lots of learning to do, but it's better from a position with a clearer view

(Maybe the phrase is "Be fruitful and multiply"? )

It's easy to draw an analogy between cosmic actiivities and the 'spiralling out of control' consequences of our own dysfunctional behaviours...

I can definitely appreciate your analogy, Leskey. Yes, we need to find some more stable, though still evolving orbital patterns - we need perceptions and associated information to allow for a determination of ideals for these and a freedom and manner of motion to reach them as well as keeping eyes on the horizons and being able to be dynamic as well to accomodate new possibilities as they arise. We need a lot of desire, intelligence, coordination, maps, game plans (I'm certain Lloyd has plenty of suggestions! ) etc. (I didn't mention the other bajillion details, but that's the fun part! Figuring it out! On top of it, it takes individual involvement because nothing else knows better than oneself what those ideals are ... and that's beautiful in itself )

I'm sorry I drifted so much and didn't reply to the rest of your post, Leskey, but still it's great seeing where your comments inspire my ramblings to head. (I know I can't think of stuff like this without a bit of interaction and ideas, though I do believe that at the 'core' those sentiments exist, or at least are a common theme throughout much of experience - it's just hard to recognize these clearly and connect the dots and see how they relate to other things in life without something "external" bringing up the directions and I'm certain this works mutually as well ... hmmm, once again, probably another principle upon which things fit together perfectly? It's an interesting exploration for sure).

Oh, and another beautiful thing to consider - you don't need to rely on bringing anything along. There's actually nothing to change but yourself - when you figure it out, it works. It's really just ones own state that determines their environment, but that state is similarly reflected in the environment (conveniently, beliefs and knowledge etc. are not objects with mass ... though mental inertia and habits can be a bit difficult to overcome and perceptions are limited by the coherency of the concepts - a conflict in ones own beliefs results in an external/undetermined resolution to those states, so finding self conflicting views is important and hypocracy is an easy one as well as differences between beliefs and actions etc., ultimately though there aren't any rules beyond what one plays by and in that respect, once again, if I'm not to be hypocritical I really can't offer anything to anyone else except suggestions (of which I have a ton, as you're probably already familiar! )).

[leskey]

Firstly, I apologize for not responding to your posts, Steve. I have to admit that I've been otherwise engaged lately and lost track of replies...I'm on my way out again, but will get back to you soon.

Although I may not be prolific or verbose, I do like to give serious thought to topics that pique further investigation. A little word has been ringing in my ears...

Time and motion = change

Change is always met by resistance.

RESISTANCE:
1 a : an act or instance of resisting : opposition b : a means of resisting
2 : the power or capacity to resist: as a : the inherent ability of an organism to resist harmful influences (as disease, toxic agents, or infection) b : the capacity of a species or strain of microorganism to survive exposure to a toxic agent (as a drug) formerly effective against it
3 : an opposing or retarding force
4 a : the opposition offered by a body or substance to the passage through it of a steady electric current b : a source of resistance
5 : a psychological defense mechanism wherein a patient rejects, denies, or otherwise opposes the therapeutic efforts of a psychotherapist
6 often capitalized : an underground organization of a conquered or nearly conquered country engaging in sabotage and secret operations against occupation forces and collaborators

Buildings are constructed with resistance to the weather.
Exercise incorporates resistance to build muscle.
Immune systems are the body's resistance to disease.
Psychologically people have a resistance to change...etc.
Then, of course, there's electrical resistance...

http://ehs.sc.edu/modules/electrical/02_definitions.htm

Electrical Resistance (R): the rate at which electricity flows through a circuit is affected by the resistance of the components and/or wires in the circuit. Increased resistance results in a decrease in the amount of current that will flow through the wire. Appliances, lights, power tools can all be thought of as resisters.

The four forces are only different aspects of the binary pair: conductivity and resistance.

Resistance must facilitate coherency. In the time and motion equation, 'pockets of resistance' are the strength required to build sound functional 'structure.' If it weren't for resistance there is only the status quo: unchanging timelessness - which we perceive as 'nothingness.'

The material universe provides the connectivity of the finite within the infinite - all recorded in memory/time:

• Spirit is the one and only electrical force 'possessing' all matter;

• Soul is the thread of individual identity within collective memory and,

• Consciousness is the capacity to develop (or not) discretionary selectivity or wisdom, which is indelibly recorded as individual idenity.

[SteveA]

Whoops, I posted on the other thread.

http://www.toequest.com/forum/consci...tml#post125258

[leskey]

Another language may be incomprehensible...yet, it's only a different way of saying the same things:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n4pecsuRVBQ